Dataset Information

Cancer treatment decision-making among young adults with lung and colorectal cancer: a comparison with adults in middle age.

ABSTRACT: Our aim is to understand experiences with treatment decision-making among young adults with cancer.We studied patients with lung cancer or colorectal cancer in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium, a prospective cohort study. We identified 148 young adult patients aged 21-40 years who completed baseline interview questions about cancer treatment decision-making; each was propensity score matched to three middle adult patients aged 41-60 years, for a cohort of 592 patients. Patients were asked about decision-making preferences, family involvement in decision-making, and worries about treatment. An ordinal logistic regression model evaluated factors associated with more treatment worries.Young and middle-aged adults reported similar decision-making preferences (p?=?0.80) and roles relative to physicians (p?=?0.36). Although family involvement was similar in the age groups (p?=?0.21), young adults were more likely to have dependent children in the home (60% younger versus 28% middle-aged adults, p?

SUBMITTER: Mack JW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4775442 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cancer treatment decision-making among young adults with lung and colorectal cancer: a comparison with adults in middle age.

Mack Jennifer W JW Cronin Angel A Fasciano Karen K Block Susan D SD Keating Nancy L NL

Psycho-oncology 20150902 9

<h4>Objective</h4>Our aim is to understand experiences with treatment decision-making among young adults with cancer.<h4>Methods</h4>We studied patients with lung cancer or colorectal cancer in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium, a prospective cohort study. We identified 148 young adult patients aged 21-40 years who completed baseline interview questions about cancer treatment decision-making; each was propensity score matched to three middle adult patients aged 41-60 ...[more]

PMID: 26335435

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Our study examined the use of decision-making styles, as identified by Scott and Bruce (1995) (i.e. differentiating between a rational, intuitive, dependent, avoidant and spontaneous decision-making style), within the context of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening participation. In the field of cancer screening, informed decision-making is considered important, which follows the Rational Decision model. Subsequently, gaining more insight into decision-making styles being used in real life, could improve support to people when making their screening decision. In addition, we examined whether the decision-making style that people used was associated with their experienced decisional conflict. METHODS:An online survey was carried out among a sample of first-time CRC screening invitees (1282 respondents, response rate 49%). We assessed people's decision-making styles, CRC screening participation, education level, self-reported health literacy, and decisional conflict, and examined the possible associations between them. RESULTS:In our study, people who had to decide about CRC screening scored high on using both a rational and intuitive decision-making style. Respondents scoring higher on using a spontaneous or dependent decision-making style were more likely to have participated in CRC screening, while respondents scoring higher on using an avoidant decision-making style were more likely not to have participated in CRC screening. However, differences were small. Generally, people in our study experienced low decisional conflict. CONCLUSION:Our eligible CRC screening population scored high on using both a rational and intuitive decision-making style. To optimise support to people, public education materials could be appealing more to the intuitive processes at hand. That being said, the current education materials aimed at informed/rational decision-making do not necessarily seem to create a problem, as people generally experienced low decisional conflict. Possible concerns regarding the use of a spontaneous, dependent or avoidant decision-making style could be that these styles might be contributing to less informed decisions. However, it is relevant to consider that the found differences are small and that any possible concern applies to a relatively small group of people.

Project description:BackgroundShared decision-making (SDM) is widely recommended and required by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid for patients considering lung cancer screening (LCS).ObjectiveWe examined clinicians' communication practices and perceived barriers of SDM for LCS at three medical centers with established screening programs.DesignMulticenter qualitative study of clinicians participating in LCS.ApproachWe performed semi-structured interviews, which were transcribed and analyzed using directed content analysis, guided by a theoretical model of patient-clinician communication.ParticipantsWe interviewed 24 clinicians including LCS coordinators (2), pulmonologists (3), and primary care providers (17), 4 of whom worked for the LCS program, a thoracic surgeon, and a radiologist.ResultsAll clinicians agreed with the goal of SDM, to ensure the screening decision was congruent with the patient's values. The depth and type of information presented by each clinician role varied considerably. LCS coordinators presented detailed information including numeric estimates of benefit and harm. Most PCPs explained the process more generally, focusing on logistics and the high rate of nodule detection. No clinician explicitly elicited values or communication preferences. Many PCPs tailored the conversation based on their implicit understanding of patients' values and preferences, gained from past experiences. PCPs reported that time, lack of detailed personal knowledge of LCS, and patient preferences were barriers to SDM. Many clinicians perceived that a significant proportion of patients were not interested in specific percentages and preferred to receive a clinician recommendation.ConclusionsOur results suggest that clinicians support the goal of SDM for LCS decisions but PCPs may not perform some of its elements. The lack of completion of some elements, such as PCPs' lack of in-depth information exchange, may reflect perceived patient preferences for communication. As LCS is implemented, further research is needed to support a personalized, patient-centered approach to produce better outcomes.

Dataset Information

Cancer treatment decision-making among young adults with lung and colorectal cancer: a comparison with adults in middle age.

Publications

Cancer treatment decision-making among young adults with lung and colorectal cancer: a comparison with adults in middle age.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets