Literature DB >> 12697872

Cancer patients seeking a second surgical opinion: results of a study on motives, needs, and expectations.

W A M Mellink1, A M V Dulmen, Th Wiggers, P M M Spreeuwenberg, A M M Eggermont, J M Bensing.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To explore the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of cancer patients seeking a second-opinion consultation and to analyze their second opinion-related motives, needs, and expectations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 212 consecutive patients seeking a second opinion at the Surgical Oncology Outpatient Clinic, satisfaction with the first specialist, motivation for the second opinion, need for information, preference for decision participation, and hope for and expectation of a different second opinion were assessed with a questionnaire.
RESULTS: The mean age was 53 years. Most patients were women (82%), of whom 76% were diagnosed with breast cancer. Half of the patients (51%) had a low educational level. The majority of patients (62%) only had internal motives for second-opinion seeking associated with the need for reassurance and more certainty, whereas a substantial minority of patients (38%) also had external motives related to negative experiences or unfulfilled needs. The externally motivated patients had a higher anxiety disposition, were less satisfied with their first specialist, preferred a more active role in medical decision making, and more often hoped for and expected a different second opinion.
CONCLUSION: Motives for second-opinion consultations differ greatly. Understanding the difference between internal and external motivation is necessary to develop strategies to prevent unnecessary second-opinion seeking. Additional studies are warranted to evaluate the objective and subjective outcomes of second-opinion consultations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12697872     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2003.12.058

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  22 in total

1.  Comprehensive needs assessment tool in cancer (CNAT): the development and validation.

Authors:  Eun-Jung Shim; Kyung-Sook Lee; Jong-Hyock Park; Jae-Hyun Park
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2010-11-14       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 2.  Is there evidence for a better health care for cancer patients after a second opinion? A systematic review.

Authors:  Dana Ruetters; Christian Keinki; Sarah Schroth; Patrick Liebl; Jutta Huebner
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-12-21       Impact factor: 4.553

3.  Second opinions from urologists for prostate cancer: Who gets them, why, and their link to treatment.

Authors:  Archana Radhakrishnan; David Grande; Nandita Mitra; Justin Bekelman; Christian Stillson; Craig Evan Pollack
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2016-11-07       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  The Trend to Seek a Second Opinion Abroad amongst Cancer Patients in Oman: Challenges and opportunities.

Authors:  Ikram A Burney
Journal:  Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J       Date:  2009-12-19

5.  Seeking a second medical opinion: composition, reasons and perceived outcomes in Israel.

Authors:  Liora Shmueli; Nadav Davidovitch; Joseph S Pliskin; Ran D Balicer; Igal Hekselman; Geva Greenfield
Journal:  Isr J Health Policy Res       Date:  2017-12-08

6.  Online health consultation: examining uses of an interactive cancer communication tool by low-income women with breast cancer.

Authors:  Hsueh-Yi Lu; Bret R Shaw; David H Gustafson
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2011-05-06       Impact factor: 4.046

Review 7.  Patient-Driven Second Opinions in Oncology: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Marij A Hillen; Niki M Medendorp; Joost G Daams; Ellen M A Smets
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2017-06-12

8.  Colon cancer patient information seeking and the adoption of targeted therapy for on-label and off-label indications.

Authors:  Stacy W Gray; Katrina Armstrong; Angela Demichele; J Sanford Schwartz; Robert C Hornik
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2009-04-01       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Second opinions and tertiary referrals in neurology: a prospective observational study.

Authors:  L Wieske; D Wijers; E Richard; M D I Vergouwen; J Stam
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2008-09-26       Impact factor: 4.849

10.  Values and risks of second opinion in Japan's universal health-care system.

Authors:  Sawako Okamoto; Kazuo Kawahara; Atsushi Okawa; Yujiro Tanaka
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-02-14       Impact factor: 3.377

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.