C Calderon1, P J Ferrando2, A Carmona-Bayonas3, U Lorenzo-Seva2, C Jara4, C Beato5, T García3, A Ramchandani6, B Castelo7, M M Muñoz8, S Garcia9, O Higuera7, M Mangas-Izquierdo10, P Jimenez-Fonseca11. 1. Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychobiology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Barcelona, Passeig de la Vall d'Hebron, 171, 08035, Barcelona, Spain. ccalderon@ub.edu. 2. Faculty of Psychology, Rovira and Virgili University, Tarragona, Spain. 3. Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Morales Meseguer, Murcia, Spain. 4. Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Fundación Alcorcón, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain. 5. Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Grupo Quirón, Sevilla, Spain. 6. Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Insular de Gran Canaria, Las Palmas, Spain. 7. Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid, Spain. 8. Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Virgen de La Luz, Cuenca, Spain. 9. Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitari Santa Creu i Sant Pau and Fundació Kàlida, Barcelona, Spain. 10. Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Galdakao-Usansolo, Galdakao-Usansolo, Spain. 11. Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Central of Asturias, Oviedo, Spain.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the psychometric properties of the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire-Physician version (SDM-Q-Doc) in a sample of medical oncologists who provide adjuvant treatment to patients with non-metastatic resected cancer and the correlations between the total SDM-Q-Doc score and physician satisfaction with the information provided. METHODS: Prospective, observational and multicenter study in which 32 medical oncologists and 520 patients were recruited. The psychometric properties, dimensionality, and factor structure of the SDM-Q-Doc were assessed. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analyses suggested that the most likely solution was two-dimensional, with two correlated factors: one factor regarding information and another one about treatment. Confirmatory factor analysis based on cross-validation showed that the fitted two-dimensional solution provided the best fit to the data. Reliability analyses revealed good accuracy for the derived scores, both total and sub-scale, with estimates ranging from 0.81 to 0.89. The results revealed significant correlations between the total SDM-Q-Doc score and physician satisfaction with the information provided (p < 0.01); between information sub-scale scores (factor 1) and satisfaction (p < 0.01), and between treatment sub-scale scores (factor 2) and satisfaction (p < 0.01). Medical oncologists of older age and those with more years of experience showed more interest in the patient preferences (p = 0.026 and p = 0.020, respectively). Patient age negatively correlated with SDM information (p < 0.01) and physicians appear to provide more information to young patients. CONCLUSION: SDM-Q-Doc showed good psychometric properties and could be a helpful tool that examines physician's perspective of SDM and as an indicator of quality and satisfaction in patients with cancer.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the psychometric properties of the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire-Physician version (SDM-Q-Doc) in a sample of medical oncologists who provide adjuvant treatment to patients with non-metastatic resected cancer and the correlations between the total SDM-Q-Doc score and physician satisfaction with the information provided. METHODS: Prospective, observational and multicenter study in which 32 medical oncologists and 520 patients were recruited. The psychometric properties, dimensionality, and factor structure of the SDM-Q-Doc were assessed. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analyses suggested that the most likely solution was two-dimensional, with two correlated factors: one factor regarding information and another one about treatment. Confirmatory factor analysis based on cross-validation showed that the fitted two-dimensional solution provided the best fit to the data. Reliability analyses revealed good accuracy for the derived scores, both total and sub-scale, with estimates ranging from 0.81 to 0.89. The results revealed significant correlations between the total SDM-Q-Doc score and physician satisfaction with the information provided (p < 0.01); between information sub-scale scores (factor 1) and satisfaction (p < 0.01), and between treatment sub-scale scores (factor 2) and satisfaction (p < 0.01). Medical oncologists of older age and those with more years of experience showed more interest in the patient preferences (p = 0.026 and p = 0.020, respectively). Patient age negatively correlated with SDM information (p < 0.01) and physicians appear to provide more information to young patients. CONCLUSION: SDM-Q-Doc showed good psychometric properties and could be a helpful tool that examines physician's perspective of SDM and as an indicator of quality and satisfaction in patients with cancer.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer; Medical oncologist; Physician’s perspective; Psychometrics properties; Shared decision-making
Authors: Kathleen A Cronin; Binbing Yu; Martin Krapcho; Diana L Miglioretti; Michael P Fay; Grant Izmirlian; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Berta M Geller; Eric J Feuer Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Joseph D Tariman; Donna L Berry; Barbara Cochrane; Ardith Doorenbos; Karen G Schepp Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Alexis Colley; Jodi Halpern; Steven Paul; Guy Micco; Maureen Lahiff; Fay Wright; Jon D Levine; Judy Mastick; Marilyn J Hammer; Christine Miaskowski; Laura B Dunn Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2016-10-05 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Sumayah Rodenburg-Vandenbussche; Arwen H Pieterse; Pieter M Kroonenberg; Isabelle Scholl; Trudy van der Weijden; Gre P M Luyten; Roy F P M Kruitwagen; Henk den Ouden; Ingrid V E Carlier; Irene M van Vliet; Frans G Zitman; Anne M Stiggelbout Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-07-07 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Fania R Gärtner; Hanna Bomhof-Roordink; Ian P Smith; Isabelle Scholl; Anne M Stiggelbout; Arwen H Pieterse Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-02-15 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: P Jimenez-Fonseca; C Calderon; A Carmona-Bayonas; M M Muñoz; R Hernández; M Mut Lloret; I Ghanem; C Beato; D Cacho Lavín; A Ivars Rubio; R Carrión; C Jara Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2018-04-02 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Luke X van Rossenberg; David Ring; Xander Jacobs; George Sulkers; Mark van Heijl; Bastiaan T van Hoorn Journal: J Patient Exp Date: 2021-12-08
Authors: Caterina Calderon; Paula Jiménez-Fonseca; Pere Joan Ferrando; Carlos Jara; Urbano Lorenzo-Seva; Carmen Beato; Teresa García-García; Beatriz Castelo; Avinash Ramchandani; María Mar Muñoz; Eva Martínez de Castro; Ismael Ghanem; Montse Mangas; Alberto Carmona-Bayonas Journal: Int J Clin Health Psychol Date: 2018-02-13