Lauren P Wallner1,2, Yun Li3, M Chandler McLeod3, Joan Gargaro1, Allison W Kurian4,5, Reshma Jagsi6,7, Archana Radhakrishnan1, Ann S Hamilton8, Kevin C Ward9, Sarah T Hawley1,10,11, Steven J Katz1,10. 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 Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California. 5. Department of Health Research and Policy, Stanford University, Stanford, California. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 7. Center for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 8. Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California. 9. Department of Epidemiology, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, Georgia. 10. Department of Health Management and Policy, University of Michigan, School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 11. Department of Health Behavior and Education, University of Michigan, School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Treatment decisions for patients with early-stage breast cancer often involve discussions with multiple oncology providers. However, the extent to which primary care providers (PCPs) are involved in initial treatment decisions remains unknown. METHODS: A stratified random sample of PCPs identified by newly diagnosed patients with early-stage breast cancer from the Georgia and Los Angeles Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries were surveyed (n = 517; a 61% response rate). PCPs were asked how frequently they discussed surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy options with patients; how comfortable they were with these discussions; whether they had the necessary knowledge to participate in decision making; and what their confidence was in their ability to help (on 5-item Likert-type scales). Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify PCP-reported attitudes associated with more PCP participation in each treatment decision. RESULTS: In this sample, 34% of PCPs reported that they discussed surgery, 23% discussed radiation, and 22% discussed chemotherapy options with their patients. Of those who reported more involvement in surgical decisions, 22% reported that they were not comfortable having a discussion, and 17% did not feel that they had the necessary knowledge to participate in treatment decision making. PCPs who positively appraised their ability to participate were more likely to participate in all 3 decisions (odds ratio [OR] for surgery, 6.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.16-8.68; OR for radiation, 8.37; 95% CI, 5.16-13.58; OR for chemotherapy, 6.56; 95% CI, 4.23-10.17). CONCLUSIONS: A third of PCPs reported participating in breast cancer treatment decisions, yet gaps in their knowledge about decision making and in their confidence in their ability to help exist. Efforts to increase PCPs' knowledge about breast cancer treatment options may be warranted.
BACKGROUND: Treatment decisions for patients with early-stage breast cancer often involve discussions with multiple oncology providers. However, the extent to which primary care providers (PCPs) are involved in initial treatment decisions remains unknown. METHODS: A stratified random sample of PCPs identified by newly diagnosed patients with early-stage breast cancer from the Georgia and Los Angeles Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries were surveyed (n = 517; a 61% response rate). PCPs were asked how frequently they discussed surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy options with patients; how comfortable they were with these discussions; whether they had the necessary knowledge to participate in decision making; and what their confidence was in their ability to help (on 5-item Likert-type scales). Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify PCP-reported attitudes associated with more PCP participation in each treatment decision. RESULTS: In this sample, 34% of PCPs reported that they discussed surgery, 23% discussed radiation, and 22% discussed chemotherapy options with their patients. Of those who reported more involvement in surgical decisions, 22% reported that they were not comfortable having a discussion, and 17% did not feel that they had the necessary knowledge to participate in treatment decision making. PCPs who positively appraised their ability to participate were more likely to participate in all 3 decisions (odds ratio [OR] for surgery, 6.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.16-8.68; OR for radiation, 8.37; 95% CI, 5.16-13.58; OR for chemotherapy, 6.56; 95% CI, 4.23-10.17). CONCLUSIONS: A third of PCPs reported participating in breast cancer treatment decisions, yet gaps in their knowledge about decision making and in their confidence in their ability to help exist. Efforts to increase PCPs' knowledge about breast cancer treatment options may be warranted.
Authors: Lauren P Wallner; Kathryn A Martinez; Yun Li; Reshma Jagsi; Nancy K Janz; Steven J Katz; Sarah T Hawley Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2016-12-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Carriene Roorda; Geertruida H de Bock; Christian Scholing; Klaas van der Meer; Marjolein Y Berger; Marlieke de Fouw; Annette J Berendsen Journal: Health Expect Date: 2014-03-25 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Lauren P Wallner; Paul Abrahamse; Jaspreet K Uppal; Christopher R Friese; Ann S Hamilton; Kevin C Ward; Steven J Katz; Sarah T Hawley Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-10-31 Impact factor: 50.717
Authors: Sarah T Hawley; Nancy K Janz; Kent A Griffith; Reshma Jagsi; Christopher R Friese; Allison W Kurian; Ann S Hamilton; Kevin C Ward; Monica Morrow; Lauren P Wallner; Steven J Katz Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2016-12-21 Impact factor: 4.624
Authors: Lauren P Wallner; Yun Li; M Chandler McLeod; Ann S Hamilton; Kevin C Ward; Christine M Veenstra; Lawrence C An; Nancy K Janz; Steven J Katz; Sarah T Hawley Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-06-22 Impact factor: 6.921
Authors: Archana Radhakrishnan; David Reyes-Gastelum; Brittany Gay; Sarah T Hawley; Ann S Hamilton; Kevin C Ward; Lauren P Wallner; Megan R Haymart Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2020-09-01 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Archana Radhakrishnan; Lauren P Wallner; Ted A Skolarus; Vahakn B Shahinian; Paul H Abrahamse; Michael D Fetters; Sarah T Hawley Journal: Urol Pract Date: 2021-04-22
Authors: Archana Radhakrishnan; David Reyes-Gastelum; Paul Abrahamse; Brittany Gay; Sarah T Hawley; Lauren P Wallner; Debbie W Chen; Ann S Hamilton; Kevin C Ward; Megan R Haymart Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2022-02-17 Impact factor: 6.134
Authors: Zhongru Cao; Yuting Li; Li Wang; Yanhua Liu; Lei Zhang; Li Ma; Yunfei An; Yibo Wang; Huiyan Li Journal: Iran J Public Health Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 1.429
Authors: Srikanth Umakanthan; Maryann Bukelo; Vijay Kumar Chattu; Ravi Maharaj; Nicole N Khan; Katherine Keane; Nick Khadoo; Aliyyah Khan; Amaara Khan; Ronny Kong; Selina Korkmaz; Anvesh Kovoor Journal: J Family Med Prim Care Date: 2021-12-27
Authors: Archana Radhakrishnan; Lauren P Wallner; Ted A Skolarus; Paul H Abrahamse; Adam S Kollipara; Steven J Katz; Sarah T Hawley Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-10-29 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Lauren P Wallner; Paul Abrahamse; Joan G Gargaro; Archana Radhakrishnan; Megan A Mullins; Lawrence C An; Jennifer J Griggs; Anne F Schott; John Z Ayanian; Anne E Sales; Steven Katz; Sarah T Hawley Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2021-07-07 Impact factor: 4.624
Authors: K Decker; R Moineddin; C Kendell; R Urquhart; N Biswanger; P Groome; M L McBride; M Winget; M Whitehead; E Grunfeld Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2019-11-21 Impact factor: 2.497