Analysis of motives and patient satisfaction in oncological second opinions provided by a certified university breast and gynecological cancer center.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Loehberg CR
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7181428 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Analysis of motives and patient satisfaction in oncological second opinions provided by a certified university breast and gynecological cancer center.
Loehberg Christian R CR Meyer Julia J Häberle Lothar L Hack Carolin C CC Jud Sebastian S Hein Alexander A Wunderle Marius M Emons Julius J Gass Paul P Fasching Peter A PA Egloffstein Sainab S Krebs Jessica J Erim Yesim Y Beckmann Matthias W MW Lux Michael P MP Wasner Sonja S
Archives of gynecology and obstetrics 20200409 5
<h4>Purpose</h4>Second opinions in oncology are becoming increasingly important in an era of more complex treatments and a growing demand for information by patients. Therefore, we analyzed their effects and influencing factors like patients' motives, subjective extent of information and satisfaction with communications.<h4>Methods</h4>This prospective study evaluated second opinions for patients with breast cancer or gynecological malignancy. The patients received a questionnaire before and two ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundSecond medical opinions have become commonplace and even mandatory in some health-care systems, as variations in diagnosis, treatment or prognosis may emerge among physicians.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether physicians' judgment is affected by another medical opinion given to a patient.DesignOrthopedic surgeons and neurologists filled out questionnaires presenting eight hypothetical clinical scenarios with suggested treatments. One group of physicians (in each specialty) was told what the other physician's opinion was (study group), and the other group was not told what it was (control group).ParticipantsA convenience sample of 332 physicians in Israel: 172 orthopedic surgeons (45.9% of their population) and 160 neurologists (64.0% of their population).MeasurementsScoring was by choice of less or more interventional treatment in the scenarios. We used ?(2) tests and repeated measures ANOVA to compare these scores between the two groups. We also fitted a cumulative ordinal regression to account for the dependence within each physician's responses.ResultsOrthopedic surgeons in the study group chose a more interventionist treatment when the other physician suggested an intervention than those in the control group [F (1, 170)?=4.6, p=0.03; OR=1.437, 95% CI 1.115-1.852]. Evaluating this effect separately in each scenario showed that in four out of the eight scenarios, they chose a more interventional treatment when the other physician suggested an intervention (scenario 1, p=0.039; scenario 2, p<0.001; scenario 3, p=0.033; scenario 6, p<0.001). These effects were insignificant among the neurologists [F (1,158)?=0.44, p=0.51; OR=1.087, 95% CI 0.811-1.458]. In both specialties there were no differences in responses by level of clinical experience [orthopedic surgeons: F (2, 166)?=0.752, p=0.473; neurologists: F (2,154)?=1.951, p=0.146].ConclusionsThe exploratory survey showed that in some cases physicians' judgments may be affected by other physicians' opinions, but unaffected in other cases. Weighing previous opinions may yield a more informed clinical decision, yet physicians may be unintentionally influenced by previous opinions. Second opinion has the potential to improve the clinical decision-making processes, and mechanisms are needed to reconcile discrepant opinions.
| S-EPMC3445697 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Physical activity (PA) is an important habit for overall health and quality of life, but it tends to recede as young adults transition from high school into university. The present study sought to understand, in the case of university students that still practice PA, their motives for PA and their relationships with psychological need satisfaction (PNS) and characteristics of practice regularity (frequency, duration, team, competitive, coach, league, federation, and type of day of the week for PA). Participants were 423 university students who reported to practice PA (203 identified as men, 191 as women, 29 did not report gender), with ages ranging from 18 to 30 years old (M = 19.91, SD = 1.97). Measures assessing motives for PA, PNS, and PA characteristics were completed. Hierarchical, followed by iterative, cluster analysis was used and four naturally occurring groupings of university students were identified based on their motives for PA: one extrinsic-motives cluster (with both extrinsic motives-fitness and appearance-above the mean), one all-motives cluster (with all five motives above the mean), one intrinsic-motives cluster (with all three intrinsic motives-enjoyment, competence, social-above the mean), and one low-motives cluster (with all motives below the mean). Groupings were compared in terms of the characteristics of their practice regularity (frequency, duration, competition, team, coach, league, federation, type of day of the week used for PA) and their levels of PNS (of the needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness in PA). Significant between-group differences were observed in the duration of single principal PA sessions, minutes per week practicing main PA, total PA minutes per week, and type of day of the week used for PA. The number of days per week devoted to the principal PA and the number of total PAs practiced were similar across all four clusters. With regard to between-group differences in psychological need satisfaction in PA by cluster, these analyses showed the existence of four clearly distinguishable naturally occurring groupings based on motives for PA, which gives researchers and practitioners the possibility to analyze and implement tailored interventions aimed at promoting PA among university students.
