Schonberg, Mara A.

ABSTRACT Background Guidelines recommend primary care practitioners (“PCPs”) engage women ≥ 75 years in shared decision‐making (SDM) around mammography screening. Therefore, we aimed to develop a web‐based conversation aid about mammography screening for women ≥ 75 using output from established simulation models to provide screening outcomes based on > 23,000 combinations of individual women's health and breast cancer risk factors. Methods We used an end‐user centered design approach to develop a prototype web‐based conversation aid incorporating feedback. From July 2023 to April 2024, 10 PCPs from a Boston‐area health system and a safety‐net hospital used the prototype aid during encounters with women ≥ 75 without breast cancer or dementia ( n = 30; 1–5 patients per PCP). We observed aid use and assessed clinician effort to involve patients in SDM using OPTION5 (assesses five components of SDM, scores range 0–100). We surveyed PCPs and patients about the aid's acceptability. Patients completed the SDM‐process scale (scores range 0–4) to rate the SDM quality experienced. Participants' comments were subject to thematic analysis. Results Of 10 PCP ‐participants, seven were female and four were community‐based. Of 30 patient‐participants, 22 (73%) were non‐Hispanic White, 9 (30%) had ≥ 2 Charlson comorbidities and mean age was 78.5 years ( SD 2.8). Nine PCPs agreed that the aid helped them with SDM and was easy‐to‐use; six felt it had too much information; and seven planned to continue using the aid. Patients rated the SDM ‐process highly (scores = 3.0 [ SD 0.9]) and we observed high SDM (mean OPTION5 = 77.9 [ SD 20.6]). Participants felt the aid was “empowering” and “helpful for decision‐making.” After SDM discussions, seven patients intended to stop screening, nine to screen less frequently, and 14 to continue screening regularly. Conclusions We developed a novel conversation aid that supports SDM about mammography screening with women ≥ 75 years. Lessons learned will guide revisions of a final tool for testing in a clinical trial.

AbstractIntroductionOlder adults are at high risk of adverse health outcomes in the post–emergency department (ED) discharge period. Prior work has shown that discharged older adults have variable understanding of their discharge instructions which may contribute to these outcomes. To identify discharge comprehension gaps amenable to future interventions, we utilize meta‐analysis to determine patient comprehension across five domains of discharge instructions: diagnosis, medications, self‐care, routine follow‐up, and return precautions.MethodsUsing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guidelines, two reviewers sourced evidence from databases including Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Google Scholar (for gray literature). Publications or preprints appearing before April 2024 were included if they focused on geriatric ED discharge instructions and reported a proportion of patients with comprehension of at least one of five predefined discharge components. Meta‐analysis of eligible studies for each component was executed using random‐effects modeling to describe the proportion of geriatric ED cases understanding the discharge instructions; where appropriate we calculated pooled estimates, reported as percentages with 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsOf initial records returned (N = 2898), exclusions based on title or abstract assessment left 51 studies for full‐text review; of these, seven constituted the study set. Acceptable heterogeneity and absence of indication of publication bias supported pooled estimates for proportions comprehending instructions on medications (41%, 95% CI 31%–50%, I2 = 43%), self‐care (81%, 95% CI 76%–85%, I2 = 43%), and routine follow‐up (76%, 95% CI 72%–79%, I2 = 25%). Key findings included marked heterogeneity with respect to comprehending two discharge parameters: diagnosis (I2 = 73%) and return precautions (I2 = 95%).ConclusionsOlder patients discharged from the ED had greater comprehension of self‐care and follow‐up instructions than about their medications. These findings suggest that medication instructions may be a priority domain for future interventions.