The goal of this clinical trial is to test a new online tool designed to provide clear and understandable information to help individuals considering Metoidioplasty and Phalloplasty Surgeries (MaPS) make informed decisions The main questions it aims to answer are: * How user-friendly is the decision aid for individuals considering metoidioplasty and phalloplasty? * Does using the decision aid reduce uncertainty and improve readiness for making surgery decisions compared to usual care? Participants in this study will: * Be randomly assigned to either 1) receive usual care or 2) test the web-based decision aid. * Share their feedback on the tool's usability and its helpfulness in supporting decision-making. * Complete surveys before and after using the decision aid to measure any changes in their decision-making process. Researchers will compare participants who used the decision aid with those who received standard care to see if the decision aid reduces decisional uncertainty and improves readiness for surgery.
This study aims to evaluate the usability, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a novel, web-based decision aid (DA) for Metoidioplasty and Phalloplasty Surgeries (MaPS). MaPS are increasingly performed, however, patients face complex decisions which may impact fertility, urinary and sexual function. Existing decisional uncertainty among individuals considering MaPS highlights the need for effective decision support tools. Prior research indicates a gap in validated decision support, partly due to insufficient understanding of patient needs and a lack of published outcomes or guidelines. This study builds on preliminary work that identified key decision-making factors among patients and healthcare providers, leading to the development of a co-developed web-based MaPS picture DA prototype. Cognitive interviews with both participants considering or post MaPS and healthcare providers will refine the decision tool. The study will also investigate the DA's implementation within clinical settings to understand optimal administration timing and its impact on shared decision-making processes. This study will employ a mixed-methods approach and a prospective randomized controlled trial to assess the DA's usability and acceptability using the System Usability Scale and focus group feedback. Additionally, it aims to evaluate the DA's preliminary efficacy in reducing decisional conflict and improving decision readiness and shared decision-making quality compared to usual care. This will be measured using validated tools such as the Decisional Conflict Scale, Preparation for Decision Making Scale, and CollaboRATE measure, alongside semi-structured patient and provider interviews. This research aims to addressing the decisional needs of transgender and non-binary individuals considering MaPGAS, aiming to empower them with the tools needed for making informed, value-congruent decisions regarding their surgical options.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
140
This intervention involves a novel, web-based decision aid tool specifically designed to support transgender and non-binary individuals assigned female at birth in making informed decisions about Metoidioplasty and Phalloplasty Surgeries (MaPS). The tool includes comprehensive information on surgical options, risks, benefits, and medical illustrations to aid in aligning surgical decisions with the individual's personal values and goals.
Dartmouth College
Hanover, New Hampshire, United States
University of Utah
Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) Score Change
The Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) is used to measure personal perceptions of uncertainty in choosing options, factors contributing to uncertainty such as feeling uninformed, unclear about personal values, and unsupported in decision making, and perceived effectiveness of decision making. A change in DCS scores from baseline (pre-decision aid exposure) to post-decision aid exposure will be assessed to determine the impact of the decision aid on reducing decisional conflict. Scores range from 0 \[no decisional conflict\] to 100 \[extremely high decisional conflict\].
Time frame: Baseline (within 1-2 weeks prior to using the decision aid) and follow-up (immediately after decision aid use, approximately 2-4 weeks later).
Preparation for Decision Making (PrepDM) Scale Score Change
The Preparation for Decision Making (PrepDM) scale assesses a patient's perception of how useful a health-related decision aid is in preparing them to make a health decision. It evaluates the perceived helpfulness of the decision aid in understanding treatment options, clarifying personal values for the decision, and feeling prepared to talk with their health provider about the decision. The change in PrepDM scores before and after decision aid exposure indicates the aid's efficacy in improving decision readiness. Higher scores indicate higher perceived level of preparation for decision making.
Time frame: Baseline (within 1-2 weeks prior to using the decision aid) and follow-up (immediately after decision aid use, approximately 2-4 weeks later).
CollaboRATE Score Change Post-Surgical Consultation
The CollaboRATE score is a brief patient-reported measure assessing the extent of shared decision-making experienced during medical encounters. It focuses on three core aspects: the explanation of health issues, the elicitation of patient preferences, and the integration of these preferences into the decision-making process. A comparison of CollaboRATE scores between control and intervention groups after the surgical consultation will indicate the decision aid's impact on enhancing shared decision making. Higher scores represent more shared decision making; scores can range from 0-100.
Time frame: Within one week following the surgical consultation.
System Usability Scale (SUS) Score
The System Usability Scale (SUS) Score is a reliable tool for measuring the usability of the web-based decision aid. It consists of a 10-item questionnaire with five response options for respondents ranging from 'Strongly agree' to 'Strongly disagree'. It is widely used in the domain of user experience and measures the overall perceived usability of the decision aid. Higher scores represent a higher perceived system usability; scores can range from 0-100.
Time frame: Immediately after using the decision aid (approximately 2-4 weeks from baseline)
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.