| S-EPMC7835284 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate user satisfaction among practices receiving services provided by the Arizona Regional Extension Center (REC).MethodsThis program evaluation utilized a mixed-methods approach including: 1) a mail-based survey targeting all 489 REC member practices; and 2) a series of telephone-based focus groups using a convenience sample of rural and urban REC member practices. Targeted respondents were key contacts who handle interactions with the REC at each practice. Program evaluators at the University of Arizona and experts at Arizona Health-e Connection (AzHeC) created the questionnaires, focus group script, participant invitation and follow up documents via a collaborative process. Regression and Rasch analyses were used to identify key factors associated with satisfaction with REC and to assess questionnaire validity, respectively.ResultsResponses from both the focus groups and survey revealed that most of the respondents were satisfied with the current services, despite the presence of satisfaction gaps between practices of various characteristics: respondents that were clinicians, practices using web-based electronic health record systems (EHRs), and practices that had achieved Stage 1 Meaningful Use had a higher level of satisfaction compared with their respective counterparts. Focus group participants provided suggestions for improving REC services.ConclusionsMost respondents reported being satisfied with REC services. Specialized representatives may be needed for practices at different stages of Meaningful Use to further improve REC satisfaction in order to facilitate more efficient adoption of EHRs.
| S-EPMC3974245 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:To date, the outcomes of second opinions in internal medicine in terms of diagnostic yield and patient benefit have not been studied extensively. This retrospective study explores the outcomes of second opinions at a general internal medicine outpatient clinic in an academic hospital. METHODS:A register of all patients referred to the general internal medicine outpatient clinic of the University Medical Center in Utrecht for a second opinion, was kept. All 173 patients referred between June 2016 and August 2018 were selected. Case records were analyzed for patient characteristics, referring doctor, chief complaint, performed investigations, follow-up time and, established diagnosis, additional diagnoses, initiated treatment and reported benefit. RESULTS:A new diagnosis was established in 13% of all patients. A new treatment was initiated in 56% of all patients: 91% and 51% of patients with and without a new diagnosis respectively (p < 0.001). Of all patients, 19% received an effective treatment (52% vs 14% of patients with vs without a new diagnosis, p < 0.001). Regardless of treatment, resolution or improvement of the chief complaint was achieved in 28% of all patients (52% vs 25% of patients with vs without a new diagnosis, p = 0.006). Regarding diagnostics, 23-33% of radiology, endoscopy and pathology tests performed during second opinion were a repetition of previously conducted investigations. Conventional blood tests were a repetition in 89% of cases. Median time to diagnosis was 64 days (IQR: 25-128 days) and median time to discharge was 75 days (IQR: 31-144 days). CONCLUSION:Second opinions in general internal medicine lead to the establishment of a new diagnosis in a small proportion of patients. However, the value of second opinions may not be limited to the establishment of diagnoses, as new treatments are often initiated and overall patients report improved symptomatology in 28% of cases.
