AIM: We aimed to document the prevalence of misunderstanding in cancer patients and investigate whether patient denial is related to misunderstanding. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred forty-four adult cancer outpatients receiving treatment completed a survey assessing levels of understanding and denial. Doctors provided the facts against which patient responses were compared. Multiple logistic regression analyses determined the predictors of misunderstanding. RESULTS: Most patients understood the extent of their disease (71%, 95% CI: 65%-77%) and goal of treatment (60%, 95% CI: 54%-67%). Few correctly estimated the likelihood of treatment achieving cure (18%, 95% CI: 13%-23%), prolongation of life (13%, 95% CI: 8%-17%) and palliation (18%, 95% CI: 10%-27%). Patient denial predicted misunderstanding of the probability that treatment would cure disease when controlling for other patient and disease variables (OR = 2.20, 95% CI: 0.99-4.88, P = 0.05). Patient ratings of the clarity of information received were also predictive of patient understanding. CONCLUSIONS: Patient denial appears to produce misunderstanding, however, doctors' ability to communicate effectively is also implicated. The challenge that oncologists face is how to communicate information in a manner which is both responsive to patients' emotional status and sufficiently informative to allow informed decision-making to take place.
AIM: We aimed to document the prevalence of misunderstanding in cancerpatients and investigate whether patient denial is related to misunderstanding. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred forty-four adult cancer outpatients receiving treatment completed a survey assessing levels of understanding and denial. Doctors provided the facts against which patient responses were compared. Multiple logistic regression analyses determined the predictors of misunderstanding. RESULTS: Most patients understood the extent of their disease (71%, 95% CI: 65%-77%) and goal of treatment (60%, 95% CI: 54%-67%). Few correctly estimated the likelihood of treatment achieving cure (18%, 95% CI: 13%-23%), prolongation of life (13%, 95% CI: 8%-17%) and palliation (18%, 95% CI: 10%-27%). Patient denial predicted misunderstanding of the probability that treatment would cure disease when controlling for other patient and disease variables (OR = 2.20, 95% CI: 0.99-4.88, P = 0.05). Patient ratings of the clarity of information received were also predictive of patient understanding. CONCLUSIONS:Patient denial appears to produce misunderstanding, however, doctors' ability to communicate effectively is also implicated. The challenge that oncologists face is how to communicate information in a manner which is both responsive to patients' emotional status and sufficiently informative to allow informed decision-making to take place.
Authors: C Y Finocchiaro; A Botturi; E Lamperti; S Gauri; A Petruzzi; G Simonetti; L Sarno; A Salmaggi Journal: Neurol Sci Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 3.307
Authors: Paul R Duberstein; Michael Chen; Benjamin P Chapman; Michael Hoerger; Fahad Saeed; Elizabeth Guancial; Jennifer W Mack Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2017-07-10
Authors: Allison J Applebaum; Elissa A Kolva; Julia R Kulikowski; Jordana D Jacobs; Antonio DeRosa; Wendy G Lichtenthal; Megan E Olden; Barry Rosenfeld; William Breitbart Journal: J Health Psychol Date: 2013-10-24
Authors: Natasha Michael; Clare O'Callaghan; Josephine Clayton; Annabel Pollard; Nikola Stepanov; Odette Spruyt; Michael Michael; David Ball Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2013-03-14 Impact factor: 3.603