A cross-sectional analysis to characterise treatment decision making for advanced cancer at a tertiary treatment centre: Where can we improve the process?

Eur J Oncol Nurs

The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road, Withington, Manchester, M20 4BX, UK; Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK; School of Nursing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong.

Published: December 2024

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study focuses on shared decision making (SDM) in cancer treatment, emphasizing the importance of considering risks, benefits, and patient preferences to align care goals and reduce decision conflict.
  • Researchers analyzed 211 patients' experiences after consultations about advanced cancer treatments, using various scales to measure SDM, decision self-efficacy, and decision conflict, with findings showing generally high SDM and low decision conflict among participants.
  • Results indicated that female patients and those attending consultations alone were more likely to report lower SDM scores, suggesting a need for additional support in these groups to improve their involvement in decision-making processes.

Article Abstract

Purpose: In decisions relating to cancer treatment, the risks and benefits of treatment and the patient's preferences must be considered to ensure concordance with goals of care. Shared decision making (SDM) can facilitate these discussions and is associated with reduced decision conflict. This study aimed to characterise decision making for advanced cancer patients at a UK tertiary cancer centre and identify who may be at risk of suboptimal SDM and increased decision conflict.

Methods: Participants completed the SDM-Q-9, decision conflict and decision self-efficacy scale following a consultation where an advanced cancer treatment decision was made. Pearson's chi-square test identified patient characteristics associated with SDM-Q-9, decision self-efficacy and decision conflict score categories; odds ratios were calculated to determine which patients were at increased probability of experiencing suboptimal SDM, low decision self-efficacy or high decision conflict.

Results: Participant's (n = 211) scores indicated predominantly high SDM, high decision self-efficacy and low decision conflict. Patient gender and the presence of an informal caregiver in consultation were significantly associated with SDM-Q-9 score category (p > 0.05). Female patients (OR = 2.466, 95% CI: 1.223-4.974) and those attending consultations alone (OR = 0.440, 95% CI: 0.222-0.874) had greater odds of reporting lower SDM scores.

Conclusion: High SDM scores indicate either effective SDM behaviours or satisfaction with care biasing responses. Greater support to engage with SDM is required for female patients and those who attend alone in advanced cancer treatment decision consultations.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2024.102762DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

advanced cancer
16
decision conflict
16
decision self-efficacy
16
decision
15
treatment decision
12
decision making
12
cancer treatment
12
making advanced
8
sdm
8
suboptimal sdm
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!