Literature DB >> 16876377

The choice is yours? How women with ovarian cancer make sense of treatment choices.

Sue Ziebland1, Julie Evans, Ann McPherson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Much has been made of the need for cancer patients to be involved in choices about their treatments. We explore the different approaches to involvement described by women with ovarian cancer and consider why being invited to make a choice can sometimes seem inappropriate and untimely.
METHOD: Qualitative interviews were conducted in the UK with women with ovarian cancer. Interviews were audio tape recorded and transcribed for qualitative analysis. The interviews were collected as part of a broader study of experiences of ovarian cancer as part of the DIPEx (personal experiences of health and illness) project which runs a website featuring further analyses and video and audio clips from the interviews.
RESULTS: Women did not always recall being involved in decisions -some felt there had been no 'real' decisions to make or said they preferred their medical team to decide on their behalf. Other women described asking questions and seeking second opinions but still 'going along with' their doctor's recommendation. A few women (including some of those who had felt unable to participate in decisions soon after their diagnosis) said that they had learnt enough to take control or make at least some of their own treatment decisions. The manner in which options were offered to women sometimes led to confusion and concern, especially if women felt the doctor was unwilling to express his or her own preference. Some worried that not accepting the doctor's advice would prejudice their future care.
CONCLUSION: Patients and doctors are often uncertain how best to share in decisions about treatments. Being asked about their preferences can surprise or shock women. Clinicians need to explain about clinical uncertainty and how individual values and preferences may relate to treatment decisions. Presenting the rationale for choice can be difficult and even when well presented, women can be left feeling ill prepared, panicky and trying to second guess what they think the doctor 'really' wanted them to do. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: When patients are invited to make choices their clinicians need to explain about clinical uncertainty and how individual values and preferences may relate to treatment decisions. The options should be communicated in a clear manner, differences in opinion should be acknowledged and the doctor's own preference stated. Patients need to be encouraged and supported to make their decision-whether or not it reflects their doctor's preference. Patients should also be reassured that whichever decision they make their subsequent care and relationship with their medical team will not be adversely affected.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16876377     DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2006.06.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient Educ Couns        ISSN: 0738-3991


  14 in total

1.  Communicating health decisions: an analysis of messages posted to online prostate cancer forums.

Authors:  Elizabeth Sillence; Phoenix K H Mo
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-02-02       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 2.  Patient preferences for shared decisions: a systematic review.

Authors:  Betty Chewning; Carma L Bylund; Bupendra Shah; Neeraj K Arora; Jennifer A Gueguen; Gregory Makoul
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2011-04-06

3.  One step at a time: self-management and transitions among women with ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Dena Schulman-Green; Elizabeth H Bradley; Nicholas R Nicholson; Erin George; Allie Indeck; Ruth McCorkle
Journal:  Oncol Nurs Forum       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 2.172

4.  Barriers to shared decisions in the most serious of cancers: a qualitative study of patients with pancreatic cancer treated in the UK.

Authors:  Sue Ziebland; Alison Chapple; Julie Evans
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2014-12-11       Impact factor: 3.377

5.  Adherence of Primary Care Physicians to Evidence-Based Recommendations to Reduce Ovarian Cancer Mortality.

Authors:  Sherri L Stewart; Julie S Townsend; Mary C Puckett; Sun Hee Rim
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 2.681

6.  Experience and Expectations of Ovarian Cancer Patients in Australia.

Authors:  Catherine M Holliday; Maria Morte; Josephine M Byrne; Anne T Holliday
Journal:  J Oncol       Date:  2018-03-07       Impact factor: 4.375

7.  The convivial and the pastoral in patient-doctor relationships: a multi-country study of patient stories of care, choice and medical authority in cancer diagnostic processes.

Authors:  John I MacArtney; Rikke S Andersen; Marlene Malmström; Birgit Rasmussen; Sue Ziebland
Journal:  Sociol Health Illn       Date:  2020-02-26

8.  Implementing an innovative consent form: the PREDICT experience.

Authors:  Carole Decker; Suzanne V Arnold; Olawale Olabiyi; Homaa Ahmad; Elizabeth Gialde; Jamie Luark; Lisa Riggs; Terry DeJaynes; Gabriel E Soto; John A Spertus
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2008-12-31       Impact factor: 7.327

9.  Rural disparities in surgical care from gynecologic oncologists among Midwestern ovarian cancer patients.

Authors:  Kristin Weeks; Charles F Lynch; Michele West; Ryan Carnahan; Michael O'Rorke; Jacob Oleson; Megan McDonald; Sherri L Stewart; Mary Charlton
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2020-11-18       Impact factor: 5.482

10.  Treatments for irritable bowel syndrome: patients' attitudes and acceptability.

Authors:  Lynsey R Harris; Lesley Roberts
Journal:  BMC Complement Altern Med       Date:  2008-12-19       Impact factor: 3.659

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.