Literature DB >> 3607572

An international survey of physician attitudes and practice in regard to revealing the diagnosis of cancer.

J C Holland, N Geary, A Marchini, S Tross.   

Abstract

In 1984, questionnaires were sent to members of the International Psycho-Oncology Society concerning the practice in their country with regard to revealing the diagnosis of cancer to patients, their opinion about the effect of their policy, and their impression of local trends and attitudes toward cancer. Data from 90 respondents from 20 countries revealed that use of the word "cancer" was often avoided in discussions with the patient. Words commonly substituted for cancer were those that implied a "swelling" (e.g., tumor, growth, lump), and "inflammation," or a pathophysiologic change (blood disease, precancerous, unclean tissue). Oncologists estimated that a low percentage (less than 40%) of their colleagues revealed the word cancer in Africa, France, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Panama, Portugal, and Spain. Oncologists from Austria, Denmark Finland, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland, estimated the percentage to be high (greater than 80%). However, in all countries, the majority of physicians tell the family the diagnosis. The majority (90%) reported a trend toward increased telling of the diagnosis, due to greater patient information and expectations, and increased physician openess in using the word cancer. Most (68%) felt that the overall effect of revealing the diagnosis was positive. While emotional distress was transiently greater when patients were told, there were positive effects concerning coping, compliance, tolerance of treatment, planning for future, communication with physicians and others, and improved prognosis. The transient negative effects were depression, anxiety, and anger. It is important to recognize that efforts to find the "correct" position about revealing or concealing cancer diagnosis must recognize that the language between doctor and patient is constrained by cultural norms. Communication is likely to be far less dependent upon the specific words used then upon the meaning that is conveyed by the doctor.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; International Psycho-Oncology Society; Professional Patient Relationship

Mesh:

Year:  1987        PMID: 3607572     DOI: 10.3109/07357908709018468

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Invest        ISSN: 0735-7907            Impact factor:   2.176


  42 in total

Review 1.  Management of primary breast cancer.

Authors:  A Melville; A Liberati; R Grilli; T Sheldon
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1996-12

2.  Exploring the role of self-management programmes in caring for people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds in Melbourne, Australia.

Authors:  Christine Walker; Amanda Weeks; Brian McAvoy; Elsa Demetriou
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 3.  Reluctance to disclose difficult diagnoses: a narrative review comparing communication by psychiatrists and oncologists.

Authors:  Alex J Mitchell
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 4.  Cultural aspects of communication in cancer care.

Authors:  Antonella Surbone
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2008-01-15       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 5.  Conceptualizing prognostic awareness in advanced cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Allison J Applebaum; Elissa A Kolva; Julia R Kulikowski; Jordana D Jacobs; Antonio DeRosa; Wendy G Lichtenthal; Megan E Olden; Barry Rosenfeld; William Breitbart
Journal:  J Health Psychol       Date:  2013-10-24

6.  Bad news and first impressions: patient and family caregiver accounts of learning the cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  Karen Sue Schaepe
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2011-07-23       Impact factor: 4.634

7.  Should cancer patients be informed about their diagnosis and prognosis? Future doctors and lawyers differ.

Authors:  Bernice S Elger; T W Harding
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 2.903

8.  Disclosure preferences regarding cancer diagnosis and prognosis: to tell or not to tell?

Authors:  H Miyata; M Takahashi; T Saito; H Tachimori; I Kai
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.903

9.  Information needs of cancer patients in west Scotland: cross sectional survey of patients' views.

Authors:  C Meredith; P Symonds; L Webster; D Lamont; E Pyper; C R Gillis; L Fallowfield
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-09-21

Review 10.  Cancer information disclosure in different cultural contexts.

Authors:  Kyriaki Mystakidou; Efi Parpa; Eleni Tsilila; Emmanuela Katsouda; Lambros Vlahos
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 3.603

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.