Literature DB >> 17765404

Offering a treatment choice in the irradiation of prostate cancer leads to better informed and more active patients, without harm to well-being.

Julia J van Tol-Geerdink1, Jan Willem Leer, Emile N J Th van Lin, Erik C Schimmel, Henk Huizenga, Willem A J van Daal, Peep F M Stalmeier.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To examine, in prostate cancer patients, the effect of (1) being offered a choice between radiation doses in three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, and of (2) accepting or declining the possibility to choose. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 150 patients with localized prostate cancer (T1-3N0M0) were offered a choice with a decision aid between two radiation doses (70 and 74 Gy). A control group of 144 patients received a fixed radiation dose without being offered a choice. Data were collected at baseline (before choice), before treatment (after choice), and 2 weeks and 6 months after treatment completion.
RESULTS: Compared with the control group, the involvement group, receiving the decision aid, showed increased participation in decision making (p < 0.001), increased knowledge (p < 0.001), and improved risk perception (p < 0.001); they were more satisfied with the quality of information (p = 0.002) and considered their treatment a more appropriate treatment (p = 0.01). No group differences were found in well-being (e.g., general health, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life, anxiety). Within the involvement group, accepting or declining the option to choose did not affect well-being either.
CONCLUSIONS: Offering a choice of radiation dose, with a decision aid, increased involvement in decision making and led to a better-informed patient. In contrast to earlier suggestions, a strong increase in involvement did not result in improved well-being; and in contrast to clinical concerns, well-being was not negatively affected either, not even in those patients who preferred to leave the decision to their physician. This study shows that older patients, such as prostate cancer patients, can be informed and involved in decision making.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17765404     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.06.058

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  14 in total

1.  Shared decision making in cancer screening and treatment decisions for American Indian and Alaska native communities: can we ethically calibrate interventions to patients' values?

Authors:  Katherine E Nowakowski; Jon C Tilburt; Judith S Kaur
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 2.037

2.  Improving the communication of benefits and harms of treatment strategies: decision AIDS for localized prostate cancer treatment decisions.

Authors:  Richard M Hoffman
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2012-12

3.  Patient-clinician communication and patient-centered outcomes among patients with suspected stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Shannon M Nugent; Sara E Golden; Donald R Sullivan; Charles R Thomas; Juan Wisnivesky; Somnath Saha; Christopher G Slatore
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2022-09-29       Impact factor: 3.738

4.  Older adults newly diagnosed with symptomatic myeloma and treatment decision making.

Authors:  Joseph D Tariman; Ardith Doorenbos; Karen G Schepp; Seema Singhal; Donna L Berry
Journal:  Oncol Nurs Forum       Date:  2014-07-01       Impact factor: 2.172

Review 5.  Prostatic irradiation-induced sexual dysfunction: A review and multidisciplinary guide to management in the radical radiotherapy era (Part III on Psychosexual Therapy and the Masculine Self-Esteem).

Authors:  Marigdalia K Ramirez-Fort; Paula Suarez; Margely Carrion; Daniel Weiner; Claire Postl; Ricardo Arribas; Mehdi Sayyah; Digna V Forta; M Junaid Niaz; Amir Feily; Christopher S Lange; Zhahedia Zhaythseff Fort; Migdalia Fort
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2020-04-30

6.  Developing and user-testing Decision boxes to facilitate shared decision making in primary care--a study protocol.

Authors:  Anik Giguere; France Legare; Roland Grad; Pierre Pluye; François Rousseau; R Brian Haynes; Michel Cauchon; Michel Labrecque
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2011-03-09       Impact factor: 2.796

7.  A tool to balance benefit and harm when deciding about adjuvant therapy.

Authors:  A M Knops; A Goossens; M P M Burger; L J A Stalpers; D T Ubbink
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-03-24       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Late gastrointestinal toxicity after dose-escalated conformal radiotherapy for early prostate cancer: results from the UK Medical Research Council RT01 trial (ISRCTN47772397).

Authors:  Isabel Syndikus; Rachel C Morgan; Matthew R Sydes; John D Graham; David P Dearnaley
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 7.038

9.  Effectiveness of Decision Aid in Men with Localized Prostate Cancer: a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial at Tertiary Referral Hospitals in an Asia Pacific Country.

Authors:  N B Jalil; P Y Lee; M Z Nor Afiah; K L Abdullah; F N S Mohd Azizi; N N S Abdul Rassip; T A Ong; C J Ng; Y K Lee; A T Cheong; A H Razack; M Saad; A Alip; R Malek; M Sundram; S Omar; J R Sathiyananthan; P Kumar
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2022-02       Impact factor: 2.037

10.  A preliminary exploration of the feasibility of offering men information about potential prostate cancer treatment options before they know their biopsy results.

Authors:  Steven B Zeliadt; Peggy A Hannon; Ranak B Trivedi; Laura M Bonner; Thuy T Vu; Carol Simons; Crystal A Kimmie; Elaine Y Hu; Chris Zipperer; Daniel W Lin
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 2.796

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.