Assessing Patient Confidence and Satisfaction about the Shared Decision-making Meetings for Planning Cancer Chemotherapy

Alkhayyat, Shadi; Hudairi, Hussain; Alqahtani, Rakan; Alqulayti, Waleed M; Kinkar, Abdulelah; Alghamdi, Mohannad Ali; Alhakami, Shihab

doi:10.7759/cureus.6445

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding suggests that through successfully raising the first concern, patient anxiety in raising additional concerns may decrease. Increased patient confidence has previously been shown to positively impact participation in consultations, patient satisfaction, trust between patient and health-care provider, and reduced levels of anxiety and distress [ 15 , 30 ]. As PCI patients raised on average more concerns, it suggests they faced less anxiety in raising concerns than patients in the non-PCI group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concerns raised by people treated for head and neck cancer: a secondary analysis of audiotaped consultations in a health services follow-up clinic

Dicks,

Rogers,

Kanatas

et al. 2023

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose People treated for head and neck cancer (HNC) face various barriers in communicating concerns with consultants. Our aim was to investigate the number of concerns raised between patients using the Patient Concerns Inventory (PCI) and those who did not. The PCI is a 57-item prompt list used in routine HNC follow-up clinics. Additionally, we aimed to examine whether who initiated the concerns differed between groups and the factors that may predict this initiation. Methods Secondary data analysis included 67 participants across 15 HNC consultants from specialist cancer centres in Liverpool and Leeds. Seven consultants utilised the PCI and eight did not, assigned by preferential and random assignment. Results Patients in the PCI group raised on average 2.5 more concerns than patients in the non-PCI group (p < .001). There was no significant relationship between group and who initiated the first concern (p = .28). A mixed-effects logistic regression was found to significantly predict who initiated the first concern in consultations (p < .05). Discussion The number of concerns raised by patients increased when the PCI was introduced pre-HNC consultation. A number of factors were shown to predict the number of concerns raised in consultations by both patient and consultant. As concerns may not be raised further following the concern mentioned, we propose that the discussion of concerns needs to be maintained by the clinician throughout the consultation and not solely at the start. Conclusion The PCI promoted the sharing of concerns in follow-up consultations between patient and consultant.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concerns raised by people treated for head and neck cancer: a secondary analysis of audiotaped consultations in a health services follow-up clinic

Dicks,

Rogers,

Kanatas

et al. 2023

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…31 Finally, the experiences of patients and GPs with the OPT were explored using questions based on former evaluations of this instrument. 32…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, a systematic review has produced contradictory evidence for the relationship between time to treatment and cancer outcomes, 31 and literature shows that patients are usually more satisfied when they have more than one conversation about their treatment decision. 32 Urgency can be felt in hospitals because of waiting time requirements. Multidisciplinary oncological care standards state that the time between the first visit to the medical specialist and start of treatment should not exceed 6 weeks.…”

Section: Collaboration Between Primary and Secondary Carementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Communication in oncology: positioning the general practitioner in shared decision making for patients with cancer

Stegmann¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chapter 1 General IntroductionChapter 2 Study protocol for the OPTion randomised controlled trial on the effect of prioritising treatment goals among older patients with cancer in a palliative setting Chapter 3 Using the Outcome Prioritisation Tool (OPT) to assess the preferences of older patients in clinical decision-making: a review Chapter 4 Prioritisation of treatment goals among older patients with noncurable cancer: the OPTion randomised controlled trial in Dutch primary care Chapter 5 Treatment goals and their changes over time of older patients with non-curable cancer Chapter 6 Correspondence between primary and secondary care about patients with cancer: A qualitative mixed-methods analysis Chapter 7 Correspondence between primary and secondary care about patients with cancer: a Delphi consensus study Chapter 8 Summary and General discussion Appendices Epidemiology of frequent types of cancer and cancer symptoms Research Institute SHARE Nederlandse Samenvatting Dankwoord Publicatielijst Curriculum VitaeChapter 1 General introduction 1 9 General introduction 10 Chapter 1 11 General introduction Role of the GP in the Dutch healthcare systemAs in several other Western countries, all patients in the Netherlands are registered with a GP. Dutch GPs provide near and accessible primary health care and offer a 24/7 care service. They often have a long and invested relationship with their patients, in particular with older patients. The GP also acts as a care coordinator, being responsible for managing all their patients' medical data and for liaising with specialists from different services. Because of this central position in the healthcare system, Dutch GPs also play an important role for patients with cancer throughout the cancer trajectory. After their role in screening and early diagnosis, 24 most GPs have contact with their patient shortly after diagnosis. Therefore they are sometimes mentioned as the best positioned health care provider for a time out consultation during the deliberation phase between the third and fourth step of the shared decision making process in the hospital. 25 Because of their longstanding relationship with the patient, GPs are often optimally informed about the patient's medical and psychosocial history, personal preferences and individual coping and communication style. In this way they can help patients to weigh the pros and cons of a specific treatment. 25,26 However, literature about the feasibility and effects of these consultations is scarce as is information about actual use of these consultations. After diagnosis, GPs aim to provide continuity of care during cancer treatment. Patients with cancer who are treated with a curative intent have more frequent contact with their GP compared to patients without cancer in the first year after diagnosis. 27,28 The GP is the first contact for new physical problems, but can also provide emotional support for patients and family members. 24,26 Similar studies are not available for patients with cancer treated with a palliative inten...

show abstract

Assessing Patient Confidence and Satisfaction about the Shared Decision-making Meetings for Planning Cancer Chemotherapy

Cited by 2 publications

References 16 publications

Concerns raised by people treated for head and neck cancer: a secondary analysis of audiotaped consultations in a health services follow-up clinic

Concerns raised by people treated for head and neck cancer: a secondary analysis of audiotaped consultations in a health services follow-up clinic

Communication in oncology: positioning the general practitioner in shared decision making for patients with cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About