OBJECTIVE: Family caregivers of older adults receiving home care often find themselves in situations in which they must make important and difficult decisions, which can cause conflict and regret. To tailor shared decision making in this context, we aimed to identify the most difficult decisions they faced, assess their levels of decision regret, and explore the associated factors.
METHODS: This study used a cross-sectional design.
METHODS: Participants included 165 caregivers of older adults who received home care services in Korea.
METHODS: We identified difficult decisions perceived by family caregivers of older adults and evaluated decision regret using the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), decisional conflict using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), burden of care using the Short Zarit Burden Inventory, and Preference Control Scale (PCS). We then performed descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate linear regression analyses to identify factors predicting decision regret.
RESULTS: The most frequently reported difficult decisions were related to place of living (71.6%), management of health conditions (15.1%), and end-of-life decisions (13.3%). The mean DCS score was 37.09 (12.67), the DRS score was 32.33 (15.91), and the burden score was 21.81 (8.25). Matching decisions with preferences and aligning decision-making roles significantly reduced regret, while decision conflicts increased regret.
CONCLUSIONS: The positive associations between decision regret, decision conflict, and the alignment of decision-making roles highlight the intricate dynamics involved in the decision-making process for family caregivers. These findings emphasize the need for tailored interventions that recognize and address the diverse factors influencing caregivers\' decision-making experiences. Future research exploring the efficacy of targeted interventions such as decision-support programs or caregiver education initiatives could offer valuable insights into mitigating decision-related challenges and improving the overall well-being of both caregivers and care recipients.

BACKGROUND: Many people struggle with the choice in a series of processes, from prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis to treatment. We investigated the degree of regret after the prostate biopsy (PBx) and relevant factors in patients recommended for biopsy for suspected PCa.
METHODS: From 06/2020 to 05/2022, 198 people who performed PBx at three institutions were enrolled and analyzed through a questionnaire before and after biopsy. Before the biopsy, a questionnaire was conducted to evaluate the sociodemographic information, anxiety scale, and health literacy, and after PBx, another questionnaire was conducted to evaluate the decision regret scale. For patients diagnosed as PCa after biopsy, a questionnaire was conducted when additional tests were performed at PCa staging work-up.
RESULTS: 190 patients answered the questionnaire before and after PBx. The mean age was 66.2 ± 7.8 years. Overall, 5.5% of men regretted biopsy, but there was no significant difference between groups according to the PCa presence. Multivariate analysis, to identify predictors for regret, revealed that the case when physicians did not properly explain what the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test was like and what PSA elevation means (OR 20.57, [95% CI 2.45-172.70], p = 0.005), low media literacy (OR 10.01, [95% CI 1.09-92.29], p = 0.042), and when nobody to rely on (OR 8.49, [95% CI 1.66-43.34], p = 0.010) were significantly related.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall regret related to PBx was low. Decision regret was more significantly related to media literacy rather than to educational level. For patients with relatively low media literacy and fewer people to rely on in case of serious diseases, more careful attention and counseling on PBx, including a well-informed explanation on PSA test, is helpful.

UNASSIGNED: Patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer are faced with the decision of whether to undergo radical treatment. Decision-making aids, such as Predict Prostate, can empower both clinicians and patients to make treatment decisions with personalised information, but their impact on multi-disciplinary team (MDT) decision-making and uptake of radical treatment remains unknown.
UNASSIGNED: The objective of this study is to assess the utilisation and utility of Predict Prostate in informing treatment decisions for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.
UNASSIGNED: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in Cambridge University Hospitals (CUH) of patients referred to the prostate cancer specialist multi-disciplinary team (pcSMDT) and robotic prostatectomy clinic (ROPD) between September 2019 and August 2021 for consideration of radical prostatectomy (RARP). Data on patient characteristics, use of PredictProstate and management decisions were collected from the Epic electronic medical record (EMR) of 839 patients, of whom 386 had intermediate-risk prostate cancer.
UNASSIGNED: The use of Predict Prostate at the pcSMDT increased in the second half of the study period (34.5% vs. 23.8%, p < 0.001). The use of Predict Prostate was associated with an increased likelihood of attending ROPD for men with CPG2 prostate cancer (OR = 2.155, 95% CI = 1.158-4.013, p = 0.015) but a reduced likelihood of proceeding with RARP for men with CPG2 (OR = 0.397, 95% CI = 0.209-0.753, p = 0.005) and CPG3 (OR = 0.305, 95% CI = 0.108-0.861, p = 0.025) prostate cancer.
UNASSIGNED: Our study showed that the use of Predict Prostate for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer is associated with increased attendance at specialist surgical clinic and a reduced chance of undergoing radical prostate surgery.

