Abstract 567P
Background
In the past 15 years, a number of decision aids (DAs) have been developed to assist individuals from families with hereditary cancer in managing inheritance and cancer risk, improving decision-making process. However, a systematic identification of DA development and assessment of their effectiveness is lacking. To identify and describe DAs for supporting individuals of families with hereditary cancer, and evaluate effectiveness of DAs.
Methods
A scoping review was conducted following the methodological framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley. Database searches were conducted through the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, in addition to manual searches. Peer-reviewed articles published in English from inception to January 2024 were selected. Quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.
Results
Out of 18,042 screened titles and abstracts, 32 publications reporting 23 unique DAs with a moderate risk of bias were included. The majority of DAs targeted women (69.6%) affected by hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (73.9%) in North America and Europe (81.3%). Only four DAs completed the guideline-recommended development process, including prototype development, alpha- and beta-testing. Most DAs focused on cancer risk-reducing strategies (56.5%) and genetic testing/counseling (47.8%). During development and alpha-testing, common outcomes assessed were acceptability, satisfaction, and relevance. Beta-testing commonly evaluated decisional conflict, knowledge, and psychological impact. DAs consistently reduced decisional conflict and increased knowledge and satisfaction, but had variable psychological effects, preferences for options, and actual decision-making outcomes.
Conclusions
Several limitations are identified in this review regarding the content and development of DAs for the treatment of hereditary cancer. In accordance with the guidelines for DA development stages, it is necessary to develop DAs targeting a broader population that includes genetic, racial, and gender minorities. Future studies should clarify the effectiveness of DAs, particularly the psychological impact.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
This research was funded by the Korean Cancer Survivors Healthcare R&D Project through the National Cancer Center, supported by the Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (grant number: NCC 23F1940).
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.