Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Acta Oncol. 2016;55(2):134-9. doi: 10.3109/0284186X.2015.1068447. Epub 2015 Aug 3.

Deciding about (neo-)adjuvant rectal and breast cancer treatment: Missed opportunities for shared decision making.

Author information

1
a Department of Medical Decision Making , Leiden University Medical Center , Leiden , The Netherlands.
2
b Department of Radiotherapy , Leiden University Medical Center , Leiden , The Netherlands.
3
c Department of Medical Oncology , Haga Hospital , the Hague , The Netherlands.
4
d Department of Medical Psychology , Academic Medical Center , Amsterdam , The Netherlands.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

The first step in shared decision making (SDM) is creating choice awareness. This is particularly relevant in consultations concerning preference-sensitive treatment decisions, e.g. those addressing (neo-)adjuvant therapy. Awareness can be achieved by explicitly stating, as the 'reason for encounter', that a treatment decision needs to be made. It is unknown whether oncologists express such reason for encounter. This study aims to establish: 1) if 'making a treatment decision' is stated as a reason for the encounter and if not, what other reason for encounter is provided; and 2) whether mentioning that a treatment decision needs to be made is associated with enhanced patient involvement in decision making.

MATERIAL AND METHODS:

Consecutive first consultations with: 1) radiation oncologists and rectal cancer patients; or 2) medical oncologists and breast cancer patients, facing a preference-sensitive treatment decision, were audiotaped. The tapes were transcribed and coded using an instrument developed for the study. Oncologists' involvement of patients in decision making was coded using the OPTION-scale.

RESULTS:

Oncologists (N = 33) gave a reason for encounter in 70/100 consultations, usually (N = 52/70, 74%) at the start of the consultation. The reason for encounter stated was 'making a treatment decision' in 3/100 consultations, and 'explaining treatment details' in 44/100 consultations. The option of foregoing adjuvant treatment was not explicitly presented in any consultation. Oncologist' involvement of patients in decision making was below baseline (Md OPTION-score = 10). Given the small number of consultations in which the need to make a treatment decision was stated, we could not investigate the impact thereof on patient involvement.

CONCLUSION:

This study suggests that oncologists rarely express that a treatment decision needs to be made in consultations concerning preference-sensitive treatment decisions. Therefore, patients might not realize that foregoing (neo-)adjuvant treatment is a viable choice. Oncologists miss a crucial opportunity to facilitate SDM.

PMID:
26237738
DOI:
10.3109/0284186X.2015.1068447
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Taylor & Francis
Loading ...
Support Center