Singh Ospina, Naykky M

AbstractBackgroundUltrasound risk stratification can improve the care of patients with thyroid nodules by providing a structured and systematic approach for the evaluation of thyroid nodule features and thyroid cancer risk. The optimal strategies to support implementation of high quality thyroid nodule risk stratification are unknown. This study seeks to summarise strategies used to support implementation of thyroid nodule ultrasound risk stratification in practice and their effects on implementation and service outcomes.MethodsThis is a systematic review of studies evaluating implementation strategies published between January 2000 and June 2022 that were identified on Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid Cochrane, Scopus, or Web of Science. Screening of eligible studies, data collection and assessment for risk of bias was completed independently and in duplicate. Implementation strategies and their effects on implementation and service outcomes were evaluated and summarised.ResultsWe identified 2666 potentially eligible studies of which 8 were included. Most implementation strategies were directed towards radiologists. Common strategies to support the implementation of thyroid nodule risk stratification included: tools to standardise thyroid ultrasound reports, education on thyroid nodule risk stratification and use of templates/forms for reporting, and reminders at the point of care. System based strategies, local consensus or audit were less commonly described. Overall, the use of these strategies supported the implementation process of thyroid nodule risk stratification with variable effects on service outcomes.ConclusionsImplementation of thyroid nodule risk stratification can be supported by development of standardised reporting templates, education of users on risk stratification and reminders of use at the point of care. Additional studies evaluating the value of implementation strategies in different contexts are urgently needed.

Abstract Context Thyroid nodule risk stratification allows clinicians to standardize the evaluation of thyroid cancer risk according to ultrasound features. Objective To evaluate interrater agreement among clinicians assessing thyroid nodules ultrasound features and thyroid cancer risk categories. Design, setting, and participants We surveyed Endocrine Society and Latin American Thyroid Society members to assess their interpretation of composition, echogenicity, shape, margins, and presence of echogenic foci of 10 thyroid nodule cases. The risk category for thyroid cancer was calculated following the American College of Radiology-Thyroid Imaging Reporting & Data System (ACR-TIRADS) framework from individual responses. Main Outcomes and Measures We used descriptive statistics and Gwet’s agreement coefficient (AC1) to assess the primary outcome of interrater agreement for ACR-TIRADS risk category. As secondary outcomes, the interrater agreement for individual features and a subgroup analysis of interrater agreement for the ACR-TIRADS category were performed (ultrasound reporting system, type of practice, and number of monthly appraisals). Results A total of 144 participants were included, mostly endocrinologists. There was moderate level of agreement for the absence of echogenic foci (AC1 0.53, 95% CI 0.24-0.81) and composition (AC1 0.54, 95% CI 0.36-0.71). The agreement for margins (AC1 0.24, 95% CI 0.15-0.33), echogenicity (AC1 0.34, 95% CI 0.22-0.46), and shape assessment (AC1 0.42, 95% CI 0.13-0.70) was lower. The overall agreement for ACR-TIRADS assessment was AC1 0.29, (95% CI 0.13-0.45). The AC1 of ACR-TIRADS among subgroups was similar. Conclusions This study found high variation of judgments about ACR-TIRADS risk category and individual features, which poses a potential challenge for the widescale implementation of thyroid nodule risk stratification.

AbstractObjectiveTo support patient‐centred care and the collaboration of patients and clinicians, we developed and pilot tested a conversation aid for patients with thyroid nodules.Design, Patient and MeasurementsWe developed a web‐based Thyroid NOdule Conversation aid (TNOC) following a human‐centred design. A proof of concept observational pre–post study was conducted (TNOC vs. usual care [UC]) to assess the impact of TNOC on the quality of conversations. Data sources included recordings of clinical visits, post‐encounter surveys and review of electronic health records. Summary statistics and group comparisons are reported.ResultsSixty‐five patients were analysed (32 in the UC and 33 in the TNOC cohort). Most patients were women (89%) with a median age of 57 years and were incidentally found to have a thyroid nodule (62%). Most thyroid nodules were at low risk for thyroid cancer (71%) and the median size was 1.4 cm. At baseline, the groups were similar except for higher numeracy in the TNOC cohort. The use of TNOC was associated with increased involvement of patients in the decision‐making process, clinician satisfaction and discussion of relevant topics for decision making. In addition, decreased decisional conflict and fewer thyroid biopsies as the next management step were noted in the TNOC cohort. No differences in terms of knowledge transfer, length of consultation, thyroid cancer risk perception or concern for thyroid cancer diagnosis were found.ConclusionIn this pilot observational study, using TNOC in clinical practice was feasible and seemed to help the collaboration of patients and clinicians.

Background: The best treatment option for patients with Graves' disease (GD) depends on each person's situation and how the differences between the treatment options matter to them in bringing resolution to their illness. The objective of this study was to develop and test an encounter decision tool (GD Choice) for patients and clinicians to engage in shared decision making about the treatment of GD. Methods: GD Choice was developed using an iterative process based on the principles of interaction design and participatory action research. To evaluate the impact of the tool, a controlled before–after study was conducted, assessing the use of GD Choice versus usual care (UC). Results: Sixty-eight patients were enrolled, 37 to UC and 31 to GD Choice. At baseline, the groups were similar. Treatment discussion length was similar in both arms. After their visit, patients in both groups had similar knowledge about the options, except for GD Choice patients knowing significantly more about the complications of treatment (correctly answered by 83% vs. 55%; p = 0.04). Compared with UC, patients in the GD Choice arm had greater involvement in decision making observed on video recordings of clinical encounters (mean OPTION scale score, 35% vs. 30%; p = 0.02), but reported similar levels of decisional comfort and participation in shared decision making. Conclusions: GD Choice increases engagement in the decision-making process and knowledge regarding intervention complications without increasing the length of consultation. These promising results support the conduct of a randomized trial of GD Choice versus UC in a large multicenter trial.

SummaryObjectiveTo report the prevalence of parathyroid carcinoma (PC) in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) and review of the literature.BackgroundPrimary hyperparathyroidism (PHP) is the most common manifestation of MEN1. The occurrence of PC in patients with MEN1 is rare and the literature regarding the clinical manifestations – including the prevalence of the disease – is scarce.ContextSingle tertiary care centre experience from 1977 to 2013.DesignElectronic search of the medical records to identify a cohort of patients with MEN1. Literature review based on current case reports.PatientsSingle case of PC in a cohort of 348 patients with MEN1. Ten cases of PC in patients with MEN1 reported in the literature.MeasurementClinical features of PC in patients with MEN1.ResultsThe prevalence of PC in 348 patients with MEN1 was found to be 0·28% (95% CI, 0–1·4%). Based on the current published cases of PC in patients with MEN1, 54·5% were women, mean age at diagnosis was 48·3 years, and the serum PTH concentrations at least four times the upper limit of the reference range in 73% of the cases.ConclusionPC in patients with MEN 1 is rare with a prevalence of 0·28%, and the clinical features are similar to PC in patients without MEN1.