Eli Ristevski1, Melanie Regan1, David Birks2, Nicole Steers3, Anny Byrne4. 1. Monash University, School of Rural Health - Monash University Department of Rural and Indigenous Health, Moe, Victoria, Australia. 2. Monash University, School of Rural Health - Churchill, Churchill, Victoria, Australia. 3. Latrobe Community Health Service, Morwell, Victoria, Australia. 4. West Gippsland HealthCare Group, Warragul, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
AIM: Identify what factors rural women perceived to influence their surgical choice for EBC. BACKGROUND: Higher rates of mastectomy still remain for women with early breast cancer (EBC) in rural areas. While access to radiotherapy is a commonly identified barrier, there is growing debate around other factors which are also important influences on surgical choice. METHODS: Qualitative study with 70 interviews with women diagnosed with EBC in rural Gippsland, Australia. Twenty-nine women had a mastectomy and 41 had breast conserving surgery (BCS). RESULTS: Patient led psychosocial and surgeon led factors influenced surgical choice. Psychosocial factors were a greater influence for the mastectomy group. These included a high fear of cancer recurrence and radiotherapy, negative views of the body and breast, a family history of cancer, wanting to avoid the negative treatment experiences they had seen significant others go through, and not wanting to travel for treatment. Surgeon led factors were a greater influence for the BCS group, in particular, the direct recommendation made by the surgeon for BCS. For both groups, urgency to act was a shared psychosocial factor. Trust and confidence in the expertise and reputation of the surgeon and their consultation style were surgeon led factors shared by the groups. CONCLUSIONS: To ensure women achieve the best treatment outcome, patients and clinicians need to work together to identify how important and influential the various factors are for the women and, if necessary, to seek support to ensure informed decisions are made.
AIM: Identify what factors rural women perceived to influence their surgical choice for EBC. BACKGROUND: Higher rates of mastectomy still remain for women with early breast cancer (EBC) in rural areas. While access to radiotherapy is a commonly identified barrier, there is growing debate around other factors which are also important influences on surgical choice. METHODS: Qualitative study with 70 interviews with women diagnosed with EBC in rural Gippsland, Australia. Twenty-nine women had a mastectomy and 41 had breast conserving surgery (BCS). RESULTS:Patient led psychosocial and surgeon led factors influenced surgical choice. Psychosocial factors were a greater influence for the mastectomy group. These included a high fear of cancer recurrence and radiotherapy, negative views of the body and breast, a family history of cancer, wanting to avoid the negative treatment experiences they had seen significant others go through, and not wanting to travel for treatment. Surgeon led factors were a greater influence for the BCS group, in particular, the direct recommendation made by the surgeon for BCS. For both groups, urgency to act was a shared psychosocial factor. Trust and confidence in the expertise and reputation of the surgeon and their consultation style were surgeon led factors shared by the groups. CONCLUSIONS: To ensure women achieve the best treatment outcome, patients and clinicians need to work together to identify how important and influential the various factors are for the women and, if necessary, to seek support to ensure informed decisions are made.
Authors: J A van Dongen; A C Voogd; I S Fentiman; C Legrand; R J Sylvester; D Tong; E van der Schueren; P A Helle; K van Zijl; H Bartelink Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-07-19 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Mary Ann O'Brien; Peter M Ellis; Timothy J Whelan; Cathy Charles; Amiram Gafni; Peter Lovrics; Som D Mukherjee; Nicole Hodgson Journal: Health Expect Date: 2011-09-16 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Anneke T Schroen; David R Brenin; Maria D Kelly; William A Knaus; Craig L Slingluff Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-10-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: John F Scoggins; Catherine R Fedorenko; Sara M A Donahue; Dedra Buchwald; David K Blough; Scott D Ramsey Journal: J Rural Health Date: 2011-03-31 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Walley J Temple; Margaret L Russell; Louise L Parsons; Sylvia M Huber; Charlotte A Jones; Jane Bankes; Michael Eliasziw Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-07-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Victoria White; Myee Pruden; Graham Giles; John Collins; Konrad Jamrozik; Graeme Inglis; John Boyages; David Hill Journal: Cancer Date: 2004-08-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: E Dale Collins; Caroline P Moore; Kate F Clay; Stephen A Kearing; Annette M O'Connor; Hilary A Llewellyn-Thomas; Richard J Barth; Karen R Sepucha Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-12-29 Impact factor: 44.544