Systemic Therapy Decision Making in Advanced Cancer: A Qualitative Analysis of Patient-Oncologist Encounters

Author:

Wasp Garrett T.12ORCID,Knutzen Kristin E.3ORCID,Murray Genevra F.4,Brody-Bizar Olivia C.5ORCID,Liu Matthew A.6ORCID,Pollak Kathryn I.7,Tulsky James A.89ORCID,Schenker Yael10ORCID,Barnato Amber E.21112ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Section of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH

2. Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH

3. Department of Behavioral, Social, and Health Education Sciences, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA

4. Department of General Internal Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA

5. Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

6. University of California San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, CA

7. Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC

8. Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA

9. Division of Palliative Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA

10. Palliative Research Center (PaRC), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA

11. The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH

12. Section of Palliative Care, Department of Medicine, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH

Abstract

PURPOSE: We sought to characterize patient-oncologist communication and decision making about continuing or limiting systemic therapy in encounters after an initial consultation, with a particular focus on whether and how oncologists foster shared decision making (SDM). METHODS: We performed content analysis of outpatient oncology encounters at two US National Cancer Institute–designated cancer centers audio recorded between November 2010 and September 2014. A multidisciplinary team used a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. We used a combination of random and purposive sampling. We restricted quantitative frequency counts to the coded random sample but included all sampled encounters in qualitative thematic analysis. RESULTS: Among 31 randomly sampled dyads with three encounters each, systemic therapy decision making was discussed in 90% (84 of 93) encounters. Thirty-four (37%) broached limiting therapy, which 27 (79%) framed as temporary, nine (26%) as completion of a standard regimen, and five (15%) as permanent discontinuation. Thematic analysis of these 93 encounters, plus five encounters purposively sampled for permanent discontinuation, found that (1) patients and oncologists framed continuing therapy as the default, (2) deficiencies in the SDM process (facilitating choice awareness, discussing options, and incorporating patient preferences) contributed to this default, and (3) oncologists use persuasion rather than deliberation when broaching discontinuation. CONCLUSION: In this study of outpatient encounters between patients with advanced cancer and their oncologists, when discussing systemic therapy, there exists a default to continue systemic therapy, and deficiencies in SDM contribute to this default.

Publisher

American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)

Subject

Oncology(nursing),Health Policy,Oncology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3