Effect of a multidisciplinary cancer conference for thoracic malignancies on patient care management.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 112-112
Author(s):  
Henner M. Schmidt ◽  
John M. Roberts ◽  
Artur M. Bodnar ◽  
Steven H. Kirtland ◽  
Sonia H. Kunz ◽  
...  

112 Background: Treatment of thoracic cancers frequently involve multiple subspecialties thus treatment decisions are typically best facilitated in multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTB). This approach should facilitate and improve treatment decision making, standardize staging and therapeutic decisions and improve outcomes. In this study we analyze the evolution in staging and treatment decision making associated with presentation at MTB. Methods: Retrospective review of all patients with lung or esophageal cancer presented at our weekly MTB from June 1, 2010 to September 30, 2012. All providers submitting patients to tumor board recorded their current treatment plan prior to presentation. The physician’s plan was then compared to the tumor board’s final recommendation. Changes made were graded according to degree of magnitude as minor, moderate or major change. Minor changes included changes in diagnostic imaging. Moderate changes involved modifications in the type of invasive staging or biopsy procedures. Major changes were defined as changes to final therapeutic plans such as surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation therapy. Results: 435 patients with esophageal or lung cancer were discussed in the MTB. 86 patients having no prior treatment plan available were excluded. In the remaining 347 patients there were 163 patients with esophageal cancer (47%) and 184 patients with lung cancer (53%). In the esophageal cancer patients a change to the physician’s prior treatment plan was recommended in 33 cases (21%). For lung cancer patients a change in the treatment plan was recommended in 50 cases (27%). Overall a recommendation for change in treatment occurred in 83 cases (24 %). Changes were major 13%, moderate 6% and minor 5%. Follow-up in 249 patients confirmed that MTB recommendations were followed in 97% of cases. Conclusions: MTB recommendations frequently differs from the physician’s primary treatment plan. MTB reviews have previously been documented to improve patient’s outcome. The study demonstrates that in one quarter of patients MTB recommendation will be different from the primary treatment plan. Complex cancer patients should be considered for presentation at MTB whenever feasible.

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. S201-S202
Author(s):  
E. Kranzler ◽  
E. Fortune ◽  
M. Miller ◽  
K. Clark ◽  
J. Ackourey ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 494-506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shih-Chuan Chen

Purpose This paper aims to investigate the effect of cancer patients’ information behaviour on their decision-making at the diagnosis and treatment stages of their cancer journey. Patients’ information sources and their decision-making approaches were analyzed. Design/methodology/approach Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 participants. Findings The cancer patients sought information from various sources in choosing a hospital, physician, treatment method, diet and alternative therapy. Physicians were the primary information source. The patients’ approaches to treatment decision-making were diverse. An informed approach was adopted by nine patients, a paternalistic approach by four and a shared decision-making approach by only two. Practical implications In practice, the findings may assist hospitals and medical professionals in fostering pertinent interactions with patients. Originality/value The findings can enhance researcher understanding regarding the effect of cancer patients’ information behaviour on their decision-making.


Author(s):  
Julie D. Johnson ◽  
Cleora S. Roberts ◽  
Charles E. Cox ◽  
Douglas S. Reintgen ◽  
Judi S. Levine ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
pp. 096973302094575
Author(s):  
Ni Gong ◽  
Qianqian Du ◽  
Hongyu Lou ◽  
Yiheng Zhang ◽  
Hengying Fang ◽  
...  

Background: Independent decision-making is one of the basic rights of patients. However, in clinical practice, most older cancer patients’ treatment decisions are made by family members. Objective: This study attempted to analyze the treatment decision-making process and formation mechanism for older cancer patients within the special cultural context of Chinese medical practice. Method: A qualitative study was conducted. With the sample saturation principle, data collected by in-depth interviews with 17 family members and 12 patients were subjected to thematic analysis. Ethical considerations: The study was approved by the ethics committees of Sun Yat-sen University. All participants provided verbal informed consent after being told their rights of confidentiality, anonymity, and voluntary participation. They had the right to refuse to answer questions and could withdraw at any time. Results: Three themes emerged: (1) complex process; (2) transformation of family decision-making power; and (3) individual compromise. Family members inevitably had different opinions during the long process of treatment decision-making for older cancer patients. The direction of this process could be regarded as an extension of the family power relationship. The patient usually compromised the decision to survive, which was made by family members. Conclusion: This study describes the treatment decision-making process of older cancer patients in the context of Chinese culture. The reasons underlying this process are related to the views on life and death and family values. An individual is a part of the family, which is often seen as the minimal interpersonal unit in Chinese society. It is significant that while emphasizing patient autonomy in the decision-making process, health professionals should also pay attention to the important roles of culture and family.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document