INTRODUCTION: Due to concerns about patients' wellbeing, open end-of-life communication is associated with reservation. Furthermore, sociocultural differences must be considered. The objective of this pilot study was therefore to investigate the information preferences of Austrian patients regarding cure rates and prognosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The information preferences of 50 advanced lung cancer patients were assessed at their first visit to the Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna. Preferences in terms of content (cure rates and/or prognosis) and depth of the information (additional quantitative estimates) were addressed. After the individually adapted medical consultation, patients' satisfaction with the consultation and the emotional responses to the information were evaluated. RESULTS: The majority of patients (76 %) requested information about cure rates and/or prognosis; nearly half of these (47 %) wanted additional quantitative estimates. Neither sociodemographic variables, disease characteristics, nor time since diagnosis had an impact on the information preferences. The individually adapted medical information showed no overall negative influence on the emotional responses; only patients receiving prognostic information had significantly higher distress scores after the consultation. High satisfaction with the individually adapted medical consultation was reported by 92 % of patients. CONCLUSION: Austrian physicians may offer end-of-life communication and directly ask patients about their information preferences, since patients seem able to decide whether or not prognostic information would overwhelm their emotional capacity and therefore to accept or reject the invitation. The disclosure of cure rates and/or prognosis with or without quantitative estimates-according to the patients' preferences-shows overall no negative impact on emotional reactions. The individually adapted consultation results in high patient satisfaction. Nevertheless, prognostic information may lead to higher distress.
INTRODUCTION: Due to concerns about patients' wellbeing, open end-of-life communication is associated with reservation. Furthermore, sociocultural differences must be considered. The objective of this pilot study was therefore to investigate the information preferences of Austrian patients regarding cure rates and prognosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The information preferences of 50 advanced lung cancerpatients were assessed at their first visit to the Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna. Preferences in terms of content (cure rates and/or prognosis) and depth of the information (additional quantitative estimates) were addressed. After the individually adapted medical consultation, patients' satisfaction with the consultation and the emotional responses to the information were evaluated. RESULTS: The majority of patients (76 %) requested information about cure rates and/or prognosis; nearly half of these (47 %) wanted additional quantitative estimates. Neither sociodemographic variables, disease characteristics, nor time since diagnosis had an impact on the information preferences. The individually adapted medical information showed no overall negative influence on the emotional responses; only patients receiving prognostic information had significantly higher distress scores after the consultation. High satisfaction with the individually adapted medical consultation was reported by 92 % of patients. CONCLUSION: Austrian physicians may offer end-of-life communication and directly ask patients about their information preferences, since patients seem able to decide whether or not prognostic information would overwhelm their emotional capacity and therefore to accept or reject the invitation. The disclosure of cure rates and/or prognosis with or without quantitative estimates-according to the patients' preferences-shows overall no negative impact on emotional reactions. The individually adapted consultation results in high patient satisfaction. Nevertheless, prognostic information may lead to higher distress.
Authors: Josephine M Clayton; Karen M Hancock; Phyllis N Butow; Martin H N Tattersall; David C Currow; Jonathan Adler; Sanchia Aranda; Kirsten Auret; Fran Boyle; Annette Britton; Richard Chye; Katy Clark; Patricia Davidson; Jan Maree Davis; Afaf Girgis; Sara Graham; Janet Hardy; Kate Introna; John Kearsley; Ian Kerridge; Linda Kristjanson; Peter Martin; Amanda McBride; Anne Meller; Geoffrey Mitchell; Alison Moore; Beverley Noble; Ian Olver; Sharon Parker; Matthew Peters; Peter Saul; Cameron Stewart; Lyn Swinburne; Bernadette Tobin; Kathryn Tuckwell; Patsy Yates Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2007-06-18 Impact factor: 7.738
Authors: Michael S Krasner; Ronald M Epstein; Howard Beckman; Anthony L Suchman; Benjamin Chapman; Christopher J Mooney; Timothy E Quill Journal: JAMA Date: 2009-09-23 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Alexander Grabenbauer; Andrea J Grabenbauer; Rosa Lengenfelder; Gerhard G Grabenbauer; Luitpold V Distel Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2016-03-16 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Naomi C A van der Velden; Maartje C Meijers; Paul K J Han; Hanneke W M van Laarhoven; Ellen M A Smets; Inge Henselmans Journal: Curr Treat Options Oncol Date: 2020-04-23
Authors: A Kitta; A Hagin; M Unseld; F Adamidis; T Diendorfer; E K Masel; K Kirchheiner Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2020-09-12 Impact factor: 3.603