BACKGROUND: Although patient decision aids (pDAs) are effective, widespread use of pDAs for cancer treatment has not been achieved. The objectives of this study were to perform a systematic review to identify alternate types of decision support interventions (DSIs) for cancer treatment and a meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness of these DSIs to pDAs. METHODS: The inclusion criteria for the study were: 1) all published studies using a randomized, controlled trial design, and 2) DSIs involving treatment decision-making for breast, prostate, colorectal, and/or lung cancer. For this analysis, DSIs were classified as pDAs if: 1) one reported outcome measure mapped onto the International Patient Decision Aids Standards Collaboration effectiveness criterion, and 2) the DSI was evaluated relative to standard consultation. Random effects models were used to compare the effectiveness of pDAs relative to other identified DSIs for reported outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 71 studies were reviewed, and 24 met the inclusion criteria. Overall, there were no significant differences in knowledge, satisfaction, anxiety, or decisional conflict scores between pDAs and other DSIs. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the effectiveness of other DSIs, including question prompt lists and audiorecording of the consultation, is similar to pDAs. This is important because it may be that these less complex DSIs may be all that is necessary to
BackgroundColorectal cancer is the third leading cause of death from cancer worldwide with over 900,000 diagnoses and 639,000 deaths each year. Although shared decision making is broadly advocated as a mechanism by which to achieve patient-centred care, there has been little investigation of patient and physician shared decision-making preferences and practices or the outcomes associated with shared decision making in the context of colorectal cancer.AimThe aim of this study is to determine patient and physician attitudes towards the use of shared decision making in the setting of colorectal cancer.MethodsStandard principles of qualitative research will be used to sample and interview 20 colorectal cancer patients in each of three tertiary care hospitals (n = 60) and 15 surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists (n = 45) affiliated with cancer centres. The interview questions will be guided by a conceptual framework defining patient and physician factors that influence the shared decision-making process and associated outcomes in the setting of colorectal cancer. An inductive, grounded approach will be used by two investigators to independently analyze the interview transcripts. These investigators will meet to compare and achieve consensus on themes that will be tabulated to compare barriers, enablers, and outcomes of shared decision making by patient, physician, and contextual factors.DiscussionThis study is the first to examine both patient and physician perspectives on the use of shared decision making for colorectal cancer in North America or elsewhere. It will provide a framework that can be used to describe the shared decision-making process and its outcomes, and evaluate strategies to facilitate this process for patients with colorectal cancer.
RESEARCH • RECHERCHEPhysicians' awareness of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colorectal cancer carcinomatosis Background: Recent trials have shown that cytoreductive surgery and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (S+HIPEC) for colorectal cancer carcinomatosis (CRC-C) leads to 5-year, disease-free survival rates of more than 30%. Since these data represent a substantial change in the management of CRC-C, the objectives of this study were to determine physicians' awareness of S+HIPEC for CRC-C and physician characteristics predictive of awareness of S+HIPEC for CRC-C. Methods:This study was a mailed, cross-sectional survey of general surgeons and medical oncologists in Ontario. Results:The response rate was 44.0% (214 of 487). Most respondents were men and younger than 50 years. There was an even split between those at academic and community hospitals. Overall, 46% of respondents were aware of S+HIPEC for CRC-C, and multivariate analysis showed that there were no physician characteristics predictive of awareness of S+HIPEC for CRC-C. Conclusion:Physician awareness of S+HIPEC for CRC-C is low. Therefore, strategies to improve patient and physician knowledge about S+HIPEC for CRC-C are important to ensure appropriate treatment for patients.Contexte : Des essais récents ont démontré que la chirurgie de réduction tumorale combinée à la chimiothérapie intrapéritonéale hyperthermique (S+HIPEC) contre la carcinomatose du cancer colorectal (C-CCR) produit des taux de survie sans maladie de 5 ans qui dépassent 30 %. Comme ces données représentent une modification importante de la prise en charge de la C-CCR, l'étude visait à déterminer si les médecins connaissent la technique S+HIPEC contre la C-CCR et les caractéristiques des médecins qui prédisent une connaissance de la technique S+HIPEC contre la C-CCR.Méthodes : L'étude consistait en un sondage transversal postal mené auprès de chirurgiens généraux et de médecins oncologues de l'Ontario.Résultats : Le taux de réponse a atteint 44,0 % (214 sur 487). La plupart des répon-dants étaient des hommes de moins de 50 ans. La répartition entre les hôpitaux universitaires et les hôpitaux communautaires était égale. Dans l'ensemble, 46 % des répondants connaissaient la technique S+HIPEC contre la C-CCR et une analyse à variables multiples a montré qu'il n'y avait pas de caractéristiques des médecins qui pouvaient prédire la connaissance de la technique S+HIPEC contre la C-CCR. Conclusion :Les médecins connaissent peu la technique S+HIPEC contre la C-CCR. Des stratégies visant à améliorer la connaissance de la technique S+HIPEC contre la C-CCR chez les patients et les médecins sont importantes pour assurer le traitement approprié des patients. Colorectal cancer carcinomatosis (CRC-C) affects about 10% of all patients with colorectal cancer, and it is the second most common cause of death in these patients after metastatic liver disease.1 Until recently, CRC-C was considered incurable, and cytoreductive surgery combined with hyperthermic intr...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.