Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2024 Dec 27;121(26):861-867.
doi: 10.3238/arztebl.m2024.0228.

The Heidelberg Decision Aid for Patients With Lung Cancer (HELP)—Findings of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Matthias Villalobos  1 , Laura Unsöld, Nicole Deis, Rouven Behnisch, Anja Siegle, Michael Thomas
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

The Heidelberg Decision Aid for Patients With Lung Cancer (HELP)—Findings of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Matthias Villalobos et al. Dtsch Arztebl Int. .

Abstract

Background: Advanced lung cancer typifies the challenges of shared decision-making in oncology. With a limited prognosis for survival, the increasingly numerous and complex treatment options must continually be weighed against issues of fragility, quality of life, and the end of life.

Methods: This randomized, controlled trial, carried out on 138 patients, concerned the use of a decision aid combined with decision coaching, versus standard care. The primary endpoint was clarity of the patient's personal attitude, as assessed on the Decisional Conflict Scale. The secondary endpoints were self-efficacy, decisional conflict, perceived preparedness and participation in decision-making, and anxiety/depression. The data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and intergroup comparisons. The trial was entered into the German registry of clinical trials (DRKS00028023).

Results: No statistically significant difference with regard to the primary endpoint (clarity of the patient's personal attitude concerning the decision) was found in a comparison between the intervention group and the control group (IG: median/IQR: 41.67/47.92; CG: median/IQR: 33.33/43.75; p = 0.35). The descriptive statistics revealed a high level of decisional conflict in the overall group of study participants: 57.6% had a very high level of decisional conflict, composed in particular of the dimensions of feeling inadequately informed (64.4%) and of uncertainty (58.9%). Most participants judged the intervention to be helpful in preparing them to make a decision.

Conclusion: Even though the intervention was perceived as helpful preparation for decision-making, it did not bring about any improvement in the high level of decisional conflict. With the continual development of new treatments and the associated increase in prognostic uncertainty, there is an important role for individualized patient information and the training of physicians in how to deal with uncertainty.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study procedure—CONSORT flow chart GC, general condition; ITT, intention to treat
Figure 2
Figure 2
Frequency distribution of the Decisional Conflict Scale and their subscales for the entire group of patients (n = 92)
Figure 3
Figure 3
Evaluation of the intervention using the Preparation for Decision-Making Scale (PDMS-D) (German version)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Nationaler Krebsplan. www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/fileadmin/Datein/5_Publikationen/Pra... www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/themen/praevention/nationaler-krebsp... (last accessed on 10 May 2024)
    1. Bieber C, Loh A, Ringel N, Eich W, Härter M. Manual zur Partizipativen Entscheidungsfindung (Shared Decision-making) Heidelberg. Selbstverlag. 2007
    1. Härter M, Buchholz A, Nicolai J, et al. Shared decision making and the use of decision aids. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2015;112:672–679. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rosca A, Krones T, Biller-Andorno N. Shared decision making: patients have a right to be informed about possible treatment options and their risks and benefits. Swiss Med Wkly. 2020;150 w20268. - PubMed
    1. Hahlweg P, Bieber C, Brutt AL, et al. Moving towards patient-centered care and shared decision-making in Germany. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2022;171:49–57. - PubMed

Publication types