S Gröger1,2, C Mäder-Porombka3, C Stang3, S Wallacher3. 1. Versorgungsforschung und Implementierungswissenschaften im Gesundheitswesen, Abteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Deutschland. Silvia77@web.de. 2. Klinik für Allgemeinpsychiatrie, Psychotherapie und Psychosomatik I, Psychiatrisches Zentrum Nordbaden AdöR, Heidelberger Straße 1a, 69168, Wiesloch, Deutschland. Silvia77@web.de. 3. Versorgungsforschung und Implementierungswissenschaften im Gesundheitswesen, Abteilung Allgemeinmedizin und Versorgungsforschung, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM) is becoming increasingly important in medical care. The relevance of SDM after diagnosis is especially noticeable in the care of prostate cancer patients, since affected patients can choose from different treatment strategies. OBJECTIVES: What are the experiences of patients regarding SDM in the treatment of prostate cancer? METHODS: Interviews with qualitative-exploratory study design were carried out and evaluated. The interviews were recorded with the help of audio tapes and literally transcribed and pseudonymized based on Kuckartz. The evaluation was done by theoretical coding according to Glaser and Strauss. This enabled the development of an object-based theory of interview data. RESULTS: The study shows that all interviewees experienced SDM and were able to reflect on this process. The interviewed patients had a high level of information regarding their disease status and treatment options, in which individual preferences played a key role. Some patients saw potential for optimization in the physician-patient conversation, taking personal preferences into account. CONCLUSIONS: Patients are not limited to medical information only, but have taken an active role in their treatment decision. Many of the participants consulted several physicians to obtain second opinions. Since the survey focuses on the patients' perspective, it remains unclear whether a joint exchange of information and decision-making has taken place from a medical point of view.
BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM) is becoming increasingly important in medical care. The relevance of SDM after diagnosis is especially noticeable in the care of prostate cancerpatients, since affected patients can choose from different treatment strategies. OBJECTIVES: What are the experiences of patients regarding SDM in the treatment of prostate cancer? METHODS: Interviews with qualitative-exploratory study design were carried out and evaluated. The interviews were recorded with the help of audio tapes and literally transcribed and pseudonymized based on Kuckartz. The evaluation was done by theoretical coding according to Glaser and Strauss. This enabled the development of an object-based theory of interview data. RESULTS: The study shows that all interviewees experienced SDM and were able to reflect on this process. The interviewed patients had a high level of information regarding their disease status and treatment options, in which individual preferences played a key role. Some patients saw potential for optimization in the physician-patient conversation, taking personal preferences into account. CONCLUSIONS:Patients are not limited to medical information only, but have taken an active role in their treatment decision. Many of the participants consulted several physicians to obtain second opinions. Since the survey focuses on the patients' perspective, it remains unclear whether a joint exchange of information and decision-making has taken place from a medical point of view.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer; Doctor-patient-communication; Health service research; Patient experience; Prostate cancer
Authors: Axel Heidenreich; Patrick J Bastian; Joaquim Bellmunt; Michel Bolla; Steven Joniau; Theodor van der Kwast; Malcolm Mason; Vsevolod Matveev; Thomas Wiegel; F Zattoni; Nicolas Mottet Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-10-06 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Andrew M D Wolf; Richard C Wender; Ruth B Etzioni; Ian M Thompson; Anthony V D'Amico; Robert J Volk; Durado D Brooks; Chiranjeev Dash; Idris Guessous; Kimberly Andrews; Carol DeSantis; Robert A Smith Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2010-03-03 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: E A G Joosten; L DeFuentes-Merillas; G H de Weert; T Sensky; C P F van der Staak; C A J de Jong Journal: Psychother Psychosom Date: 2008-04-16 Impact factor: 17.659