Literature DB >> 14530674

What do patients want? Patient preferences and surrogate decision making in the treatment of colorectal cancer.

Michael J Solomon1, Chet K Pager, Anil Keshava, Michael Findlay, Phyllis Butow, Glenn P Salkeld, Rachael Roberts.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Clinicians often make decisions for their patients, despite evidence that suggests that correspondence between patient and clinician decision making is poor. The management of colorectal cancer presents difficult decisions because the impact of treatment on quality of life might overshadow its survival efficacy. This study investigated whether patients are able to trade survival for quality of life as a means to express their preference for treatment options and to compare their preferences with those expressed by clinicians.
METHODS: Patients undergoing curative surgery for colorectal cancer were interviewed postoperatively to elicit their preferences in four hypothetical treatment scenarios. A questionnaire was mailed to all Australian colorectal surgeons and medical oncologists that asked them to respond as if they themselves were patients.
RESULTS: One hundred patients (91 percent), 43 colorectal surgeons (77 percent), and 103 medical oncologists (50 percent) participated. In all four scenarios, patients were able to trade survival for quality of life. Patients' responses varied between scenarios, both in willingness to trade and the average amount traded. There were significant differences between patients and clinicians. Clinicians were more willing than patients to trade survival to avoid a permanent colostomy in favor of chemoradiotherapy. Patients' strongest preference was to avoid chemotherapy, more than to avoid a permanent colostomy.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients are able to trade survival as a measure of preference for quality of life and can do so differentially between treatment scenarios. Patients' preferences do not always accord with those of clinicians. Unless patients' preferences are explicitly sought and incorporated into clinical decision making, patients may not receive the treatment that is best for them.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14530674     DOI: 10.1097/01.DCR.0000084432.45536.83

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


  21 in total

1.  Proximity to disease and perception of utility: physicians' vs patients' assessment of treatment options for ulcerative colitis.

Authors:  Lindsay Kennedy Brown; Akbar K Waljee; Peter D R Higgins; Jennifer F Waljee; Arden M Morris
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 4.585

2.  Limits of evidence-based surgery.

Authors:  Karem Slim
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  The health-related quality of life in long-term colorectal cancer survivors study: objectives, methods and patient sample.

Authors:  M Jane Mohler; Stephen Joel Coons; Mark C Hornbrook; Lisa J Herrinton; Christopher S Wendel; Marcia Grant; Robert S Krouse
Journal:  Curr Med Res Opin       Date:  2008-06-09       Impact factor: 2.580

Review 4.  Decision making and quality of life in the treatment of cancer: a review.

Authors:  S Yousuf Zafar; Stewart C Alexander; Kevin P Weinfurt; Kevin A Schulman; Amy P Abernethy
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2008-09-19       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 5.  Informed consent in surgery.

Authors:  Miguel A Cainzos; S González-Vinagre
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  Patients' perspective on bowel resection for inflammatory bowel disease.

Authors:  Milton Mui; Vinna An; Jane Lovell; Basil D'Souza; Rodney Woods
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-12-04       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Health State Utility Values for Ileostomies and Colostomies: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Fahima Dossa; Jonathan Josse; Sergio A Acuna; Nancy N Baxter
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2018-01-23       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Sphincter-Preserving Surgery for Low Rectal Cancer: Do We Overshoot the Mark?

Authors:  Johannes Klose; Ignazio Tarantino; Yakup Kulu; Thomas Bruckner; Stefan Trefz; Thomas Schmidt; Martin Schneider; Thilo Hackert; Markus W Büchler; Alexis Ulrich
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 3.452

9.  Community-based health preferences for proctocolectomy: a race comparison.

Authors:  Geoffrey C Nguyen; Anne Tuskey; Theodore M Bayless; Thomas A LaVeist; Steven R Brant
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2007-09-01       Impact factor: 3.199

10.  A matter of trust--patient's views on decision-making in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Glenn Salkeld; Michael Solomon; Leonie Short; Phyllis N Butow
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 3.377

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.