Preference Sensitive Care and Shared Decision-Making in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Study Design. Scoping review. Objective. The objective of this study was to conduct a scoping review exploring the extent to which preference sensitivity has been studied in treatment decisions for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), utilizing shared decision-making (SDM) as a proxy. Background. Preference-sensitive care involves situations where multiple treatment options exist with significant tradeoffs in cost, outcome, recovery time, and quality of life. LSS has gained research focus as a preference-sensitive care scenario. Materials and Methods. A scoping review protocol in accordance with “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews” regulations was registered with the Open Science Framework (ID: 9ewup) and conducted across multiple databases from January 2000 to October 2022. Study selection and characterization were performed by 3 independent reviewers and an unbiased moderator. Results. The search resulted in the inclusion of 16 studies varying in design and sample size, with most published between 2016 and 2021. The studies examined variables related to SDM, patient preferences, surgeon preferences, and decision aids (DAs). The outcomes assessed included treatment choice, patient satisfaction, and patient understanding. Several studies reported that SDM influenced treatment choice and patient satisfaction, while the impact on patient understanding was less clear. DAs were used in some studies to facilitate SDM. Conclusion. The scoping review identified a gap in comprehensive studies analyzing the preference sensitivity of treatment for LSS and the role of DAs. Further research is needed to better understand the impact of patient preferences on treatment decisions and the effectiveness of DAs in LSS care. This review provides a foundation for future research in preference-sensitive care and SDM in the context of lumbar stenosis treatment.

[1]  Kristin R. Archer,et al.  A Conceptual Model for Spine Surgery Recovery , 2022, Spine.

[2]  M. Cabana,et al.  Collaboration and Shared Decision-Making Between Patients and Clinicians in Preventive Health Care Decisions and US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations. , 2022, JAMA.

[3]  P. Cram,et al.  Surgical Outcomes in Canada and the United States: An Analysis of the ACS-NSQIP Clinical Registry , 2022, World Journal of Surgery.

[4]  S. Atlas,et al.  Assessing the quality of shared decision making for elective orthopedic surgery across a large healthcare system: cross-sectional survey study , 2021, BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.

[5]  S. Puri,et al.  Minimally invasive direct decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: impact of multiple prior epidural steroid injections. , 2021, Pain management.

[6]  Seth Peterson,et al.  How people with lumbar spinal stenosis make decisions about treatment: A qualitative study using the Health Belief Model. , 2021, Musculoskeletal science & practice.

[7]  D. Balmer,et al.  Longitudinal qualitative research in medical education: Time to conceptualise time , 2021, Medical education.

[8]  R. Kamal,et al.  Decompression With or Without Fusion for Lumbar Stenosis: A Cost Minimization Analysis. , 2020, Spine.

[9]  A. Stiggelbout,et al.  Key components of shared decision making models: a systematic review , 2019, BMJ Open.

[10]  D. Gordon,et al.  A Qualitative Descriptive Study of Patient Experiences of Pain Before and After Spine Surgery. , 2019, Pain medicine.

[11]  James D. Kang,et al.  Changes in the Use of Lumbar Arthrodesis Procedures Within Accountable Care Organizations , 2019, Spine.

[12]  C. Ryan,et al.  Pain Neuroscience Education for Adults With Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. , 2019, The journal of pain : official journal of the American Pain Society.

[13]  Sohail K. Mirza,et al.  Trends in Lumbar Fusion Procedure Rates and Associated Hospital Costs for Degenerative Spinal Diseases in the United States, 2004 to 2015 , 2019, Spine.

[14]  T. Lamer,et al.  The MIST Guidelines: The Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Consensus Group Guidelines for Minimally Invasive Spine Treatment , 2018, Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain.

[15]  Karen R. Sepucha,et al.  Informed, Patient-Centered Decisions Associated with Better Health Outcomes in Orthopedics: Prospective Cohort Study , 2018, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[16]  Karen R. Sepucha,et al.  Variation in costs among surgeons for lumbar spinal stenosis. , 2018, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[17]  Karen R. Sepucha,et al.  Increasing the use of patient decision aids in orthopaedic care: results of a quality improvement project , 2017, BMJ Quality & Safety.

[18]  Theodore Speroff,et al.  An analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database, Part 1. Disability, quality of life, and pain outcomes following lumbar spine surgery: predicting likely individual patient outcomes for shared decision-making. , 2017, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[19]  Andrew D. Lynch,et al.  Patients' experience with nonsurgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis: a qualitative study. , 2017, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[20]  D. Balmer,et al.  Longitudinal qualitative research in medical education , 2017, Perspectives on Medical Education.

[21]  Karen R. Sepucha,et al.  Patient Decision Aids Improve Decision Quality and Patient Experience and Reduce Surgical Rates in Routine Orthopaedic Care: A Prospective Cohort Study , 2017, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[22]  E. Benzel,et al.  Decision-making process in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis. , 2017, Journal of neurosurgical sciences.

