scholarly journals Shared decision making, physicians’ explanations, and treatment satisfaction: a cross-sectional survey of prostate cancer patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazuhiro Nakayama ◽  
Wakako Osaka ◽  
Nobuaki Matsubara ◽  
Tsutomu Takeuchi ◽  
Mayumi Toyoda ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Hormone therapy is one option for some types of prostate cancer. Shared decision making (SDM) is important in the decision making process, but SDM between prostate cancer patients receiving hormone therapy and physicians is not fully understood. This study tested hypotheses: “Patients’ perception of SDM is associated with treatment satisfaction, mediated by satisfaction with physicians’ explanations and perceived effective decision making” and “The amount of information provided to patients by physicians on diseases and treatment is associated with treatment satisfaction mediated by patients’ perceived SDM and satisfaction with physicians’ explanations.” Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted using an online panel via a private research company in Japan. The participants in this study were patients registered with the panel who had received or were currently receiving hormone therapy for prostate cancer and physicians registered with the panel who were treating patients with prostate cancer. Measures used in this study included a nine-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire, levels of satisfaction with physicians’ explanations and treatment satisfaction, and effective decision making for patients (feeling the choice is informed, value-based, likely to be implemented and expressing satisfaction with the choice), and a Shared Decision Making Questionnaire for Doctors. The hypotheses were examined using path analysis. Results In total, 124 patients and 150 physicians were included in the analyses. In keeping with our hypotheses, perceived SDM significantly correlated with the physicians’ explanations and perceived effective decision making for patients, and satisfaction with physicians’ explanations and perceived effective decision making for patients were both related to treatment satisfaction. Although the amount of information provided to patients was correlated with the perceived SDM, it was indirectly related to their satisfaction with physicians’ explanations. Conclusions When physicians encourage patients to be actively involved in making decisions about treatment through the SDM process while presenting a wide range of information at the start of hormone therapy, patients’ effective decision making and physicians’ explanations may be improved; consequently, the patients’ overall treatment satisfaction may be improved. Physicians who treat patients with prostate cancer may have underestimated the importance of SDM before starting hormone therapy, even greater extent than patients.

2020 ◽  
Vol 203 ◽  
pp. e817-e818
Author(s):  
Kerry Kilbridge ◽  
William Martin-Doyle* ◽  
Christopher Filson ◽  
Quoc-Dien Trinh ◽  
Sierra Williams ◽  
...  

2001 ◽  
Vol 19 (7) ◽  
pp. 684-691 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon P. Kim ◽  
Sara J. Knight ◽  
Cecilia Tomori ◽  
Kathleen M. Colella ◽  
Richard A. Schoor ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ying Wang ◽  
Jinna Zhang ◽  
Bo Hu ◽  
Jizhe Wang ◽  
Laixiang Zhang ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate and analyze the level of actual participation and perceived importance of shared decision-making on treatment and care of lung cancer patients, to compare their differences and to explore factors that influence them.Methods: A total of 290 lung cancer patients were collected from the department of oncology and thoracic surgery of a comprehensive medical center in Qingdao from October 2018 to December 2019. Participants completed a cross-sectional questionnaire to assess their actual participation and perceived importance in shared decision-making on treatment and care. Descriptive analysis and non-parametric tests were carried out to assess the status quo of patients' shared decision-making on treatment and care. Binary logistic regression analysis with a stepwise back-wards was applied to predict the factors that affected patients' participation in shared decision-making.Results: The results showed that patients with lung cancer had a low degree of participation in shared decision-making. There were significant differences between actual participation and perceived importance of shared decision-making on treatment and care. Education level, younger, gender, income, marital status, personality, the course of the disease (>6 months), and the Pathological TNM staging (Ⅲ) affected the patient's level of participation in shared decision-making.Conclusion: Actual participation in shared decision-making for the treatment and care of lung cancer patients was low and considered unimportant. We could train oncology nurses to use patient decision aids to help patients and families participate in shared decision-making based patients’ value, preferences and needs.


2001 ◽  
Vol os8 (2) ◽  
pp. 77-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen A Best ◽  
Raman Bedi

With the introduction of the Internet there has been a growth both in the quantity and accessibility of information to the public concerning health issues. This improved availability of information does not always lead to a more informed public since there is no quality control of information but it can lead to a public that takes a more active role in their own health and thus is involved in shared decision-making. In order to develop a more informed public in the future, systems for quality control of information have been addressed. These systems can range from the present state of uncontrolled information (no quality control) to full-centralised control (censored information). Between these extremes lie two, more appropriate, decentralised filtering approaches—'upstream filtering’ (where third parties set quality criteria and evaluate information) and ‘down-stream filtering’ (where data are rated, labelled and weighted according to consumers’ criteria). These systems of filtering are discussed along with recommendations for those using the Internet as a source of information. The paper also documents reliable sources of information for the public, highlights the current concepts of shared decision-making, and provides some guidelines for developing an effective decision-making strategy.


2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (14_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6086-6086
Author(s):  
A. Arseven ◽  
M. S. Wolf ◽  
E. A. Lyons ◽  
S. Pickard ◽  
R. M. Golub ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 85 (3) ◽  
pp. e251-e259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arwen H. Pieterse ◽  
Inge Henselmans ◽  
Hanneke C.J.M. de Haes ◽  
Caro C.E. Koning ◽  
Elisabeth D. Geijsen ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 181 (4S) ◽  
pp. 26-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
David F Penson ◽  
Steven B. Zeliadt ◽  
Carol M Moinpour ◽  
Ingrid J Hall ◽  
Judith L Smith ◽  
...  

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (14_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6086-6086
Author(s):  
A. Arseven ◽  
M. S. Wolf ◽  
E. A. Lyons ◽  
S. Pickard ◽  
R. M. Golub ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. A488
Author(s):  
SD Ramsey ◽  
SB Zeliadt ◽  
CM Moinpour ◽  
IJ Hall ◽  
JW Lee ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document