Patient and physician shared decision-making behaviors in oncology: Evidence on adequate measurement properties of the iSHARE questionnaires

Hanna Bomhof-Roordink; Anne M Stiggelbout; Fania R Gärtner; Johanneke E A Portielje; Cor D de Kroon; Koen C M J Peeters; Karen J Neelis; Jan Willem T Dekker; Trudy van der Weijden; Arwen H Pieterse; iSHARE Study group; Liesbeth Boersma; Johannes Buijsen

doi:10.1016/j.pec.2021.08.034

Patient and physician shared decision-making behaviors in oncology: Evidence on adequate measurement properties of the iSHARE questionnaires

Hanna Bomhof-Roordink, Anne M Stiggelbout, Fania R Gärtner, Johanneke E A Portielje, Cor D de Kroon, Koen C M J Peeters, Karen J Neelis, Jan Willem T Dekker, Trudy van der Weijden, Arwen H Pieterse^*, iSHARE Study group, Liesbeth Boersma, Johannes Buijsen

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We have developed two Dutch questionnaires to assess the shared decision-making (SDM) process in oncology; the iSHAREpatient and iSHAREphysician. In this study, we aimed to determine: scores, construct validity, test-retest agreement (iSHAREpatient), and inter-rater (iSHAREpatient-iSHAREphysician) agreement.

METHODS: Physicians from seven Dutch hospitals recruited cancer patients, and completed the iSHAREphysician and SDM-Questionnaire-physician version. Their patients completed the: iSHAREpatient, nine-item SDM-Questionnaire, Decisional Conflict Scale, Combined Outcome Measure for Risk communication And treatment Decision-making Effectiveness, and five-item Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions. We formulated, respectively, one (iSHAREphysician) and 10 (iSHAREpatient) a priori hypotheses regarding correlations between the iSHARE questionnaires and questionnaires assessing related constructs. To assess test-retest agreement patients completed the iSHAREpatient again 1-2 weeks later.

RESULTS: In total, 151 treatment decision-making processes with unique patients were rated. Dimension and total iSHARE scores were high both in patients and physicians. The hypothesis on the iSHAREphysician and 9/10 hypotheses on the iSHAREpatient were confirmed. Test-retest and inter-rater agreement were>.60 for most items.

CONCLUSIONS: The iSHARE questionnaires show high scores, have good construct validity, substantial test-retest agreement, and moderate inter-rater agreement.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Results from the iSHARE questionnaires can inform both physician- and patient-directed efforts to improve SDM in clinical practice.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1089-1100
Number of pages	12
Journal	Patient Education and Counseling
Volume	105
Issue number	5
Early online date	28 Aug 2021
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2021.08.034
Publication status	Published - May 2022

Keywords

AGREEMENT
COMMUNICATION
CONFLICT SCALE
COSMIN
Construct validity
Formative
Hypotheses testing
Inter-rater agreement
MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENTS
METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY
Oncology
PERCEIVED EFFICACY
PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES
Questionnaire
SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS
Shared decision-making
Test-retest agreement
VALIDATION

Access to Document

10.1016/j.pec.2021.08.034Licence: CC BY

Cite this

Bomhof-Roordink, H., Stiggelbout, A. M., Gärtner, F. R., Portielje, J. E. A., de Kroon, C. D., Peeters, K. C. M. J., Neelis, K. J., Dekker, J. W. T., van der Weijden, T., Pieterse, A. H., iSHARE Study group, Boersma, L., & Buijsen, J. (2022). Patient and physician shared decision-making behaviors in oncology: Evidence on adequate measurement properties of the iSHARE questionnaires. Patient Education and Counseling, 105(5), 1089-1100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2021.08.034

