Literature DB >> 30458451

Why Do Cancer Patients Have Difficulties Evaluating the Need for a Second Opinion and What Is Needed to Lower the Barrier? A Qualitative Study.

Karen S Peier-Ruser, Salome von Greyerz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Requesting a second opinion (SO) is common in oncology. The reasons and barriers for patients not seeking an SO have yet been to be investigated. Why do patients have difficulties evaluating their need for an SO and what could be done to minimize these barriers? PATIENTS AND METHODS: A 2-stage qualitative study was conducted. 1) Participants were studied in 3 focus groups (FGs). The participants themselves analyzed and then grouped their statements into defined categories. 2) Results of the FGs were discussed with 7 experts from different professional backgrounds. The interviews were unstructured and detailed in the protocol. The statements underwent thematic analysis.
RESULTS: The following 4 main barriers were identified: 1) state of shock, 2) pressure of time, 3) sense of excessive demands and uncertainty triggered by information overload, 4) fear of jeopardizing the patient-physician relationship. The following 4 main suggestions for minimizing the barriers were identified: 1) written patient information, 2) improvement of communication, 3) patient empowerment (PE), 4) holistic approach.
CONCLUSION: These barriers incapacitate the patients from evaluating the need for an SO. To minimize the barriers, PE, self-management support and shared decision making is recommended. While the implementation of these concepts advances, patients can be empowered by psycho-oncological assistance.
© 2018 S. Karger GmbH, Freiburg.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Communication barriers; Health literacy; Patient empowerment; Physician-patient relationship; Qualitative study; Second opinion

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30458451     DOI: 10.1159/000492390

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oncol Res Treat        ISSN: 2296-5270            Impact factor:   2.825


  5 in total

1.  Obtaining a second opinion is a neglected source of health care inequalities.

Authors:  Jochanan Benbassat
Journal:  Isr J Health Policy Res       Date:  2019-01-16

2.  Analysis of motives and patient satisfaction in oncological second opinions provided by a certified university breast and gynecological cancer center.

Authors:  Christian R Loehberg; Julia Meyer; Lothar Häberle; Carolin C Hack; Sebastian Jud; Alexander Hein; Marius Wunderle; Julius Emons; Paul Gass; Peter A Fasching; Sainab Egloffstein; Jessica Krebs; Yesim Erim; Matthias W Beckmann; Michael P Lux; Sonja Wasner
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2020-04-09       Impact factor: 2.344

3.  Novel Program Offering Remote, Asynchronous Subspecialist Input in Thoracic Oncology: Early Experience and Insights Gained During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Howard Jack West; Yuan Angela Tan; Afsaneh Barzi; Debra Wong; Robert Parsley; Todd Sachs
Journal:  JCO Oncol Pract       Date:  2021-12-03

4.  Communication about Prognosis during Patient-Initiated Second Opinion Consultations in Advanced Cancer Care: An Observational Qualitative Analysis.

Authors:  N C A van der Velden; M B A van der Kleij; V Lehmann; E M A Smets; J M L Stouthard; I Henselmans; M A Hillen
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-05-26       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Analysis of Oncological Second Opinions in a Certified University Breast and Gynecological Cancer Center Regarding Consensus between the First and Second Opinion and Conformity with the Guidelines.

Authors:  Michael P Lux; Sonja Wasner; Julia Meyer; Lothar Häberle; Carolin C Hack; Sebastian Jud; Alexander Hein; Marius Wunderle; Julius Emons; Paul Gass; Peter A Fasching; Sainab Egloffstein; Jessica Krebs; Yesim Erim; Matthias W Beckmann; Christian R Loehberg
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2020-08-05       Impact factor: 2.268

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.