Patients’ confidence in treatment decisions for early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

• Main Authors: Cecilia Pompili, Patricia Holch, Zoe Rogers, Kate Absolom, Beverly Clayton, Kevin Franks, Hilary Bekker, Galina Velikova
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2020-07-01
• Series: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
• Subjects: Shared decision making; Informed decision making; Self-efficacy; Lung cancer; Radiotherapy; Surgery
• Online Access: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12955-020-01496-9

Abstract Background In early-stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) patients, little is known about how to measure patient participation in Shared-Decision Making (SDM). We examined the psychometric properties and clinical acceptability of the Decision Self-Efficacy scale (DSE) in a cohort of patients undergoing to Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR) or Video-assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery (VATS) to capture patient involvement in treatment decisions. Methods In the context of a prospective longitudinal study (Life after Lung Cancer-LiLAC) involving 244 patients with early-stage NSCLC, 158 (64.7%) patients completed the DSE either on paper or electronically online prior to treatment with SABR or VATS pulmonary resection. DSE psychometric properties were examined using: principal components analysis of item properties and internal structure, and internal construct validity; we also performed a sensitivity analysis according to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS), gender, age and treatment received (VATS or SABR) difference. Results Exploratory factor analysis using polychoric correlations substantiated that the 11 item DSE is one scale accounting for 81% of the variance. We calculated a value of 0.96 for Cronbach’s alpha for the total DSE score. DSE scores did not differ by gender (p = 0.37), between the two treatment groups (p = 0.09) and between younger and older patients (p = 0.4). However, patients with an ECOG PS > 1 have a DSE mean of 73.8 (SD 26) compared to patients with a PS 0–1 who have a DSE mean of 85.8 (SD 20.3 p = 0.002). Conclusion Findings provide preliminary evidence for the reliability and validity of the DSE questionnaire in this population. However, future studies are warranted to identify the most appropriate SDM tool for clinical practice in the lung cancer treatment field.