Lauren P Wallner1,2, Yun Li3, M Chandler McLeod3, Ann S Hamilton4, Kevin C Ward5, Christine M Veenstra6, Lawrence C An1, Nancy K Janz7, Steven J Katz1,8, Sarah T Hawley1,7,8,9. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 2. Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 3. Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 4. Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California. 5. Department of Epidemiology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. 6. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 7. Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 8. Department of Health Management and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 9. Ann Arbor Veterans Affairs Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the size and characteristics of the decision-support networks of women newly diagnosed with breast cancer and whether their involvement improves breast cancer treatment decisions. METHODS: A population-based sample of patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer in 2014 and 2015, as reported to the Georgia and Los Angeles Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries, were surveyed approximately 7 months after diagnosis (N = 2502; response rate, 68%). Network size was estimated by asking women to list up to 3 of the most important decision-support persons (DSPs) who helped them with locoregional therapy decisions. Decision deliberation was measured using 4 items assessing the degree to which patients thought through the decision, with higher scores reflecting more deliberative breast cancer treatment decisions. The size of the network (range, 0-3 or more) was compared across patient-level characteristics, and adjusted mean deliberation scores were estimated across levels of network size using multivariable linear regression. RESULTS: Of the 2502 women included in this analysis, 51% reported having 3 or more DSPs, 20% reported 2, 18% reported 1, and 11% reported not having any DSPs. Married/partnered women, those younger than 45 years, and black women all were more likely to report larger network sizes (all P < .001). Larger support networks were associated with more deliberative surgical treatment decisions (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Most women engaged multiple DSPs in their treatment decision making, and involving more DSPs was associated with more deliberative treatment decisions. Future initiatives to improve treatment decision making among women with breast cancer should acknowledge and engage informal DSPs. Cancer 2017;123:3895-903.
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the size and characteristics of the decision-support networks of women newly diagnosed with breast cancer and whether their involvement improves breast cancer treatment decisions. METHODS: A population-based sample of patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer in 2014 and 2015, as reported to the Georgia and Los Angeles Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries, were surveyed approximately 7 months after diagnosis (N = 2502; response rate, 68%). Network size was estimated by asking women to list up to 3 of the most important decision-support persons (DSPs) who helped them with locoregional therapy decisions. Decision deliberation was measured using 4 items assessing the degree to which patients thought through the decision, with higher scores reflecting more deliberative breast cancer treatment decisions. The size of the network (range, 0-3 or more) was compared across patient-level characteristics, and adjusted mean deliberation scores were estimated across levels of network size using multivariable linear regression. RESULTS: Of the 2502 women included in this analysis, 51% reported having 3 or more DSPs, 20% reported 2, 18% reported 1, and 11% reported not having any DSPs. Married/partnered women, those younger than 45 years, and black women all were more likely to report larger network sizes (all P < .001). Larger support networks were associated with more deliberative surgical treatment decisions (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Most women engaged multiple DSPs in their treatment decision making, and involving more DSPs was associated with more deliberative treatment decisions. Future initiatives to improve treatment decision making among women with breast cancer should acknowledge and engage informal DSPs. Cancer 2017;123:3895-903.
Authors: Sarah T Hawley; Reshma Jagsi; Monica Morrow; Nancy K Janz; Ann Hamilton; John J Graff; Steven J Katz Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Sarah T Hawley; Nancy K Janz; Ann Hamilton; Jennifer J Griggs; Amy K Alderman; Mahasin Mujahid; Steven J Katz Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2008-11
Authors: Erin L Mead; Ardith Z Doorenbos; Sara H Javid; Emily A Haozous; Lori Arviso Alvord; David R Flum; Arden M Morris Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-10-17 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Christine M Veenstra; Lauren P Wallner; Paul H Abrahamse; Nancy K Janz; Steven J Katz; Sarah T Hawley Journal: Cancer Date: 2019-01-11 Impact factor: 6.921
Authors: Christine M Veenstra; Katrina R Ellis; Paul Abrahamse; Kevin C Ward; Arden M Morris; Sarah T Hawley Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2022-10-13 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Lauren P Wallner; Yun Li; M Chandler McLeod; Joan Gargaro; Allison W Kurian; Reshma Jagsi; Archana Radhakrishnan; Ann S Hamilton; Kevin C Ward; Sarah T Hawley; Steven J Katz Journal: Cancer Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 6.921
Authors: Christine M Veenstra; Thomas M Braun; Paul H Abrahamse; Daniela Wittmann; Sarah T Hawley Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2022-02-03 Impact factor: 4.711
Authors: Alison S Baskin; Ton Wang; Nicole M Mott; Sarah T Hawley; Reshma Jagsi; Lesly A Dossett Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2020-07-30 Impact factor: 5.344