Deb Feldman-Stewart1, Carlo Capirci2, Sarah Brennenstuhl1, Christine Tong1, Ufuk Abacioglu3, Marzena Gawkowska-Suwinska4, Francis van Gils5, Alicja Heyda4, Sefik Igdem6, Victor Macias7, Isabel Monteiro Grillo8, Clare Moynihan9, Madelon Pijls-Johannesma5, Chris Parker7, Nuno Pimentel7, Herbert Wördehoff10. 1. Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada (DFS, SB, CT) 2. Azienda ULSS 18, Rovigo, Italy (CC) 3. Marmara University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey (UA) 4. Maria Sk1odowska-Curie, Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology, Gliwice Branch, Poland (MGS, AH) 5. Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO Clinic), GROW—School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands (FvG, MPJ) 6. Istanbul Bilim University, Istanbul, Turkey (SI) 7. Instituto Oncolo´ gico del Valle´ s (Barcelona)–Hospital Clı´nico Universitario (Salamanca), Spain (VM, CP, NP) 8. University Hospital Santa Maria, Lisbon, Portugal (IMG) 9. Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Trust, London, England (CM) 10. Klinik fu¨ r Strahlentherapie, Magdeburg, Germany (HW)
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe decisional roles of patients with early-stage prostate cancer in 9 countries and to compare the information they rated important for decision making (DM). METHOD: A survey of recently treated patients was conducted in Canada, Italy, England, Germany, Poland, Portugal, Netherlands, Spain, and Turkey. Participants indicated their decisional role in their actual decision and the role they would prefer now. Each participant also rated (essential/desired/no opinion/avoid) the importance of obtaining answers, between diagnosis and treatment decision, to each of 92 questions. For each essential/desired question, participants specified all purposes for that information (to help them: understand/decide/plan/not sure/other). RESULTS: A total of 659 patients participated with country-specific response rates between 58%-77%. Between 83%-96% of each country's participants recalled actually taking an active decisional role and, in most countries, that increased slightly if they were to make the decision today; there were no significant differences among countries. There was a small reliable difference in the mean number of questions rated essential for DM across countries. More striking, however, was the wide variability within each country: no question was rated essential for DM by even 50% of its participants but almost every question was rated essential by some. CONCLUSIONS: Almost all participants from each country want to participate in their treatment decisions. Although there are country-specific differences in the amount of information required, wide variation within each country suggests that information that patients feel is essential or desired for DM should be addressed on an individual basis in all countries.
PURPOSE: To describe decisional roles of patients with early-stage prostate cancer in 9 countries and to compare the information they rated important for decision making (DM). METHOD: A survey of recently treated patients was conducted in Canada, Italy, England, Germany, Poland, Portugal, Netherlands, Spain, and Turkey. Participants indicated their decisional role in their actual decision and the role they would prefer now. Each participant also rated (essential/desired/no opinion/avoid) the importance of obtaining answers, between diagnosis and treatment decision, to each of 92 questions. For each essential/desired question, participants specified all purposes for that information (to help them: understand/decide/plan/not sure/other). RESULTS: A total of 659 patients participated with country-specific response rates between 58%-77%. Between 83%-96% of each country's participants recalled actually taking an active decisional role and, in most countries, that increased slightly if they were to make the decision today; there were no significant differences among countries. There was a small reliable difference in the mean number of questions rated essential for DM across countries. More striking, however, was the wide variability within each country: no question was rated essential for DM by even 50% of its participants but almost every question was rated essential by some. CONCLUSIONS: Almost all participants from each country want to participate in their treatment decisions. Although there are country-specific differences in the amount of information required, wide variation within each country suggests that information that patients feel is essential or desired for DM should be addressed on an individual basis in all countries.
Authors: Bryan R Haugen; Erik K Alexander; Keith C Bible; Gerard M Doherty; Susan J Mandel; Yuri E Nikiforov; Furio Pacini; Gregory W Randolph; Anna M Sawka; Martin Schlumberger; Kathryn G Schuff; Steven I Sherman; Julie Ann Sosa; David L Steward; R Michael Tuttle; Leonard Wartofsky Journal: Thyroid Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: Maarten Cuypers; Romy E D Lamers; Paul J M Kil; Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse; Marieke de Vries Journal: Trials Date: 2015-05-27 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Maarten Cuypers; Romy Ed Lamers; Paul Jm Kil; Regina The; Klemens Karssen; Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse; Marieke de Vries Journal: Health Informatics J Date: 2017-07-27 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Deb Feldman-Stewart; Mary Ann O'Brien; Marla L Clayman; B Joyce Davison; Masahito Jimbo; Michel Labrecque; Richard W Martin; Heather Shepherd Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2013-11-29 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Dawn Stacey; Monica Taljaard; Jennifer Smylie; Laura Boland; Rodney H Breau; Meg Carley; Kunal Jana; Larry Peckford; Terry Blackmore; Marian Waldie; Robert Chi Wu; France Legare Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2016-07-02 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Chang Hwan Ryu; Seung Jin Lee; Jae-Gu Cho; Ik Joon Choi; Yoon Seok Choi; Yong Tae Hong; Soo Yeon Jung; Ji Won Kim; Doh Young Lee; Dong Kun Lee; GIljoon Lee; Sang Joon Lee; Young Chan Lee; Yong Sang Lee; Inn Chul Nam; Ki Nam Park; Young Min Park; Eui-Suk Sung; Hee Young Son; In Hyo Seo; Byung-Joo Lee; Jae-Yol Lim Journal: Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 3.372