Literature DB >> 12161583

Should cancer patients be informed about their diagnosis and prognosis? Future doctors and lawyers differ.

Bernice S Elger1, T W Harding.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare attitudes of medical and law students toward informing a cancer patient about diagnosis and prognosis and to examine whether differences are related to different convictions about benefit or harm of information. SETTING AND
DESIGN: Anonymous questionnaires were distributed to convenience samples of students at the University of Geneva containing four vignettes describing a cancer patient who wishes, or alternatively, who does not wish to be told the truth. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and twenty seven medical students and 168 law students. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Five point Likert scale of responses to the vignettes ranging from "certainly inform" to "certainly not inform" the patient.
RESULTS: All medical students and 96% of law students favoured information about the diagnosis of cancer if the patient requests it. Seventy four per cent of medical students and 82% of law students favoured informing a cancer patient about his or her prognosis (p = 0.0003). Thirty five per cent of law students and 11.7% of medical students favoured telling about the diagnosis (p = 0.0004) and 25.6% of law students and 7% of medical students favoured telling about the prognosis (p < 0.0001) even if the patient had clearly expressed his wish not to be informed. Law students indicated significantly more often than medical students reasons to do with the patient's good, legal obligations, and the physician's obligation to tell the truth, and significantly less often than medical students that their attitude had been determined predominantly by respect for the autonomous choice of the patient.
CONCLUSION: Differences in attitudes according to the type of case and the type of studies were related to convictions about the benefit or harm to the patient caused by being given information. The self reported reasons of future physicians and future lawyers are helpful when considering means to achieve a better acceptance of patients' right to know and not to know.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Professional Patient Relationship

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12161583      PMCID: PMC1733617          DOI: 10.1136/jme.28.4.258

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  27 in total

1.  Changes in disclosure of information to cancer patients in a general hospital in Japan.

Authors:  N Horikawa; T Yamazaki; M Sagawa; T Nagata
Journal:  Gen Hosp Psychiatry       Date:  2000 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.238

2.  Medical paternalism.

Authors:  Allen Buchanan
Journal:  Philos Public Aff       Date:  1978

3.  What to tell cancer patients. A study of medical attitudes.

Authors:  D OKEN
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1961-04-01       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Telling the diagnosis to cancer patients in Japan: attitude and perception of patients, physicians and nurses.

Authors:  M Seo; K Tamura; H Shijo; E Morioka; C Ikegame; K Hirasako
Journal:  Palliat Med       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 4.762

5.  Quantity and quality of information desired by Portuguese cancer patients.

Authors:  F L Pimentel; J S Ferreira; M Vila Real; N F Mesquita; J P Maia-Gonçalves
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 3.603

6.  Truth, trust, and paternalism.

Authors:  T B Brewin
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1985-08-31       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Changes in physicians' attitudes toward telling the cancer patient.

Authors:  D H Novack; R Plumer; R L Smith; H Ochitill; G R Morrow; J M Bennett
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1979-03-02       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Telling the truth about cancer: views of elderly patients and their relatives.

Authors:  I Noone; M Crowe; I Pillay; S T O'Keeffe
Journal:  Ir Med J       Date:  2000-06

9.  Information and participation preferences among cancer patients.

Authors:  B R Cassileth; R V Zupkis; K Sutton-Smith; V March
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1980-06       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  The 'right' not to know.

Authors:  D E Ost
Journal:  J Med Philos       Date:  1984-08
View more
  6 in total

1.  Clinical ethics, information, and communication: review of 31 cases from a clinical ethics committee.

Authors:  R Førde; I H Vandvik
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 2.903

2.  Theory and practice of informed consent in the Czech Republic.

Authors:  Eva Krizova; Jiri Simek
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 2.903

3.  Primary care physicians and oncologists are partners in cancer announcement.

Authors:  Marie-Eve Rougé Bugat; Christelle Omnes; Cyrille Delpierre; Emile Escourrou; Nathalie Boussier; Stéphane Oustric; Jean-Pierre Delord; Eric Bauvin; Pascale Grosclaude
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2015-12-14       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  Different attitudes of oncology clinicians toward truth telling of different stages of cancer.

Authors:  Yu Jiang; Jun-ying Li; Chang Liu; Mei-juan Huang; Lin Zhou; Mei Li; Xia Zhao; Yu-quan Wei
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2006-04-19       Impact factor: 3.359

5.  Mothers' preferences toward breaking bad news about their children cancer.

Authors:  Zahra Mostafavian; Zahra Abbasi Shaye; Arezou Farajpour
Journal:  J Family Med Prim Care       Date:  2018 May-Jun

6.  How to break bad news: physicians' and nurses' attitudes.

Authors:  Mohammad Arbabi; Ava Roozdar; Mohammad Taher; Samira Shirzad; Mohsen Arjmand; Mohammad Reza Mohammadi; Ali-Akbar Nejatisafa; Mamak Tahmasebi; Alale Roozdar
Journal:  Iran J Psychiatry       Date:  2010
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.