Marleen Kunneman1, Anne M Stiggelbout1, Corrie A M Marijnen2, Arwen H Pieterse3. 1. Leiden University Medical Centre, Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden, the Netherlands. 2. Leiden University Medical Centre, Department of Clinical Oncology, Leiden, the Netherlands. 3. Leiden University Medical Centre, Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden, the Netherlands. Electronic address: pieterse@lumc.nl.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Probabilities of benefits and harms of treatment may help patients when making a treatment decision. This study aimed to examine (1) whether and how radiation oncologists convey probabilities to rectal cancer patients, and (2) patients' estimates of probabilities of major outcomes of rectal cancer treatment. METHODS: First consultations of oncologists and patients eligible for preoperative radiotherapy (PRT) (N=90) were audio taped. Tapes were transcribed verbatim and coded to identify probabilistic information presented. Patients (N=56) filled in a post-consultation questionnaire on their estimates of probabilities. RESULTS: Probabilities were mentioned in 99% (local recurrence), 75% (incontinence), 72% and 40% (sexual dysfunction in males and females, respectively) of cases. Most patients (89%) correctly estimated that PRT decreases the probability of local recurrence, and 10% and 38%/54% that it increases the probability of incontinence and sexual dysfunction in males/females, respectively. Patients tended to underestimate the probabilities of harms of treatment. CONCLUSION: Our results show that oncologists almost always mention probabilities of benefit of PRT. In contrast, probabilities of harms often go unmentioned. The effect of PRT on adverse events is often underestimated. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Oncologists should stay alert to patients' possible misunderstanding of probabilistic information and should check patients' perceptions of probabilities.
OBJECTIVE: Probabilities of benefits and harms of treatment may help patients when making a treatment decision. This study aimed to examine (1) whether and how radiation oncologists convey probabilities to rectal cancerpatients, and (2) patients' estimates of probabilities of major outcomes of rectal cancer treatment. METHODS: First consultations of oncologists and patients eligible for preoperative radiotherapy (PRT) (N=90) were audio taped. Tapes were transcribed verbatim and coded to identify probabilistic information presented. Patients (N=56) filled in a post-consultation questionnaire on their estimates of probabilities. RESULTS: Probabilities were mentioned in 99% (local recurrence), 75% (incontinence), 72% and 40% (sexual dysfunction in males and females, respectively) of cases. Most patients (89%) correctly estimated that PRT decreases the probability of local recurrence, and 10% and 38%/54% that it increases the probability of incontinence and sexual dysfunction in males/females, respectively. Patients tended to underestimate the probabilities of harms of treatment. CONCLUSION: Our results show that oncologists almost always mention probabilities of benefit of PRT. In contrast, probabilities of harms often go unmentioned. The effect of PRT on adverse events is often underestimated. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Oncologists should stay alert to patients' possible misunderstanding of probabilistic information and should check patients' perceptions of probabilities.
Authors: Olga C Damman; Anant Jani; Brigit A de Jong; Annemarie Becker; Margot J Metz; Martine C de Bruijne; Danielle R Timmermans; Martina C Cornel; Dirk T Ubbink; Marije van der Steen; Muir Gray; Carla van El Journal: J Eval Clin Pract Date: 2019-12-15 Impact factor: 2.431
Authors: Sebastiaan M Stuij; Constance H C Drossaert; Nanon H M Labrie; Robert L Hulsman; Marie José Kersten; Sandra van Dulmen; Ellen M A Smets Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2020-05-01 Impact factor: 2.463
Authors: Marleen Kunneman; Inge Henselmans; Fania R Gärtner; Hanna Bomhof-Roordink; Arwen H Pieterse Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2019-09-26 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: Fania R Gärtner; Johanneke E Portielje; Miranda Langendam; Desiree Hairwassers; Thomas Agoritsas; Brigitte Gijsen; Gerrit-Jan Liefers; Arwen H Pieterse; Anne M Stiggelbout Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-12-05 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: L F van de Water; J J van Kleef; W P M Dijksterhuis; I Henselmans; H G van den Boorn; N M Vaarzon Morel; K F Schut; J G Daams; E M A Smets; H W M van Laarhoven Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2020-04-24 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Ruben D Vromans; Steffen C Pauws; Nadine Bol; Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse; Emiel J Krahmer Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2020-10-27 Impact factor: 2.796