Background: It is important to understand cancer survivors\' perceptions about their treatment decisions and quality of life. Methods: We performed a prospective observational cohort study of Canadian patients with small (<2 cm) low-risk papillary thyroid cancer (PTC) who were offered the choice of active surveillance (AS) or surgery (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03271892). Participants completed a questionnaire one year after their treatment decision. The primary intention-to-treat analysis compared the mean decision regret scale total score between patients who chose AS or surgery. A secondary analysis examined one-year decision regret score according to treatment status. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, mood, fear of disease progression, and body image perception. We adjusted for age, sex, and follow-up duration in linear regression analyses. Results: The overall questionnaire response rate was 95.5% (191/200). The initial treatment choices of respondents were AS 79.1% (151/191) and surgery 20.9% (40/191). The mean age was 53 years (standard deviation [SD] 15 years) and 77% (147/191) were females. In the AS group, 7.3% (11/151) of patients crossed over to definitive treatment (two for disease progression) before the time of questionnaire completion. The mean level of decision regret did not differ significantly between patients who chose AS (mean 22.4, SD 13.9) or surgery (mean 20.9, SD 12.2) in crude (p = 0.730) or adjusted (p = 0.29) analyses. However, the adjusted level of decision regret was significantly higher in patients who initially chose AS and crossed over to surgery (beta coefficient 10.1 [confidence interval; CI 1.3-18.9], p = 0.02), compared with those remaining under AS. In secondary adjusted analyses, respondents who chose surgery reported that symptoms related to their cancer or its treatment interfered with life to a greater extent than those who chose AS (p = 0.02), but there were no significant group differences in the levels of depression, anxiety, fear of disease progression, or overall body image perception. Conclusions: In this study of patients with small, low-risk PTC, the mean level of decision regret pertaining to the initial disease management choice was relatively low after one year and it did not differ significantly for respondents who chose AS or surgery.

UNASSIGNED: We aimed to gain insight into psychological barriers toward initiation of strong opioid analgesic use in patients with advanced recurrent cancer.
UNASSIGNED: This study included 46 patients who were prescribed with opioid analgesics for advanced recurrent cancer. The primary outcome was psychological barriers assessed using the Japanese version of the Barriers Questionnaire-II (JBQ-II). The secondary outcomes were psychological changes and pain relief one week after the induction of strong opioid analgesics.
UNASSIGNED: The mean age of participants was 63.6 years. Furthermore, 26.1% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of ≥3. The mean JBQ-II total score was 1.97 (95% confidence interval: 1.75-2.19). At the initiation of opioid therapy, there was no difference in the total scores between the baseline and one week later. Nevertheless, there was a significant difference in the subscale \"disease progression\" score (mean 2.97 vs. 2.59, difference in means 0.38, standard error 0.16, p = 0.026). Personalized Pain Goal (PPG) was achieved in about half of the participants, and a trend toward a higher score in the subscale \"harmful effects\" (concern about adverse events) was observed in those who did not achieve PPG.
UNASSIGNED: This study showed that patients with advanced recurrent cancer have psychological barriers to opioid induction. The relationship between the presence of psychological barriers before and after induction of opioid analgesics and the speed of pain improvement was determined. The results may provide fundamental information for prospective intervention studies to develop individualized education programs for patients with psychological barriers to opioids.Clinical Trial Registration Number UMIN000042443.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient\'s satisfaction, Decision Regret And QUality of Life Assessment (DRAQULA) among adolescents (older than 15 years) and adults after hypospadias surgery in childhood.
METHODS: 234 Patients operated on hypospadias as children in our center and their parents were contacted after they reached the age of 15 years to complete a questionnaire survey to assess satisfaction with the operative result, the regret with the operative decision and the health related quality of life (HRQOL). The survey is based on the Decision Regret Scale available in the literature with a score of 100 meaning maximum dissatisfaction or regret, and on the Kidscreen10 index. Satisfaction was measured on a scale from 1 to 5 with 5 signifying full satisfaction.
RESULTS: 81 of 234 patients from 15 to 43 years (mean age 19.7 years) completed the survey (34.6 %). 44 Patients had distal, and 17 proximal hypospadias and the remaining 20 patients could not remember the type of hypospadias they had. The patient\'s satisfaction with the operative result was 5 (full satisfaction) in 74.1 %, 4 in 18.5 %, 3 in 6.2 % and 2 in 1.2 % (mean satisfaction score 4.7 of 5). Regarding decision regret among patients, 64/81 patients (79.0 %) had no decision regret. Only 14.8 % reported mild and 6.2 % moderate decisional regret (mean decisional regret score 4.8). 71 of 234 parents answered the parents\' questionnaire (30.0 %). Fifty-eight (81.7 %) had no decision regret. 13 parents (18.3 %) had decision regret; 10 parents (14.1 %) reported mild, 2 parents (2.8 %) moderate, and only one parent (1.4 %) reported strong decisional regret. The mean HRQOL T-score was 55.9 (SD 10, control Group of adolescent males from 12 to 18 years.) and thus corresponded to the average of the reference normal population.
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, only 19.7 % had decision regret as compared to 50-65 % reported in literature. The decision regret scale of O\'Connor needs to be revalidated as even candidates who approve of the decision of early surgery have a score less than 25 and considered to have decision regret.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of the survey showed that 90 % of the patients were satisfied with early hypospadias surgery with average HRQOL and low level of decisional regret in patients as well as parents. The findings support the current practice of operating hypospadias in early childhood.

