Heather Orom1, Caitlin Biddle1, Willie Underwood2, Christian J Nelson3, D Lynn Homish1. 1. Department of Community Health and Health Behavior, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA (HO, CB, DLH) 2. Department of Urology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA (WU) 3. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA (CJN)
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We explored whether active patient involvement in decision making and greater patient knowledge are associated with better treatment decision-making experiences and better quality of life (QOL) among men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Localized prostate cancer treatment decision making is an advantageous model for studying patient treatment decision-making dynamics because there are multiple treatment options and a lack of empirical evidence to recommend one over the other; consequently, it is recommended that patients be fully involved in making the decision. METHODS: Men with newly diagnosed clinically localized prostate cancer (N = 1529) completed measures of decisional control, prostate cancer knowledge, and decision-making experiences (decisional conflict and decision-making satisfaction and difficulty) shortly after they made their treatment decision. Prostate cancer-specific QOL was assessed at 6 months after treatment. RESULTS: More active involvement in decision making and greater knowledge were associated with lower decisional conflict and higher decision-making satisfaction but greater decision-making difficulty. An interaction between decisional control and knowledge revealed that greater knowledge was only associated with greater difficulty for men actively involved in making the decision (67% of sample). Greater knowledge, but not decisional control, predicted better QOL 6 months after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Although men who are actively involved in decision making and more knowledgeable may make more informed decisions, they could benefit from decisional support (e.g., decision-making aids, emotional support from providers, strategies for reducing emotional distress) to make the process easier. Men who were more knowledgeable about prostate cancer and treatment side effects at the time that they made their treatment decision may have appraised their QOL as higher because they had realistic expectations about side effects.
OBJECTIVE: We explored whether active patient involvement in decision making and greater patient knowledge are associated with better treatment decision-making experiences and better quality of life (QOL) among men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Localized prostate cancer treatment decision making is an advantageous model for studying patient treatment decision-making dynamics because there are multiple treatment options and a lack of empirical evidence to recommend one over the other; consequently, it is recommended that patients be fully involved in making the decision. METHODS:Men with newly diagnosed clinically localized prostate cancer (N = 1529) completed measures of decisional control, prostate cancer knowledge, and decision-making experiences (decisional conflict and decision-making satisfaction and difficulty) shortly after they made their treatment decision. Prostate cancer-specific QOL was assessed at 6 months after treatment. RESULTS: More active involvement in decision making and greater knowledge were associated with lower decisional conflict and higher decision-making satisfaction but greater decision-making difficulty. An interaction between decisional control and knowledge revealed that greater knowledge was only associated with greater difficulty for men actively involved in making the decision (67% of sample). Greater knowledge, but not decisional control, predicted better QOL 6 months after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Although men who are actively involved in decision making and more knowledgeable may make more informed decisions, they could benefit from decisional support (e.g., decision-making aids, emotional support from providers, strategies for reducing emotional distress) to make the process easier. Men who were more knowledgeable about prostate cancer and treatment side effects at the time that they made their treatment decision may have appraised their QOL as higher because they had realistic expectations about side effects.
Authors: Ian Thompson; James Brantley Thrasher; Gunnar Aus; Arthur L Burnett; Edith D Canby-Hagino; Michael S Cookson; Anthony V D'Amico; Roger R Dmochowski; David T Eton; Jeffrey D Forman; S Larry Goldenberg; Javier Hernandez; Celestia S Higano; Stephen R Kraus; Judd W Moul; Catherine M Tangen Journal: J Urol Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Mónica E López; Celia P Kaplan; Anna M Nápoles; E Shelley Hwang; Jennifer C Livaudais; Leah S Karliner Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2013-09-17
Authors: Clement K Gwede; Julio Pow-Sang; John Seigne; Randy Heysek; Mohamed Helal; Kristin Shade; Alan Cantor; Paul B Jacobsen Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-10-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: R B Hovey; K E S Cuthbertson; K A Birnie; J W Robinson; B C Thomas; H F Massfeller; J D Ruether; C Scott Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Philippe D Violette; Thomas Agoritsas; Paul Alexander; Jarno Riikonen; Henrikki Santti; Arnav Agarwal; Neera Bhatnagar; Philipp Dahm; Victor Montori; Gordon H Guyatt; Kari A O Tikkinen Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2015-03-12 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Alan L Kaplan; Catherine M Crespi; Josemanuel D Saucedo; Sarah E Connor; Mark S Litwin; Christopher S Saigal Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-05-09 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Daniel S Wang; Ashesh B Jani; Caroline G Tai; Musu Sesay; Daniel K Lee; Michael Goodman; Katharina V Echt; Kerry E Kilbridge; Viraj A Master Journal: Cancer Date: 2013-06-03 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Maarten Cuypers; Romy E D Lamers; Erik B Cornel; Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse; Marieke de Vries; Paul J M Kil Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-11-10 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Lionne D F Venderbos; Shafak Aluwini; Monique J Roobol; Leonard P Bokhorst; Eric H G M Oomens; Chris H Bangma; Ida J Korfage Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-02-06 Impact factor: 4.147