| S-EPMC7347190 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough patient-driven second opinions are increasingly sought in oncology, the desirability of this trend remains unknown. Therefore, this systematic review assesses evidence on the motivation for and frequency of requests for second opinions and examines how they evolve and their consequences for oncological practice.Materials and methodsRelevant databases were sought using the terms "cancer," "second opinion," and "self-initiated." Included were peer-reviewed articles that reported on patient-initiated second opinions within oncology. Selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed and discussed by two researchers.ResultsOf the 25 included studies, the methodological designs were qualitative (n?=?4), mixed (n?=?1), or quantitative (n?=?20). Study quality was rated high for 10 studies, moderate for eight, and low for seven studies. Reported rates of second opinion seeking ranged from 1%-88%. Higher education was most consistently related to seeking a second opinion. Patients' primary motivations were a perceived need for certainty or confirmation, a lack of trust, dissatisfaction with communication, and/or a need for more (personalized) information. Reported rates of diagnostic or therapeutic discrepancies between the first and second opinions ranged from 2%-51%.DiscussionAdditional studies are required to further examine the medical, practical, and psychological consequences of second opinions for patients and oncologists. Future studies could compare the potential advantages and disadvantages of second opinion seeking, and might offer guidance to patients and physicians to better facilitate the second opinion process. Some practical recommendations are provided for oncologists to optimally discuss and conduct second opinions with their patients. The Oncologist 2017;22:1197-1211 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Although cancer patients increasingly seek a second opinion, the benefits of this process remain unclear. Results of this systematic review suggest that the available studies on this topic are highly variable in both methodology and quality. Moreover, reported rates for a second opinion (1%-88%) as well as for disagreement between the first and second opinion (2%-51%) range widely. The primary motivations of patients are a need for certainty, lack of trust, dissatisfaction with communication, and/or a need for more (personalized) information. Additional research should evaluate how unnecessary second opinions might be avoided. Practical suggestions are provided for oncologists to optimize second opinions.
| S-EPMC5634767 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivePrediction of disease phenotypes and their outcomes is a difficult task. In practice, patients routinely seek second opinions from multiple clinical experts for complex disease diagnosis. Our objective is to mimic such a practice of seeking second opinions by training 2 agents with different focuses: the primary agent studies the most recent visit of the patient to learn the current health status, and then the second-opinion agent considers the entire patient history to obtain a more global view.Materials and methodsOur approach Dr. Agent augments recurrent neural networks with 2 policy gradient agents. Moreover, Dr. Agent is customized with various patient demographics information and learns a dynamic skip connection to focus on the relevant information over time. We trained Dr. Agent to perform 4 clinical prediction tasks on the publicly available MIMIC-III (Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care) database: (1) in-hospital mortality prediction, (2) acute care phenotype classification, (3) physiologic decompensation prediction, and (4) forecasting length of stay. We compared the performance of Dr. Agent against 4 baseline clinical predictive models.ResultsDr. Agent outperforms baseline clinical prediction models across all 4 tasks in terms of all metrics. Compared with the best baseline model, Dr. Agent achieves up to 15% higher area under the precision-recall curve on different tasks.ConclusionsDr. Agent can comprehensively model the long-term dependencies of patients' health status while considering patients' demographics using 2 agents, and therefore achieves better prediction performance on different clinical prediction tasks.
| S-EPMC7647368 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We use a Master Regular-based precision cancer medicine framework to predict drug sensitivity to tumors.
2022-09-06 | GSE212377 | GEO
Project description:ImportanceRadiotherapy is a common treatment for rectal cancer, yet the risk of second gynecological malignant neoplasms (SGMNs) in patients with rectal cancer undergoing radiotherapy have not been adequately studied.ObjectiveTo investigate the association between radiotherapy and the risk of individual types of SGMN in patients with rectal cancer and assess survival outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsA large population-based cohort study was designed to identify the risk of SGMNs in patients with rectal cancer diagnosed from January 1973 to December 2015. The statistical analysis was conducted from September 2019 to April 2020. The study was based on the 9 cancer registries of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. A total of 20 142 female patients with rectal cancer in localized and regional stage were included.ExposureReceipt of neoadjuvant radiotherapy for rectal cancer.Main outcomes and measuresThe development of an SGMN defined as any type of GMN occurring more than 5 years after the diagnosis of rectal cancer. The cumulative incidence of SGMNs was estimated by Fine-Gray competing risk regression. Poisson regression was used to evaluate the radiotherapy-associated risk for SGMNs in patients undergoing radiotherapy vs patients not undergoing radiotherapy. