[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-429352-105":59,"doc-detail-429352-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","improving-patient-experience-through-co-designed-patient-decision-aids-in-glaucoma","Improving patient experience through co-designed patient decision aids in glaucoma","","Glaucoma management is complex and requires shared decision-making as a core component of patient-centred care. Patient decision aids (PDAs) support SDM by providing clear, evidence-based information that patients can understand, distinct from standard information leaflets. This study co-produced glaucoma PDAs via a multidisciplinary approach, using NICE-aligned subtypes and landmark trial data. Focus group feedback, captured and thematically analysed, informed revisions and highlighted needs for clarity, accessibility, inclusivity, and support tools.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":35,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/improving-patient-experience-through-co-designed-patient-decision-aids-in-glaucoma/429352/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/improving-patient-experience-through-co-designed-patient-decision-aids-in-glaucoma/429352.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Emma Wilson","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-09-29",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":34},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"How were the glaucoma patient decision aids developed?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The PDAs were co-produced through a multidisciplinary approach with students, clinicians, and patients. Glaucoma subtypes and treatment options were selected following NICE guidance, and trial evidence was used to create explanatory figures and diagrams.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What role did the patient focus group play?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"A patient focus group provided insights that were recorded and analysed using thematic analysis. Revisions were implemented based on emergent themes, summarized in figures in the study.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What key patient needs were highlighted?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Participants emphasized clear communication, early involvement in decisions, accessible and inclusive formats, and support for practical challenges such as remembering eye-drop regimens. They also described unmet information needs at diagnosis and valued emotional and practical support services.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},429352,1791076366,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":34,"category_name":35,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":34,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":81,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":39,"preview_page_count":4},3848291630094,"https://eur-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_085a072bc5b1113ac321206ff7593b45","[www.nature.com/eye](www.nature.com/eye)  \nCOMMENT OPEN   \nImproving patient experience through co-designed patient decision aids in glaucoma  \nChristin Henein 1, Jit Kai Tan2, Caroline Kilduff2 and Rashmi G. Mathew1,2 ✉  \n© The Author(s) 2025  \nEye (2026) 40:9–11; [https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-025-041](https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-025-041)13-5  \nGlaucoma management is inherently complex, encompassing a range of treatment options. Shared decision-making (SDM) has become increasingly recognised as a critical component of patient-centred glaucoma care. Patient decision aids (PDAs) play an essential role in supporting SDM by enabling patients to engage in their treatment through the provision of clear, evidence-based information which patients can understand [1] . Distinction between PDAs and information leaflets is important, as PDAs provide information to patients about their choices regarding their disease, which can include observation. In this study, the PDAs were co-produced through a multidisciplinary approach involving students, clinicians, and patients, ensuring content was clinically robust.  \nPre-defined glaucoma subtypes and corresponding treatment options were selected for PDA development in accordance with NICE guidelines [2] . Landmark clinical trials relevant to each condition were identified to inform the content, with key statistics extracted to generate explanatory figures and diagrams. Initial versions of the PDAs were co-produced by MSc students as part of a formative assessment, under the supervision of module leads (RGM, CH) .  \nQuestions were prepared in advance for the patient focus group (see Supplementary File 1) . Insights from the focus group were recorded and analysed using thematic analysis, with revisions implemented based on emergent themes. This is summarized in Fig. 1.  \nFive key topics were identified for the development of PDAs: mild-to-moderate primary open-angle glaucoma (OAG), advanced OAG, primary angle-closure, cataracts in mild-to-moderate OAG, and primary congenital glaucoma. The selection of these topics was informed by landmark clinical trials [3–11] . 4 PDAs were produced from these topics. Participants for the patient focus group were recruited via a public webinar hosted by Glaucoma UK, which was attended by 67 individuals. Four volunteers took part in the focus group discussion, three of whom participated online, and were compensated with a monetary voucher. The session was transcribed by two clinicians (CH, JKT), and thematic analysis was conducted by CH.  \nParticipants described a lack of consistent communication and conflicting opinions between clinicians, “Every clinician has their own view on the best way forward”. Others emphasized the importance of being involved in early treatment decisions.  \nUnclear terminology in the PDA was raised: “Did not progress… you mean did not get worse?”.  \nThe accessibility of PDAs was a concern, particularly for those with visual impairments. “…how else can you communicate this information?”. There were calls for multi-format versions, including audio and translated versions. Participants also suggested codesigned educational videos: “… so that they are clear and less ambiguous”.  \nMany participants expressed regret at not being fully informed about glaucoma at diagnosis. “I wish I knew an awful lot more”. There was desire for the PDA to include an overview of the patient journey: “Explain what to expect”.  \nDifficulties in administering eye drops and remembering complex regimens were commonly cited. “I had to create my own log to track my drops”. One participant recalled being given the wrong medication: “…the packages are so similar”. Others called for support tools such as drop reminder cards or mobile apps.  \nEmotional impacts of diagnosis and vision loss were profound.“You don’t know what you’re missing…”. Support services such as Glaucoma UK helplines and buddy schemes were described as invaluable. “So many things I didn’t know…”. P","cbCainFSgxaD2wVR","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCainFSgxaD2wVR","pdf",2987017,"English","# PDA development approach\n## Shared decision-making and rationale\n## PDA design inputs and co-production\n## Focus group recruitment and thematic analysis\n# Key themes from patient focus group\n## Communication and early involvement\n## Terminology clarity and accessibility\n## Learning at diagnosis and patient journey\n## Treatment administration support\n## Emotional impact and support services\n## Daily-life, financial, and cultural considerations","[{\"question\":\"How were the glaucoma patient decision aids developed?\",\"answer\":\"The PDAs were co-produced through a multidisciplinary approach with students, clinicians, and patients. Glaucoma subtypes and treatment options were selected following NICE guidance, and trial evidence was used to create explanatory figures and diagrams.\"},{\"question\":\"What role did the patient focus group play?\",\"answer\":\"A patient focus group provided insights that were recorded and analysed using thematic analysis. Revisions were implemented based on emergent themes, summarized in figures in the study.\"},{\"question\":\"What key patient needs were highlighted?\",\"answer\":\"Participants emphasized clear communication, early involvement in decisions, accessible and inclusive formats, and support for practical challenges such as remembering eye-drop regimens. They also described unmet information needs at diagnosis and valued emotional and practical support services.\"}]","Improving patient experience through co-designed patient decision aids in glaucoma | PDF",1790649711]