BACKGROUND: In the past, recommendations on how to break the bad news of a cancer diagnosis have been based on expert opinion. Recently, consensus-based guidelines for medical practitioners have been developed. The objective of this work is to investigate patient preferences for communication practices and to identify any disparities between these guidelines, patient preferences and patient recollections of hearing their diagnosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A consecutive sample of 131 newly diagnosed melanoma patients were surveyed approximately 4 months after initial diagnosis to document their preferences and recollections of their communication experiences. RESULTS: Of the 'breaking bad news' recommendations investigated, patients did not strongly endorse the doctor helping tell others of the diagnosis or telling the patient about cancer support services. Very few patients expressed a preference for having another health professional present. One communication feature, the patient feeling confident about getting the best treatment, was endorsed as 'very important' but does not feature in published guidelines. The most notable disparities between guidelines and the reported experiences of patients related to perceived delays in receiving the diagnosis, and having adequate opportunity to ask their clinician questions. CONCLUSION: Current Australian recommendations on how to communicate a diagnosis of cancer were generally supported by the patients' expressed preferences, but several modifications are proposed. IMPLICATIONS: Suggestions are offered to help overcome the disparities identified between recommendations and patients' preferences when a diagnosis of cancer is being communicated.
BACKGROUND: In the past, recommendations on how to break the bad news of a cancer diagnosis have been based on expert opinion. Recently, consensus-based guidelines for medical practitioners have been developed. The objective of this work is to investigate patient preferences for communication practices and to identify any disparities between these guidelines, patient preferences and patient recollections of hearing their diagnosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A consecutive sample of 131 newly diagnosed melanomapatients were surveyed approximately 4 months after initial diagnosis to document their preferences and recollections of their communication experiences. RESULTS: Of the 'breaking bad news' recommendations investigated, patients did not strongly endorse the doctor helping tell others of the diagnosis or telling the patient about cancer support services. Very few patients expressed a preference for having another health professional present. One communication feature, the patient feeling confident about getting the best treatment, was endorsed as 'very important' but does not feature in published guidelines. The most notable disparities between guidelines and the reported experiences of patients related to perceived delays in receiving the diagnosis, and having adequate opportunity to ask their clinician questions. CONCLUSION: Current Australian recommendations on how to communicate a diagnosis of cancer were generally supported by the patients' expressed preferences, but several modifications are proposed. IMPLICATIONS: Suggestions are offered to help overcome the disparities identified between recommendations and patients' preferences when a diagnosis of cancer is being communicated.
Entities:
Keywords:
Empirical Approach; Professional Patient Relationship
Authors: Ana P M Pinheiro; Rachel H Pocock; Jeffrey M Switchenko; Margie D Dixon; Walid L Shaib; Suresh S Ramalingam; Rebecca D Pentz Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-01-31 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: William D Figg; Erika K Smith; Douglas K Price; Bevin C English; Paul W Thurman; Seth M Steinberg; Ezekiel Emanuel Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-07-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Paweł Marschollek; Katarzyna Bąkowska; Wojciech Bąkowski; Karol Marschollek; Radosław Tarkowski Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Paul Wheatley-Price; Christine Massey; Tony Panzarella; Frances A Shepherd; Joseph Mikhael Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2009-07-21 Impact factor: 3.603