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to assess the survival outcomes of patients with SGMNs.ResultsOf 20 142 patients, 16 802 patients (83.4%) were White and the median age was 65 years (interquartile range, 54-74 years). A total of 5310 (34.3%) patients were treated with surgery and radiotherapy, and 14 832 (65.7%) patients were treated with surgery alone. The cumulative incidence of SGMNs during 30 years of follow-up was 4.53% among patients who received radiotherapy and 1.53% among patients who did not. In competing risk regression analysis, undergoing radiotherapy was associated with a higher risk of developing cancer of the uterine corpus (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.06; 95% CI, 2.14-4.37; P < .001) and ovarian cancer (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.22-3.56; P = .007) compared with those who did not receive radiotherapy. The dynamic radiotherapy-associated risks (RR) for cancer of the uterine corpus significantly increased with increasing age at rectal cancer diagnosis (aged 20-49 years: adjusted RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.35-1.79; P = .57; aged 50-69 years: adjusted RR, 3.74; 95% CI, 2.63-5.32; P < .001; aged ≥70 years: adjusted RR, 5.13; 95% CI, 2.64-9.97; P < .001) and decreased with increasing latency since rectal cancer diagnosis (60-119 months: adjusted RR, 3.22; 95% CI, 2.12-4.87; P < .001; 120-239 months: adjusted RR, 2.72; 95% CI, 1.75-4.24; P < .001; 240-360 months: adjusted RR, 1.95; 95% CI, 0.67-5.66; P = .22), but the dynamic RR for ovarian cancer increased with increasing latency since rectal cancer diagnosis (60-119 months: adjusted RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.26-1.89; P = .48; 120-239 months: adjusted RR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.09-4.70; P = .03; 240-360 months: adjusted RR, 11.84; 95% CI, 2.18-64.33; P = .004). The 10-year overall survival among patients with radiotherapy-associated cancer of the uterine corpus was significantly lower than that among matched patients with primary cancer of the uterine corpus (21.5% vs 33.6%; P = .01).Conclusions and relevanceRadiotherapy for rectal cancer was associated with an increased risk of cancer of the uterine corpus and ovarian cancer. Special attention should be paid to reduce radiotherapy-associated SGMNs and improve their prognosis.
| S-EPMC7794669 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:During university, students face some potentially serious health risks, and their lifestyle can have a direct effect on health and health behaviors later in life. Concurrently, university students are digital natives having easy access to the internet and new technologies. Digital health interventions offer promising new opportunities for health promotion, disease prevention, and care in this specific population. The description of the current use of and opinions on digital health among university students can inform future digital health strategies and interventions within university settings. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this exploratory study was to report on university students' use and opinions regarding information and communication technologies for health and well-being, taking into account sociodemographic and self-rated general and mental health correlates. METHODS:This field survey was conducted from March to April 2017. An informed consent form and a paper questionnaire were given to students aged 18 to 24 years in 4 university campuses in Bordeaux, France. The survey was formulated in 3 sections: (1) sociodemographic characteristics and self-rated general and mental health, (2) information about the use of digital health, and (3) opinions about digital health. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and tests of independence. RESULTS:A total of 59.8% (303/507 females) students completed the questionnaire. Concerning digital health use, 34.9% (174/498) had at least 1 health app mostly for physical activity (49.4%, 86/174) and general health monitoring (41.4%, 72/174,), but only 3.9% (20/507) of students had a wearable device. Almost all (94.8%, 450/476) had searched for Web-based health-related information at least once in the last 12 months. The most sought health-related topics were nutrition (68.1%, 324/476); pain and illnesses (64.5%, 307/476); and stress, anxiety, or depression (51.1%, 243/476). Although Wikipedia (79.7%, 357/448) and general health websites (349/448, 77.9%) were the most consulted sources, students considered institutional or official websites as the most credible sources (309/335, 92.2%). There were significant differences in digital health use by gender, field, and year of study. No statistically significant association was found between digital health use and self-rated general and mental health status. Concerning opinions on digital health, although 94.1% (475/505) of students estimated that today's digital health cannot replace traditional health services and medical consultations, 44.6% (207/464) of students declared that this could be possible in the future, provided that digital health interventions are promoted by institutional or official entities. CONCLUSIONS:University students are largely using the internet for health information seeking, but using less mobile health apps and very few wearable devices. Our data suggest that digital health has the potential for improving health and well-being at the university, especially if digital health interventions take into account students' profiles, interests, and needs.
| S-EPMC5876492 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The long-time goal is to understand what decision-making process and patient characteristics factor into a patient deciding to stay with their initial physician versus seeking treatment with a second opinion.
| 2394118 | ecrin-mdr-crc