Cancer patients’ trust as a motivator to seek a second opinion and its effects on trust

5569 Background: The primary aim of this study was to investigate information needs and preferences among patients with ovarian cancer, focusing especially on doctor-patient relationships and therapy management in different European countries. Methods: A questionnaire was developed based on the experiences of expression II, a German survey, and then provided to primary and recurrent ovarian cancer patients via internet (online) or as a print-version in 8 countries in Europe (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Rumania, Spain). In the first part basic data (age, tumour status, therapy) were requested from the patient. In the second part, most of the questions tried to evaluate the expectations and needs concerning their therapy management and doctor-patient communication. Results: From December 2009 to October 2012, a total of 1743 patients with ovarian cancer from 8 European countries participated in the survey.The median age was 58 years (range 16-89). Nearly all patients (96,3%) had a primary surgery and a first-line chemotherapy (91,5%). About 423 (25,7%) patients were included in another clinical trial.Most of the patients in each country were pleased with the completeness and understandability of the explanations about the therapies from their doctors. About 68% of patients would be interested in having the opportunity to have a second opinion. The three most important aspects, which were proposed by patients to improve therapy against ovarian cancer were: “the therapy should not induce alopecia” (42%), “there must be more done to counter fatigue” (34%), and “the therapy should be more effective” (29%). Conclusions: This study underlines the high need of ovarian cancer patients to discuss all details concerning treatment options and clinical management with only minor difference between the countries. Patients also need more information about side effects of cancer therapies and second opinion opportunities. Besides effectiveness of therapy, alopecia and fatigue are the most important side effects bothering the patients.

Download Full-text

Why do newly diagnosed breast cancer patients seek a second opinion? – Second opinion seeking and its association with the physician-patient relationship

Patient Education and Counseling ◽

10.1016/j.pec.2018.12.017 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 102 (5) ◽

pp. 998-1004 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Natalia Cecon ◽

Marij A. Hillen ◽

Holger Pfaff ◽

Antje Dresen ◽

Sophie E. Groß

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Second Opinion ◽

Patient Relationship ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Breast Cancer Patients ◽

Physician Patient Relationship ◽

Opinion Seeking ◽

Physician Patient

Download Full-text

Is there evidence for a better health care for cancer patients after a second opinion? A systematic review

Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1007/s00432-015-2099-7 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 142 (7) ◽

pp. 1521-1528 ◽

Cited By ~ 23

Author(s):

Dana Ruetters ◽

Christian Keinki ◽

Sarah Schroth ◽

Patrick Liebl ◽

Jutta Huebner

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Health Care ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Second Opinion

Download Full-text

Second opinion in medical encounters − A study among breast cancer patients

Patient Education and Counseling ◽

10.1016/j.pec.2017.05.038 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 100 (11) ◽

pp. 1990-1995 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Sophie E. Groß ◽

Marij A. Hillen ◽

Holger Pfaff ◽

Nadine Scholten

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Second Opinion ◽

Breast Cancer Patients

Download Full-text

Better resource utilization and quality of care for ovarian cancer patients using internet-based second opinion pathology.

10.26226/morressier.5770e29dd462b80290b4bf00 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Stefan Kommoss

Keyword(s):

Ovarian Cancer ◽

Quality Of Care ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Resource Utilization ◽

Second Opinion

Download Full-text

Impact of international collaboration utilizing E-consult and E-tumor board in the multidisciplinary management of cancer patients: A study from Mayo Clinic Care Network (MCCN) members.

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2019.37.15_suppl.e18261 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽

pp. e18261-e18261

Author(s):

Faraz A. Khan ◽

Saima Maqbool ◽

Maroun Elkhoury ◽

Thomas Matthew Habermann ◽

Tariq Dufan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Patient Care ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

International Collaboration ◽

Mayo Clinic ◽

Second Opinion ◽

Tumor Board ◽

American Hospital ◽

Site Specific ◽

Clinical Recommendations ◽

Multidisciplinary Tumor Board

e18261 Background: Multidisciplinary tumor board meetings have shown to improve quality and outcome in the care of cancer patients. Many tertiary centers conduct site specific tumor board meetings but not all the centers especially community oncology and international centers have the manpower capacity to hold site specific meetings, the overall impact of tumor boards on patients care may vary based on its structure and composition. We propose that institutional collaboration in the comprehensive care of cancer patients utilizing E-consult and E tumor board may help to improve patient care. Methods: Retrospective data of 134 patient cases seen at the American hospital Dubai between 2016-2018 was analyzed. Cases that were reviewed at the American Hospital multidisciplinary tumor board meeting (AHD-MDT) and also referred for second opinion utilizing Mayo e-consult/e-tumor board service were analyzed using electronic health record, AHD-MDT meeting minutes and reports of Mayo e-consult/e-tumor board. 3 major areas of case assessment for review were selected 1. Pathology . 2. Medical imaging. 3. Clinical recommendations. Variation in assessment and recommendations between AHD- MDT and Mayo Clinic were compared. Results: A total of 1018 cases were reviewed in the AHD-MDT between 2016 and 2018. 136 out of the 1018(13%) cases were referred for second opinion utilizing Mayo E-Consult or E-tumor board service. 117 cases were included in the analysis as there was missing data in 4 patients, 9 were duplicate and 4 were cancelled and 7 cases were not reviewed at AHD-MDT. In 78 cases pathology was reviewed at Mayo but 4 (5%) were not reviewed at AHD. In 74 (95%) cases, pathology was reviewed both at AHD and Mayo. There was change (Ch) in 2 (3%), 7(9%)updated(Ud) and no change(Ch) in 65 cases(88%). 97 cases of imaging had change(Ch) in 1 case (1%). 101 cases of e-consult/e-tumor board were assessed for clinical recommendations. There was change(Ch) in 3(3%), 2/3 cases had a change in plan due to change in the pathology. In 35(35%) the plan was updated (Ud) and 7 out of 35(20%) were due to updated(Ud) pathology. Conclusions: Our data indicates that international collaboration as part of MCCN has resulted in significant improvement in the patient care. In a select group of challenging cases, 35% had an improvement in the final treatment plan after utilization of e-consult/e-tumor board service.

Download Full-text