A Tool for Improving the Shared Decision-making Process in Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

This clinical trial compares the use of a shared decision-making communication tool during a clinical encounter to standard care for improving the quality of the shared decision-making process among patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Lung cancer patients are faced with many decisions about their treatment options. Studies have found that patients are most satisfied if they perceive an effort by their physician to share decision making and are afforded sufficient time to make their decision. Shared decision-making tools can help physicians guide the conversation, offer tailored estimates of the potential benefits, harms, and practical inconveniences of the available options, and support deliberations that take into account patient biological and biographical circumstances, goals, and priorities. Incorporating a shared decision-making communication tool into standard clinical encounters may improve the shared-decision making process as well as patient satisfaction with their treatment choice.

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: I. Encounters where standard of care and the non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) choice conversation aid were utilized will have an improvement in the quality of the shared decision-making process over encounters with standard of care alone. II. Patients with encounters where the NSCLC choice conversation aid was used along with standard of care will have decreased decisional conflict in regard to treatment choice compared to standard of care alone. OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM I: Patients attend a standard of care visit with their clinician on study. ARM II: Patients attend a standard of care visit with the use of the shared decision-making conversation tool by the clinician on study. After completion of study intervention, patients are followed up at 2 and 6 weeks.