Dataset Information

Satisfaction of breast cancer patients regarding surgery and radiation therapy: A survey in Japan.

ABSTRACT: To evaluate patient satisfaction in Japan and factors, including timing factors, cost, and specific medical practices derived from Western influence (shared decision-making and second opinion), which might affect satisfaction.All patients who presented to 1 large Japanese department of radiation oncology for postoperative radiation therapy for breast cancer from September 2010 to November 2013 were included in this study. The questionnaire was distributed to patients after the radiation oncologist consultation, and patients were asked to complete it anonymously by the end of treatment. We measured patient satisfaction with overall treatment and for each treatment separately (surgery, radiation oncology). We further inquired regarding facts that could affect satisfaction, including time from diagnosis to treatment start, waiting time in waiting room for consultation, average length of consultations, out-of-pocket cost for breast cancer treatment, patients' opinion of the cost, level of inclusion of the patient in decision-making, level of the patient sharing her feelings with her physician, and whether the patients had asked for second opinion.Of 364 patients surveyed, 214 (58.5%) responded. Overall satisfaction and satisfaction with surgeon and with radiation oncologist were 95.7%, 98.5%, and 98.2%, respectively. Factors correlated with satisfaction were waiting time for the consult in the waiting room, treatment cost, and perceived degree of sharing feelings with physicians. Overall, 27 patients (12.6%) reported having asked for second opinions. Of those who did not seek a second opinion, most (173) indicated that they did not think it was necessary.In a large, typical Japanese radiation oncology practice, breast cancer patients' satisfaction correlated with waiting time, cost, and the rate with which the patient shared her feelings with her physician. This illuminates targets for quality improvement within the Japanese system and provides interesting cross-cultural comparative data for other countries in which the context of care may differ.

SUBMITTER: Saito AI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5514224 | biostudies-other | 2016 Oct-Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The purpose of this study was to clarify the opinions of radiation oncologists in Japan regarding treatment for lung cancer complicated with interstitial lung disease (ILD) by a questionnaire survey, and the risk of acute exacerbation (AE) after radiotherapy. Questionnaires were sent to all of the facilities in which radiation therapy is performed for lung cancer in Japan by using the mailing list of the Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology (JASTRO). The questionnaire survey was conducted to clarify who judges the existence of ILD, the indications for radiation therapy in cases of ILD-combined lung cancer, and the ratio of ILD-combined lung cancer in lung cancer patients treated with radiation therapy. Patients with ILD-combined lung cancer who received radiotherapy during the period from April 2014 to March 2015 were retrospectively analysed. Any cases of AE without any other obvious cause were included. ILD confirmation was performed by central radiologists using computed tomography images. A total of 47 facilities responded to the questionnaire. Radiation therapy was an option in cases of ILD-combined lung cancer in 39 (83%) of the facilities. The indication for radiation therapy was based on image findings in 35 (90%) of the 39 facilities in which radiation therapy was acceptable or was a choice in some cases of ILD. The final indication was based on the opinion of the pulmonologist in 29 (74%) of those 39 facilities. In fiscal year 2014, a total of 2128 patients in 38 facilities received chest irradiation. Seventy-eight (3.7%) of those 2128 patients had ILD-combined lung cancer. Sixty-seven patients were included in patient analysis. AE occurred in 5 patients (7.5%), and one of those 5 patients (20.0%) died from radiation-induced AE. The median period from radiotherapy to AE was 4 months (range, 2-7 months). The following four independent risk factors for AE were identified in univariate analysis: non-advanced age (<75 years), increased C-reactive protein level (?0.3 mg/dl), adjuvant chemotherapy and ? Grade 2 radiation pneumonitis. Radiotherapy was an option for lung cancer even in cases with ILD in 83% (39/47) of the facilities in Japan. Seventy-eight (3.7%) of 2128 patients who received radiation therapy for lung cancer had ILD. Radiotherapy for ILD-combined lung cancer may induce AE at a substantial rate and AE can be life-threatening. Minimizing the risk of radiation pneumonitis might enable the risk of AE to be reduced.

Project description:AimThe aim of the study was to assess the safety of surgery for breast cancer in patients with antithrombotic therapy (ATT), including antiplatelet therapy (APT) and anticoagulation therapy (ACT) for thromboembolic risks.MethodsOne hundred ninety-three consecutive patients receiving breast surgery for breast cancer at our institution between 2010 and 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Among them, ATT was regularly used in 50 patients (25.9%). Our perioperative management included maintenance of preoperative aspirin monotherapy for APT and bridging heparin for ACT in patients at high thromboembolic risks and early postoperative reinstitution in all ATT cases. The outcome variables of patients with ATT (ATT group) were compared to those of patients without ATT (non-ATT group), and the significant risk factors for postoperative complications were determined by multivariate analysis.ResultsThis series included 127 mastectomy and 66 breast-conserving surgery. ATT group showed significantly high frequency of history of cerebral infarction and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In the ATT group, 32 patients (16.6%) were categorized as high risk for thromboembolism, but there was neither thromboembolic event nor perioperative death in the whole cohort. Surgical blood loss and rates of intraoperative transfusion were identical between the groups. Whereas overall postoperative bleeding complication was more frequently observed in the ATT group compared to the non-ATT group (12.0% vs. 3.5%, p=0.360) in univariate analyses, multivariate analysis showed that neither ATT nor preoperative aspirin continuation affected postoperative bleeding complications.ConclusionEven in patients undergoing ATT, surgery for breast cancer is safely performed without any increase in blood loss or postoperative bleeding, and no thromboembolism was experienced in the series. Our perioperative management of ATT patients is valid during breast surgery, although this patient population is still challenging and should be rigorously managed.

Project description:BackgroundPenile prosthesis surgery (PPS) is a commonly used treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED), either as first-line therapy or in cases refractory to other treatment options. In patients with a urologic malignancy such as prostate cancer, surgical interventions like radical prostatectomy (RP) as well as non-surgical treatments such as radiation therapy can all induce ED. PPS as a treatment for ED has high satisfaction rates in the general population. Our aim was to compare sexual satisfaction in patients with prosthesis implantation for ED following RP versus ED following radiation therapy for prostate cancer.MethodsA retrospective chart review from our institutional database was conducted to identify patients who underwent PPS at our institution from 2011 to 2021. Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction (EDITS) questionnaire data at least 6 months from implant operative date available was required for inclusion. Eligible patients were placed in one of two groups depending on etiology of ED-following RP or prostate cancer radiation therapy. To prevent crossover confounding; patients with history of pelvic radiation were excluded from the RP group and patients with history of RP were excluded from the radiation group. Data were obtained from 51 patients in the RP group and 32 patients in the radiation therapy group. Mean EDITS scores and additional survey questions were compared between the radiation and RP groups.ResultsThere was a significant difference in mean survey responses for 8 of the 11 questions in the EDITS questionnaire between the RP group and the radiation group. Additional survey questions administered also found RP patients reported significantly higher rate of satisfaction with size of penis post-operatively versus the radiation group.ConclusionsThese preliminary findings, while requiring large-scale follow-up, suggest that there is greater sexual satisfaction and penile prosthesis device satisfaction in patients undergoing IPP placement following RP versus radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Use of validated questionnaires should continue to be utilized in quantifying device and sexual satisfaction following PPS.

Dataset Information

Satisfaction of breast cancer patients regarding surgery and radiation therapy: A survey in Japan.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets