Quality of decision aids developed for women at average risk of breast cancer eligible for mammographic screening: Systematic review and assessment according to the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument

Mammographic screening contributes to a reduction in specific mortality, but it has disadvantages. Decision aids are tools designed to support people's decisions. Because these aids influence patient choice, their quality is crucial. The objective of the current study was to conduct a systematic review of decision aids developed for women eligible for mammographic screening who have an average breast cancer risk and to assess the quality of these aids. The systematic review included articles published between January 1, 1997, and August 1, 2019, in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and PsycInfo databases. The studies were reviewed independently by 2 reviewers. Any study containing a decision aid for women eligible for mammographic screening with an average breast cancer risk was included. Two double-blind reviewers assessed the quality of the selected decision aids using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument, version 3 (IPDASi). Twenty-three decision aids were extracted. Classification of decision aid quality using the IPDASi demonstrated large variations among the decision aids (maximum IPDASi score, 188; mean ± SD score, 132.6 ± 23.8; range, 85-172). Three decision aids had high overall scores. The 3 best-rated dimensions were disclosure (maximum score, 8; mean score, 6.8), focusing on transparency; information (maximum score, 32; mean score, 26.1), focusing on the provision of sufficient details; and probabilities (maximum score, 32; mean score 25), focusing on the presentation of probabilities. The 3 lowest-rated dimensions were decision support technology evaluation (maximum score, 8; mean score, 4.3), focusing on the effectiveness of the decision aid; development (maximum score, 24; mean score, 12.6), evaluating the development process; and plain language (maximum score, 4; mean score, 1.9), assessing appropriateness for patients with low literacy. The results of this review identified 3 high-quality decision aids for breast cancer screening.     

Addressing Substance Use in Adolescents: Screening,Brief Intervention,and Referral to Treatment

Adolescent substance use is a national public health crisis. The most commonly used substances among adolescents are nicotine, alcohol, and marijuana. Use of these substances during adolescence has serious adverse effects on brain development, with impairments that can endure into adulthood. Advanced practice nurses in primary care can address substance use in the adolescent population with the use of evidence-based interventions, such as Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT). This article describes trends in adolescent substance use and use of the SBIRT intervention for low, medium, and high-risk use in this population.     

Personal trauma among healthcare providers: implications for screening practices

ABSTRACT

Screening rates for trauma are low in health care settings. We examined the association between health care providers’ (HCPs) experience of physical or sexual trauma and their screening of female patients for trauma. HCPs at an urban academic medical institution were surveyed from September through November 2016. The Brief Trauma (BTQ) and Sexual and Physical Abuse History Questionnaires (SPAHQ) assessed their own experiences of trauma. The Screening Practices Questionnaire (SPQ) assessed HCPs trauma screening. Multiple regression analyses were performed. Among 212 respondents aged 22–67 years, most were female (78.3%) and white (76.1%). Nurses (41.0%) were the largest occupational group. Overall, 85.8% reported having experienced trauma. No significant difference was observed in median SPQ scores between HCPs who had experienced trauma (3.88 [Interquartile Range (IQR) 3.44–4.31]) and those who had not (4.00 [IQR 3.47–4.33], p = .645). In an adjusted model, screening policy awareness and having an obstetrics & gynecology or psychiatry specialty were associated with higher SPQ scores (p < .001). The prevalence of trauma experience in this sample was high, but not associated with screening. Screening policy awareness and practice specialty were associated with screening. HCP factors associated with greater trauma screening should be explored.     

Risk stratification in breast cancer screening: Cost-effectiveness and harm-benefit ratios for low-risk and high-risk women

In mammography screening programmes, women are screened according to a one-size-fits-all principle. Tailored screening, based on risk levels, may lead to a better balance of benefits and harms. With microsimulation modelling, we determined optimal mammography screening strategies for women at lower (relative risk [RR] 0.75) and higher (RR 1.8) than average risk of breast cancer, eligible for screening, using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of current uniform screening in the Netherlands (biennial [B] 50-74) as a threshold ICER. Strategies varied by interval (annual [A], biennial, triennial [T]) and age range. The number of life-years gained (LYG), breast cancer deaths averted, overdiagnosed cases, false-positive mammograms, ICERs and harm-benefit ratios were calculated. Optimal risk-based screening scenarios, below the threshold ICER of €8883/LYG, were T50-71 (€7840/LYG) for low-risk and B40-74 (€6062/LYG) for high-risk women. T50-71 screening in low-risk women resulted in a 33% reduction in false-positive findings, a similar reduction in costs and improved harm-benefit ratios compared to the current screening schedule. B40-74 in high-risk women led to an increase in screening benefit, compared to current B50-74 screening, but a relatively higher increase in false-positive findings. In conclusion, optimal screening consisted of a longer interval and lower stopping age than current uniform screening for low-risk women, and a lower starting age for high-risk women. Extending the interval for women at lower risk from biennial to triennial screening reduced harms and costs while maintaining most of the screening benefit.     

Arabic adaptation of the Edinburgh cognitive and behavioural Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis screen (ECAS-AR)

Current screening batteries for assessing neuropsychological function are not specific for Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) and are considered as limited tools due to the physical disabilities associated with ALS. The Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioural ALS screen (ECAS) was developed to detect the specific cognitive and behavioral changes that may occur among ALS patients. This study presents the ECAS developed for Arabic-speaking ALS patients (ECAS-AR) for use by healthcare professionals. ECAS was translated and modified to refined variety of Arabic language. Eighty-five ALS patients were included. Normative data were collected from 200 healthy controls (among them 97 were matched). Subjects were administered the ECAS-AR and two conventional cognitive screening batteries, Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). ECAS-AR discriminated well between healthy controls and ALS patients. Significant differences were noted in language, executive functions, memory, and visuospatial domains between the two groups. The most prevalent deficit occurred in language and executive functions in ALS-specific functions. Whereas memory was more readily impaired in the lower and middle education groups concerning ALS non-specific functions. Verbal fluency tended to be preserved. Positive correlations were found between ECAS-AR and the standard cognitive tests supporting its full validity. The ECAS-AR version proposed will provide rapid, efficient and sensitive tools for healthcare professional to determine the cognitive-behavioural profile in Arabic-speaking ALS patients.