BACKGROUND: Decisions for how to resolve infertility are complex and may lead to regret. We examined whether couples and individuals who sought a consultation from a reproductive specialist for infertility later expressed decisional regret about their family-building choices and whether regret was associated with parental role, family-building paths, or outcomes.
METHODS: This longitudinal mixed methods study included women and their partners who completed a questionnaire prior to their initial consultation with a reproductive specialist and 6 years later. The six-year questionnaire included the Ottawa Decision Regret Scale referencing \"the decisions you made about how to add a child to your family.\" A score of 25+ indicates moderate-to-severe regret. Additional items invited reflections on family-building decisions, treatments, and costs. A systematic content analysis assessed qualitative themes.
RESULTS: Forty-five couples and 34 individuals participated in the six-year questionnaire (76% retention rate), Half (n = 61) of participants expressed no regret, which was similar by role (median 0 for women and supporting partners, F = .08; p = .77). One in 5 women and 1 in 7 partners expressed moderate-to-severe regret. Women who did not pursue any treatment had significantly higher regret (median 15; F = 5.6, p < 0.01) compared to those who pursued IVF (median 0) or other treatments (median 0). Women who did not add a child to their family had significantly higher regret (median 35; F = 10.1, p < 0.001) than those who added a child through treatment (median 0), through fostering/adoption (median 0), or naturally (median 5). Among partners, regret scores were not associated with family-building paths or outcomes. More than one-quarter of participants wished they had spent less money trying to add a child to their family. Qualitative themes included gratitude for parenthood despite the burdensome process of family-building as well as dissatisfaction or regret about the process. Results should be confirmed in other settings to increase generalizability.
CONCLUSIONS: This longitudinal study provides new insight into the burden of infertility. For women seeking parenthood, any of the multiple paths to parenthood may prevent future decision regret. Greater psychosocial, financial, and decision support is needed to help patients and their partners navigate family-building with minimal regret.
When people experience infertility, there are many decisions that can be challenging, such as whether to seek fertility treatments, to pursue fostering/adoption, and how to manage costs. With each decision, there is an opportunity for regret. The goal of this study was to look at whether people who were experiencing infertility and made an appointment with a doctor who specializes in infertility felt any regret about their decisions 6 years later. We also looked at whether different roles (that is, women seeking pregnancy or their supporting partners), different family-building paths (that is, medical treatments or not), or different outcomes (that is, adding a child to their family or not) were associated with different levels of regret. Results showed that half of the 120 people in the study did not have any regret 6 years after meeting with a specialty doctor. However, some patients did have regret, including 20% of women and 14% of partners who expressed moderate-to-severe regret. Women who did not add a child to their family in the six years during the study reported higher regret compared to women who did add a child to their family. There were no such differences among partners. About 25% of participants wished they had tried more, fewer, or different treatments. More than 25% wished they spent less money to try to add a child to their family. For people who want to add a child to their family, there are multiple ways to become a parent, any of which may be linked to lower decision regret. Decision regret is experienced differently between women seeking to add a child to their family and their partners. Would-be parents need more emotional, financial, and decision making support to help them navigate family-building with minimal regret.

