Treatment‐related experiences and preferences of patients with lung cancer: a qualitative analysis

Aumann, Ines; Kreis, Kristine; Damm, Kathrin; Golpon, Heiko; Welte, Tobias; Schulenburg, J.-Matthias Graf von der

doi:10.1111/hex.12417

Cited by 13 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 10 , 11 Second, we conducted guided qualitative interviews that were based on the results of our systematic literature review. We interviewed 18 patients with LC and 17 patients with CRC, and then conducted content analyses (Aumann et al 19 for interviews with LC patients and [Damm et al: Supplementary material ] for interviews with CRC patients). We used the inductive and deductive categories from the content analysis to identify the main topics: adverse effects, social quality of life, emotional quality of life, and organization.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Therapy preferences of patients with lung and colon cancer: a discrete choice experiment

Schmidt

Damm

Vogel

et al. 2017

PPA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThere is increasing interest in studies that examine patient preferences to measure health-related outcomes. Understanding patients’ preferences can improve the treatment process and is particularly relevant for oncology. In this study, we aimed to identify the subgroup-specific treatment preferences of German patients with lung cancer (LC) or colorectal cancer (CRC).MethodsSix discrete choice experiment (DCE) attributes were established on the basis of a systematic literature review and qualitative interviews. The DCE analyses comprised generalized linear mixed-effects model and latent class mixed logit model.ResultsThe study cohort comprised 310 patients (194 with LC, 108 with CRC, 8 with both types of cancer) with a median age of 63 (SD =10.66) years. The generalized linear mixed-effects model showed a significant (P<0.05) degree of association for all of the tested attributes. “Strongly increased life expectancy” was the attribute given the greatest weight by all patient groups. Using latent class mixed logit model analysis, we identified three classes of patients. Patients who were better informed tended to prefer a more balanced relationship between length and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) than those who were less informed. Class 2 (LC patients with low HRQoL who had undergone surgery) gave a very strong weighting to increased length of life. We deduced from Class 3 patients that those with a relatively good life expectancy (CRC compared with LC) gave a greater weight to moderate effects on HRQoL than to a longer life.ConclusionOverall survival was the most important attribute of therapy for patients with LC or CRC. Differences in treatment preferences between subgroups should be considered in regard to treatment and development of guidelines. Patients’ preferences were not affected by sex or age, but were affected by the cancer type, HRQoL, surgery status, and the main source of information on the disease.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Therapy preferences of patients with lung and colon cancer: a discrete choice experiment

Schmidt

Damm

Vogel

et al. 2017

PPA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of 27 survivors in the Patient Advisory Committee, 19 (70%) completed interviews. Patients had varying cancer type, disease severity (stages 1-4), years since diagnosis ( 1 – 13 ), and experiences with treatment (radiation, surgery, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy). Some had no current disease, but most were living with chronic lung cancer.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Survivors’ voices are vital for empowering patients with knowledge from others’ experiences, creating a lung cancer community and promoting important issues in medical care, research, and policy. Previous qualitative studies have evaluated specific issues such as coping with symptoms ( 9 ), treatment ( 10 ), stigma ( 11 ), and the experience of advanced lung cancer ( 12 ) but have not addressed the narrative of the emerging survivor–advocate in this new era.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Live, Learn, Pass It on

Janssen

Ferris

et al. 2017

Journal of Patient Experience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:The objective of this project was to engage survivor–advocates by describing their experiences living with lung cancer in an era of increasing treatment options.Methods:This was a qualitative engagement project with participants from a lung cancer advocacy organization’s survivor advisory board. Interviews were conducted, transcribed, and analyzed for stages and associated experiences using interpretive phenomenological analysis and elements of narrative analysis, in partnership with the patient advocacy organization.Results:Of 27 engaged members, interviews were conducted with 19, mostly long-term survivors with stage 3 or 4 lung cancer. Within the quest for patient-centeredness, we identified 3 stages of the patient experience. The stage Live describes the journey of the lived experience; Learn describes the quest for knowledge, empowerment, and skills; and Pass it on describes making a difference through guiding others, building awareness, and community.Conclusions:Lung cancer survivor–advocates have an intertwined experience of their personal journey, the quest for knowledge, and developing advocacy. Future patient engagement can incorporate these findings into increasing the survivor-centeredness of partnerships and research, particularly for quality of life and shared decision-making.

show abstract

“…Many patients require caregivers to drive them to appointments; this is a substantial burden when patients must travel long distances for treatment. 1 With respect to breast cancer (BC), treatment causes fatigue, negatively impacts health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and disrupts activities of daily living, including the ability to work and earn income. 2 The need to arrange transportation and time to travel to a clinic may exacerbate these problems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%