@article{99a0f2a1dc98465e90e998cef30c87ad,

title = "Patient and physician shared decision-making behaviors in oncology: Evidence on adequate measurement properties of the iSHARE questionnaires",

abstract = "OBJECTIVES: We have developed two Dutch questionnaires to assess the shared decision-making (SDM) process in oncology; the iSHAREpatient and iSHAREphysician. In this study, we aimed to determine: scores, construct validity, test-retest agreement (iSHAREpatient), and inter-rater (iSHAREpatient-iSHAREphysician) agreement.METHODS: Physicians from seven Dutch hospitals recruited cancer patients, and completed the iSHAREphysician and SDM-Questionnaire-physician version. Their patients completed the: iSHAREpatient, nine-item SDM-Questionnaire, Decisional Conflict Scale, Combined Outcome Measure for Risk communication And treatment Decision-making Effectiveness, and five-item Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions. We formulated, respectively, one (iSHAREphysician) and 10 (iSHAREpatient) a priori hypotheses regarding correlations between the iSHARE questionnaires and questionnaires assessing related constructs. To assess test-retest agreement patients completed the iSHAREpatient again 1-2 weeks later.RESULTS: In total, 151 treatment decision-making processes with unique patients were rated. Dimension and total iSHARE scores were high both in patients and physicians. The hypothesis on the iSHAREphysician and 9/10 hypotheses on the iSHAREpatient were confirmed. Test-retest and inter-rater agreement were>.60 for most items.CONCLUSIONS: The iSHARE questionnaires show high scores, have good construct validity, substantial test-retest agreement, and moderate inter-rater agreement.PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Results from the iSHARE questionnaires can inform both physician- and patient-directed efforts to improve SDM in clinical practice.",

keywords = "AGREEMENT, COMMUNICATION, CONFLICT SCALE, COSMIN, Construct validity, Formative, Hypotheses testing, Inter-rater agreement, MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENTS, METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY, Oncology, PERCEIVED EFFICACY, PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES, Questionnaire, SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, Shared decision-making, Test-retest agreement, VALIDATION",

author = "Hanna Bomhof-Roordink and Stiggelbout, {Anne M} and G{\"a}rtner, {Fania R} and Portielje, {Johanneke E A} and {de Kroon}, {Cor D} and Peeters, {Koen C M J} and Neelis, {Karen J} and Dekker, {Jan Willem T} and {van der Weijden}, Trudy and Pieterse, {Arwen H} and {iSHARE Study group} and Liesbeth Boersma and Johannes Buijsen",

year = "2022",

month = may,

doi = "10.1016/j.pec.2021.08.034",

language = "English",

volume = "105",

pages = "1089--1100",

journal = "Patient Education and Counseling",

issn = "0738-3991",

publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",

number = "5",

}

Bomhof-Roordink, H, Stiggelbout, AM, Gärtner, FR, Portielje, JEA, de Kroon, CD, Peeters, KCMJ, Neelis, KJ, Dekker, JWT, van der Weijden, T, Pieterse, AH, iSHARE Study group, Boersma, L & Buijsen, J 2022, 'Patient and physician shared decision-making behaviors in oncology: Evidence on adequate measurement properties of the iSHARE questionnaires', Patient Education and Counseling, vol. 105, no. 5, pp. 1089-1100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2021.08.034

Patient and physician shared decision-making behaviors in oncology: Evidence on adequate measurement properties of the iSHARE questionnaires. / Bomhof-Roordink, Hanna; Stiggelbout, Anne M; Gärtner, Fania R et al.
In: Patient Education and Counseling, Vol. 105, No. 5, 05.2022, p. 1089-1100.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Patient and physician shared decision-making behaviors in oncology