OBJECTIVE: To (1) prospectively characterize the incidence of decision regret among women considering planned oocyte cryopreservation (planned OC), comparing those who pursued treatment vs those who did not freeze eggs, and (2) to identify baseline predictors for future decision regret.
METHODS: A total of 173 women seen in consultation for planned OC were followed prospectively. Surveys were administered at (1) baseline (< 1 week after initial consultation) and (2) follow-up, 6 months after planned OC among participants who froze eggs or 6 months following consultation in the absence of further communication to pursue treatment. The primary outcome was the incidence of moderate-to-severe decision regret, indicated by a Decision Regret Scale score > 25. We also examined predictors of regret.
RESULTS: The incidence of moderate-to-severe regret over the decision to freeze eggs was 9% compared to 51% over the decision not to pursue treatment. Among women who froze eggs, adequacy of information at baseline to decide about treatment (aOR 0.16, 95% CI 0.03, 0.87) and emphasis on future parenthood (aOR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66, 0.99) were associated with reduced odds of regret. Forty-six percent of women who froze eggs regretted not doing so earlier. Among women who did not freeze eggs, the primary reasons were financial and time constraints, correlating with increased odds of decision regret in an exploratory analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: Among women undergoing planned OC, the incidence of decision regret is low compared to the regret confronting women seen in consultation for planned OC but who do not pursue treatment. Provider counseling is key to offset the regret risk.

Background: While psychological difficulties, such as depression, among prostate cancer patients are known, their longitudinal burden remains understudied. We assessed the burden of depression across low-, intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer groups, and the association between regret and long-term depression. Methods: Secondary analysis of data from a multi-centered randomized controlled study among localized prostate cancer patients was carried out. Assessments were performed at baseline, and at 3-, 6-, 12- and 24-month follow-up. Depression was assessed using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale. A CES-D score ≥ 16 indicates high depression. Regret was measured using the regret scale of the Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer (MAX-PC). The proportion of patients with high depression was compared over time, for each risk category. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between regret, and long-term depression after adjusting for age, race, insurance, smoking status, marital status, income, education, employment, treatment, number of people in the household and study site. Results: The study had 743 localized prostate cancer patients. Median depression scores at 6, 12 and 24 months were significantly larger than the baseline median score, overall and for the three prostate cancer risk groups. The proportion of participants with high depression increased over time for all risk groups. Higher regret at 24-month follow-up was significantly associated with high depression at 24-month follow-up, after adjusting for covariates. Conclusions: A substantial proportion of localized prostate cancer patients continued to experience long-term depression. Patient-centered survivorship care strategies can help reduce depression and regret, and improve outcomes in prostate cancer care.

Patient’s regret (PatR) concerning the choice of therapy represents a crucial endpoint for treatment evaluation after radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PCA). This study aims to compare PatR following robot-assisted (RARP) and open surgical approach (ORP). A survey comprising perioperative-functional criteria was sent to 1000 patients in 20 German centers at a median of 15 months after RP. Surgery-related items were collected from participating centers. To calculate PatR differences between approaches, a multivariate regressive base model (MVBM) was established incorporating surgical approach and demographic, center-specific, and tumor-specific criteria not primarily affected by surgical approach. An extended model (MVEM) was further adjusted by variables potentially affected by surgical approach. PatR was based on five validated questions ranging 0−100 (cutoff >15 defined as critical PatR). The response rate was 75.0%. After exclusion of patients with laparoscopic RP or stage M1b/c, the study cohort comprised 277/365 ORP/RARP patients. ORP/RARP patients had a median PatR of 15/10 (p < 0.001) and 46.2%/28.1% had a PatR >15, respectively (p < 0.001). Based on the MVBM, RARP patients showed PatR >15 relative 46.8% less frequently (p < 0.001). Consensual decision making regarding surgical approach independently reduced PatR. With the MVEM, the independent impact of both surgical approach and of consensual decision making was confirmed. This study involving centers of different care levels showed significantly lower PatR following RARP.