Chen Hsiu Chen1,2, Su Ching Kuo2,3, Siew Tzuh Tang4,5,6. 1. 1 Department of Nursing, University of Kang Ning, Tainan, Taiwan. 2. 2 Graduate Institute of Clinical Medical Science, Chang Gung University, Tao-Yuan, Taiwan. 3. 3 Department of Nursing, Yuanpei University, Hsinchu, Taiwan. 4. 4 School of Nursing, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Tao-Yuan, Taiwan. 5. 5 Department of Nursing, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 6. 6 Division of Hematology-Oncology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Tao-Yuan, Taiwan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: No systematic meta-analysis is available on the prevalence of cancer patients' accurate prognostic awareness and differences in accurate prognostic awareness by publication year, region, assessment method, and service received. AIM: To examine the prevalence of advanced/terminal cancer patients' accurate prognostic awareness and differences in accurate prognostic awareness by publication year, region, assessment method, and service received. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were systematically searched on accurate prognostic awareness in adult patients with advanced/terminal cancer (1990-2014). Pooled prevalences were calculated for accurate prognostic awareness by a random-effects model. Differences in weighted estimates of accurate prognostic awareness were compared by meta-regression. RESULTS: In total, 34 articles were retrieved for systematic review and meta-analysis. At best, only about half of advanced/terminal cancer patients accurately understood their prognosis (49.1%; 95% confidence interval: 42.7%-55.5%; range: 5.4%-85.7%). Accurate prognostic awareness was independent of service received and publication year, but highest in Australia, followed by East Asia, North America, and southern Europe and the United Kingdom (67.7%, 60.7%, 52.8%, and 36.0%, respectively; p = 0.019). Accurate prognostic awareness was higher by clinician assessment than by patient report (63.2% vs 44.5%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Less than half of advanced/terminal cancer patients accurately understood their prognosis, with significant variations by region and assessment method. Healthcare professionals should thoroughly assess advanced/terminal cancer patients' preferences for prognostic information and engage them in prognostic discussion early in the cancer trajectory, thus facilitating their accurate prognostic awareness and the quality of end-of-life care decision-making.
BACKGROUND: No systematic meta-analysis is available on the prevalence of cancerpatients' accurate prognostic awareness and differences in accurate prognostic awareness by publication year, region, assessment method, and service received. AIM: To examine the prevalence of advanced/terminal cancerpatients' accurate prognostic awareness and differences in accurate prognostic awareness by publication year, region, assessment method, and service received. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were systematically searched on accurate prognostic awareness in adult patients with advanced/terminal cancer (1990-2014). Pooled prevalences were calculated for accurate prognostic awareness by a random-effects model. Differences in weighted estimates of accurate prognostic awareness were compared by meta-regression. RESULTS: In total, 34 articles were retrieved for systematic review and meta-analysis. At best, only about half of advanced/terminal cancerpatients accurately understood their prognosis (49.1%; 95% confidence interval: 42.7%-55.5%; range: 5.4%-85.7%). Accurate prognostic awareness was independent of service received and publication year, but highest in Australia, followed by East Asia, North America, and southern Europe and the United Kingdom (67.7%, 60.7%, 52.8%, and 36.0%, respectively; p = 0.019). Accurate prognostic awareness was higher by clinician assessment than by patient report (63.2% vs 44.5%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Less than half of advanced/terminal cancerpatients accurately understood their prognosis, with significant variations by region and assessment method. Healthcare professionals should thoroughly assess advanced/terminal cancerpatients' preferences for prognostic information and engage them in prognostic discussion early in the cancer trajectory, thus facilitating their accurate prognostic awareness and the quality of end-of-life care decision-making.
Entities:
Keywords:
Prognosis; accurate prognostic awareness; awareness; neoplasms
Authors: Mellar P Davis; Erin A Vanenkevort; Alexander Elder; Amanda Young; Irina D Correa Ordonez; Mark J Wojtowicz; Halle Ellison; Carlos Fernandez; Zankhana Mehta; Bertrand Behm; Glen Digwood; Rajiv Panikkar Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-03-15 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Login S George; Holly G Prigerson; Andrew S Epstein; Kristy L Richards; Megan J Shen; Heather M Derry; Valerie F Reyna; Manish A Shah; Paul K Maciejewski Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2019-10-08 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Melissa P Masterson; Allison J Applebaum; Kara Buda; Sally Reisch; Barry Rosenfeld Journal: Am J Hosp Palliat Care Date: 2018-06-12 Impact factor: 2.500
Authors: Eli L Diamond; Holly G Prigerson; Denise C Correa; Anne Reiner; Katherine Panageas; Maria Kryza-Lacombe; Justin Buthorn; Elizabeth C Neil; Alex M Miller; Lisa M DeAngelis; Allison J Applebaum Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2017-10-19 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Libby Sallnow; Richard Smith; Sam H Ahmedzai; Afsan Bhadelia; Charlotte Chamberlain; Yali Cong; Brett Doble; Luckson Dullie; Robin Durie; Eric A Finkelstein; Sam Guglani; Melanie Hodson; Bettina S Husebø; Allan Kellehear; Celia Kitzinger; Felicia Marie Knaul; Scott A Murray; Julia Neuberger; Seamus O'Mahony; M R Rajagopal; Sarah Russell; Eriko Sase; Katherine E Sleeman; Sheldon Solomon; Ros Taylor; Mpho Tutu van Furth; Katrina Wyatt Journal: Lancet Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 79.321