[23]  M. Lumley,et al.  Patient factors in decision-making for orthopaedic surgery: a prospective analysis , 2017 .

[24]  Karen R. Sepucha,et al.  State of the Science: Tools and Measurement for Shared Decision Making. , 2016, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[25]  M. Miyagi,et al.  Surgical and nonsurgical treatments for lumbar spinal stenosis , 2016, European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology.

[26]  A. Ryan,et al.  Regional variations in spine surgery: current challenges and potential solutions. , 2016, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[27]  E. Carragee,et al.  Surgical versus non-surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis. , 2016, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[28]  A M Stiggelbout,et al.  Shared decision making: Concepts, evidence, and practice. , 2015, Patient education and counseling.

[29]  A. Masi,et al.  Efficacy of Commercial Weight-Loss Programs , 2015, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[30]  J. Katz,et al.  Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Informed Patient Preferences Should Weigh Heavily , 2015, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[31]  Tyler R. Ross,et al.  Decision aids for benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostate cancer. , 2015, The American journal of managed care.

[32]  N. Mekhail,et al.  The 2‐Year Cost‐Effectiveness of 3 options to Treat Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Patients , 2015, Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain.

[33]  Mohsen Tavakol,et al.  Quantitative and qualitative methods in medical education research: AMEE Guide No 90: Part I , 2014, Medical teacher.

[34]  Glyn Elwyn,et al.  Undetermined impact of patient decision support interventions on healthcare costs and savings: systematic review , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[35]  France Légaré,et al.  Coaching and guidance with patient decision aids: A review of theoretical and empirical evidence , 2013, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making.

[36]  D. Kreiner,et al.  An evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (update). , 2013, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[37]  P. Bossuyt,et al.  Decision Aids for Patients Facing a Surgical Treatment Decision: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis , 2013, Annals of surgery.

[38]  D. Wennberg,et al.  Enhanced support for shared decision making reduced costs of care for patients with preference-sensitive conditions. , 2013, Health affairs.

[39]  Carolyn Rutter,et al.  Introducing decision aids at Group Health was linked to sharply lower hip and knee surgery rates and costs. , 2012, Health affairs.

[40]  J. Weinstein,et al.  Who Should Have Surgery for an Intervertebral Disc Herniation?: Comparative Effectiveness Evidence From the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial , 2012, Spine.

[41]  J. Weinstein,et al.  Effects of Viewing an Evidence-Based Video Decision Aid on Patients' Treatment Preferences for Spine Surgery , 2011, Spine.

[42]  Karen Harker,et al.  Is Qualitative Research Second Class Science? A Quantitative Longitudinal Examination of Qualitative Research in Medical Journals , 2011, PloS one.

[43]  I. Wilson Qualitative research in medical education , 2010, Medical education.

[44]  R. Deyo,et al.  Treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: a balancing act. , 2010, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[45]  R. Deyo,et al.  Trends, major medical complications, and charges associated with surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in older adults. , 2010, JAMA.

[46]  S. Goold,et al.  Patient-centered care and preference-sensitive decision making. , 2009, JAMA.

[47]  Amiram Gafni,et al.  Shared Decision Making in the Medical Encounter: Are We All Talking about the Same Thing? , 2007, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[48]  B. Weiner,et al.  Patient Preferences Regarding Spine Surgical Decision Making , 2006, Spine.

[49]  James N Weinstein,et al.  United States’ Trends and Regional Variations in Lumbar Spine Surgery: 1992–2003 , 2006, Spine.

[50]  J. Frank,et al.  Informed consent in interventional spine procedures: how much do patients understand? , 2005, Pain physician.

[51]  P. Marcotte,et al.  LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS: TREATMENT OPTIONS AND RESULTS , 2000 .

[52]  R A Deyo,et al.  Involving Patients in Clinical Decisions: Impact of an Interactive Video Program on Use of Back Surgery , 2000, Medical care.

[53]  Russell S. Kirby,et al.  The Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care , 1998 .

[54]  R. Deyo,et al.  An International Comparison of Back Surgery Rates , 1994, Spine.

[55]  P. Diehr,et al.  Small area analysis of surgery for low-back pain. , 1992, Spine.

[56]  J. Kolcun,et al.  Scenario Planning: Playing the Expectations Game in Spine Surgery. , 2018, World neurosurgery.

[57]  R. Thomson,et al.  Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. , 2014, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[58]  R M Poses,et al.  Qualitative research in medicine and health care: questions and controversy. , 1998, Journal of general internal medicine.

[59]  F. Postacchini Management of lumbar spinal stenosis. , 1996, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[60]  G. Osborne Spinal stenosis. , 1974, Physiotherapy.