Narek Shaverdian1, Pin-Chieh Wang1, Michael Steinberg1, Percy Lee2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, 200 UCLA Medical Plaza, Suite B265, Los Angeles, CA 90095-6951, USA. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, 200 UCLA Medical Plaza, Suite B265, Los Angeles, CA 90095-6951, USA. Electronic address: Percylee@mednet.ucla.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We investigated the patient's perspective on SBRT for treatment of stage I NSCLC and compared the patient's perspective of SBRT to that of surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: IRB approval was obtained to contact patients who had received SBRT for stage I NSCLCs. Patients were asked questions inquiring into their knowledge of SBRT and how their SBRT experience compared to their original expectations. Patients who had undergone prior surgery for a previously diagnosed stage I NSCLC were asked questions comparing their experience between SBRT and surgery. Frequencies of these reported measures were calculated and analysis was done using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: 102 patients were contacted with 91 (89%) participating. Among all patients, prior to their radiation oncology consultation, 56% had no knowledge of SBRT and 58% believed SBRT to be as effective as resection. After consultation, 98.9% did not believe they were getting an inferior treatment with SBRT. 92.3% of patients reported less side effects, 59.3% reported SBRT to be more convenient and 87.9% reported SBRT to be less anxiety provoking than compared to their original expectations. Among patients with prior lung surgery (N=39), compared to surgery, 100% reported an easier recovery, less treatment related anxiety and less caregiver strain with SBRT. Overall, 79.5% were more satisfied with SBRT than surgery and 89.7% would have rather had SBRT than surgery as it was performed for their prior NSCLC. CONCLUSION: Actual experiences with SBRT are overwhelmingly superior compared to patient expectations. Patients with prior lung surgery reported significantly more satisfaction with SBRT.
OBJECTIVES: We investigated the patient's perspective on SBRT for treatment of stage I NSCLC and compared the patient's perspective of SBRT to that of surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: IRB approval was obtained to contact patients who had received SBRT for stage I NSCLCs. Patients were asked questions inquiring into their knowledge of SBRT and how their SBRT experience compared to their original expectations. Patients who had undergone prior surgery for a previously diagnosed stage I NSCLC were asked questions comparing their experience between SBRT and surgery. Frequencies of these reported measures were calculated and analysis was done using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: 102 patients were contacted with 91 (89%) participating. Among all patients, prior to their radiation oncology consultation, 56% had no knowledge of SBRT and 58% believed SBRT to be as effective as resection. After consultation, 98.9% did not believe they were getting an inferior treatment with SBRT. 92.3% of patients reported less side effects, 59.3% reported SBRT to be more convenient and 87.9% reported SBRT to be less anxiety provoking than compared to their original expectations. Among patients with prior lung surgery (N=39), compared to surgery, 100% reported an easier recovery, less treatment related anxiety and less caregiver strain with SBRT. Overall, 79.5% were more satisfied with SBRT than surgery and 89.7% would have rather had SBRT than surgery as it was performed for their prior NSCLC. CONCLUSION: Actual experiences with SBRT are overwhelmingly superior compared to patient expectations. Patients with prior lung surgery reported significantly more satisfaction with SBRT.
Authors: Jonathan W Lischalk; Stephanie M Woo; Shaan Kataria; Nima Aghdam; Ima Paydar; Michael C Repka; Eric D Anderson; Brian T Collins Journal: J Radiat Oncol Date: 2016-08-20