T2 - Evidence on adequate measurement properties of the iSHARE questionnaires

AU - Bomhof-Roordink, Hanna

AU - Stiggelbout, Anne M

AU - Gärtner, Fania R

AU - Portielje, Johanneke E A

AU - de Kroon, Cor D

AU - Peeters, Koen C M J

AU - Neelis, Karen J

AU - Dekker, Jan Willem T

AU - van der Weijden, Trudy

AU - Pieterse, Arwen H

AU - iSHARE Study group

AU - Boersma, Liesbeth

AU - Buijsen, Johannes

PY - 2022/5

Y1 - 2022/5

N2 - OBJECTIVES: We have developed two Dutch questionnaires to assess the shared decision-making (SDM) process in oncology; the iSHAREpatient and iSHAREphysician. In this study, we aimed to determine: scores, construct validity, test-retest agreement (iSHAREpatient), and inter-rater (iSHAREpatient-iSHAREphysician) agreement.METHODS: Physicians from seven Dutch hospitals recruited cancer patients, and completed the iSHAREphysician and SDM-Questionnaire-physician version. Their patients completed the: iSHAREpatient, nine-item SDM-Questionnaire, Decisional Conflict Scale, Combined Outcome Measure for Risk communication And treatment Decision-making Effectiveness, and five-item Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions. We formulated, respectively, one (iSHAREphysician) and 10 (iSHAREpatient) a priori hypotheses regarding correlations between the iSHARE questionnaires and questionnaires assessing related constructs. To assess test-retest agreement patients completed the iSHAREpatient again 1-2 weeks later.RESULTS: In total, 151 treatment decision-making processes with unique patients were rated. Dimension and total iSHARE scores were high both in patients and physicians. The hypothesis on the iSHAREphysician and 9/10 hypotheses on the iSHAREpatient were confirmed. Test-retest and inter-rater agreement were>.60 for most items.CONCLUSIONS: The iSHARE questionnaires show high scores, have good construct validity, substantial test-retest agreement, and moderate inter-rater agreement.PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Results from the iSHARE questionnaires can inform both physician- and patient-directed efforts to improve SDM in clinical practice.

AB - OBJECTIVES: We have developed two Dutch questionnaires to assess the shared decision-making (SDM) process in oncology; the iSHAREpatient and iSHAREphysician. In this study, we aimed to determine: scores, construct validity, test-retest agreement (iSHAREpatient), and inter-rater (iSHAREpatient-iSHAREphysician) agreement.METHODS: Physicians from seven Dutch hospitals recruited cancer patients, and completed the iSHAREphysician and SDM-Questionnaire-physician version. Their patients completed the: iSHAREpatient, nine-item SDM-Questionnaire, Decisional Conflict Scale, Combined Outcome Measure for Risk communication And treatment Decision-making Effectiveness, and five-item Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions. We formulated, respectively, one (iSHAREphysician) and 10 (iSHAREpatient) a priori hypotheses regarding correlations between the iSHARE questionnaires and questionnaires assessing related constructs. To assess test-retest agreement patients completed the iSHAREpatient again 1-2 weeks later.RESULTS: In total, 151 treatment decision-making processes with unique patients were rated. Dimension and total iSHARE scores were high both in patients and physicians. The hypothesis on the iSHAREphysician and 9/10 hypotheses on the iSHAREpatient were confirmed. Test-retest and inter-rater agreement were>.60 for most items.CONCLUSIONS: The iSHARE questionnaires show high scores, have good construct validity, substantial test-retest agreement, and moderate inter-rater agreement.PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Results from the iSHARE questionnaires can inform both physician- and patient-directed efforts to improve SDM in clinical practice.

KW - AGREEMENT

KW - COMMUNICATION

KW - CONFLICT SCALE

KW - COSMIN

KW - Construct validity

KW - Formative

KW - Hypotheses testing

KW - Inter-rater agreement

KW - MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENTS

KW - METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY

KW - Oncology

KW - PERCEIVED EFFICACY

KW - PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES

KW - Questionnaire

KW - SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS

KW - Shared decision-making

KW - Test-retest agreement

KW - VALIDATION

U2 - 10.1016/j.pec.2021.08.034

DO - 10.1016/j.pec.2021.08.034

M3 - Article

C2 - 34556384

SN - 0738-3991

VL - 105

SP - 1089

EP - 1100

JO - Patient Education and Counseling

JF - Patient Education and Counseling

IS - 5

ER -

Patient and physician shared decision-making behaviors in oncology: Evidence on adequate measurement properties of the iSHARE questionnaires

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this