Natalia Cecon1, Marij A Hillen2, Holger Pfaff3, Antje Dresen3, Sophie E Groß3. 1. Institute of Medical Sociology, Health Services Research and Rehabilitation Science, Faculty of Human Sciences and Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Eupener Str. 129, D-50933, Cologne, Germany. Electronic address: natalia.cecon@uk-koeln.de. 2. Department of Medical Psychology, Academic Medical Center - University of Amsterdam, P.O. Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 3. Institute of Medical Sociology, Health Services Research and Rehabilitation Science, Faculty of Human Sciences and Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Eupener Str. 129, D-50933, Cologne, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine breast cancer patients' reasons to seek a second opinion (SO) and the underlying variables. To find out more about the outcome of the SO, the perceived helpfulness and the effect on the physician-patient relationship. METHODS: In 2017, 4626 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients from 86 hospitals in Germany completed a postoperative mail survey (response rate = 89.04%). Data from 419 SO-seeking patients was obtained and analyzed by conducting logistic regression and non-parametric group comparisons. RESULTS: Reasons to seek an SO were mostly unrelated to the physician-patient relationship. Reasons related to the physician-patient-relationship were associated with a lower education level. The SO mostly (72.2%) equaled the first opinion. A different treatment plan recommendation (25%) reportedly affected the patients' relationship with their primary physician. Patients who received a different diagnosis reported more fear of progression. Most patients found the SO helpful. CONCLUSION: The reasons to seek an SO are primarily unrelated to the physician-patient relationship. However, less educated patients seem to have different reasons to seek an SO. These reasons were reportedly associated with the physician-patient relationship. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Physicians may need to explicitly ascertain the patient's needs within the physician-patient communication to avoid inequalities based on patient education.
OBJECTIVE: To examine breast cancerpatients' reasons to seek a second opinion (SO) and the underlying variables. To find out more about the outcome of the SO, the perceived helpfulness and the effect on the physician-patient relationship. METHODS: In 2017, 4626 newly diagnosed breast cancerpatients from 86 hospitals in Germany completed a postoperative mail survey (response rate = 89.04%). Data from 419 SO-seeking patients was obtained and analyzed by conducting logistic regression and non-parametric group comparisons. RESULTS: Reasons to seek an SO were mostly unrelated to the physician-patient relationship. Reasons related to the physician-patient-relationship were associated with a lower education level. The SO mostly (72.2%) equaled the first opinion. A different treatment plan recommendation (25%) reportedly affected the patients' relationship with their primary physician. Patients who received a different diagnosis reported more fear of progression. Most patients found the SO helpful. CONCLUSION: The reasons to seek an SO are primarily unrelated to the physician-patient relationship. However, less educated patients seem to have different reasons to seek an SO. These reasons were reportedly associated with the physician-patient relationship. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Physicians may need to explicitly ascertain the patient's needs within the physician-patient communication to avoid inequalities based on patient education.
Authors: E Heeg; Y A Civil; M A Hillen; C H Smorenburg; L A E Woerdeman; E J Groen; H A O Winter-Warnars; M T F D Vrancken Peeters Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2019-10-11 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Eline de Heus; Vivian Engelen; Irene Dingemans; Carol Richel; Marga Schrieks; Jan Maarten van der Zwan; Marc G Besselink; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Carla M L van Herpen; Saskia F A Duijts Journal: Orphanet J Rare Dis Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 4.123
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
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