To become part of the team-patient experiences of participating in decision-making for a new treatment (proton beam therapy).


Journal

Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer
ISSN: 1433-7339
Titre abrégé: Support Care Cancer
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9302957

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
18 Jun 2024
Historique:
received: 11 12 2023
accepted: 04 06 2024
medline: 19 6 2024
pubmed: 19 6 2024
entrez: 18 6 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The aim of this study was to explore patients' experience of participation in the treatment decision of proton beam therapy versus conventional radiotherapy. Proton beam therapy (PBT) has become a treatment option for some cancer patients receiving radiotherapy. The decision to give PBT instead of conventional radiotherapy (CRT) needs to be carefully planned together with the patient to ensure that the degree of participation is based on individuals' preferences. There is a knowledge gap of successful approaches to support patients' participation in the decision-making process, which is particularly important when it comes to the situation of having to choose between two treatment options such as PBT and CRT, with similar expected outcomes. We conducted a secondary analysis of qualitative data collected from interviews with patients who received PBT for their brain tumor. Transcribed verbatims from interviews with 22 patients were analyzed regarding experiences of participation in the decision-making process leading to PBT. Participants experienced their participation in the decision-making process to a varying degree, and with individual preferences. Four themes emerged from data: to be a voice that matters, to get control over what will happen, being in the hand of doctors' choice, and feeling selected for treatment. A decision for treatment with PBT can be experienced as a privilege but can also cause stress as it might entail practical issues affecting everyday life in a considerable way. For the patient to have confidence in the decision-making process, patients' preferences, expectations, and experiences must be included by the healthcare team. Including the patient in the healthcare team as an equal partner by confirming the person enables and facilitates for patients' voice to be heard and reckoned with. Person-centered care building on a partnership between patients and healthcare professionals should provide the right basis for the decision-making process.

Sections du résumé

PURPOSE OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to explore patients' experience of participation in the treatment decision of proton beam therapy versus conventional radiotherapy.
BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Proton beam therapy (PBT) has become a treatment option for some cancer patients receiving radiotherapy. The decision to give PBT instead of conventional radiotherapy (CRT) needs to be carefully planned together with the patient to ensure that the degree of participation is based on individuals' preferences. There is a knowledge gap of successful approaches to support patients' participation in the decision-making process, which is particularly important when it comes to the situation of having to choose between two treatment options such as PBT and CRT, with similar expected outcomes.
METHOD METHODS
We conducted a secondary analysis of qualitative data collected from interviews with patients who received PBT for their brain tumor. Transcribed verbatims from interviews with 22 patients were analyzed regarding experiences of participation in the decision-making process leading to PBT.
FINDINGS RESULTS
Participants experienced their participation in the decision-making process to a varying degree, and with individual preferences. Four themes emerged from data: to be a voice that matters, to get control over what will happen, being in the hand of doctors' choice, and feeling selected for treatment.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
A decision for treatment with PBT can be experienced as a privilege but can also cause stress as it might entail practical issues affecting everyday life in a considerable way. For the patient to have confidence in the decision-making process, patients' preferences, expectations, and experiences must be included by the healthcare team. Including the patient in the healthcare team as an equal partner by confirming the person enables and facilitates for patients' voice to be heard and reckoned with. Person-centered care building on a partnership between patients and healthcare professionals should provide the right basis for the decision-making process.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38890189
doi: 10.1007/s00520-024-08631-y
pii: 10.1007/s00520-024-08631-y
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

442

Subventions

Organisme : the Swedish Cancer Foundation
ID : CAN2015/428 and CAN2016/809

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s).

Références

World Health Organization (1994) A declaration on the promotion of patients’ rights in Europe. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe
Health and Medical Services Act (1982:763) Retrieved from https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/doku ent-lagar/ dokum ent/svensk-forfattningssamling/patientsakerhet slag-20106 59_sfs-2010
Patient law (2014:821) Retrieved from https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/doku ent-lagar/ dokum ent/svensk-forfattningssamling/patientsakerhet slag-20106 59_sfs-2010
Patient Safety Act(SFS 2010:659) Retrieved from https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/doku ent-lagar/ dokum ent/svensk-forfattningssamling/patientsakerhet slag-20106 59_sfs-2010
Shay LA, Lafata JE (2015) Where is the evidence? A systematic review of shared decision making and patient outcomes. Med Decis Making. 35(1):114–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X14551638
doi: 10.1177/0272989X14551638 pubmed: 25351843
Lawler M, Oliver K, Gijssels S, Aapro M, Abolina A, Albreht T, Erdem S, Geissler J, Jassem J, Karjalainen S, La Vecchia C, Lievens Y, Meunier F, Morrissey M, Naredi P, Oberst S, Poortmans P, Price R, Sullivan R, Velikova G, Vrdoljak E, Wilking N, Yared W, Selby P (2021) The European code of cancer practice. J Cancer Policy 28:100282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcpo.2021.100282
doi: 10.1016/j.jcpo.2021.100282 pubmed: 35559911
Efverman A, Bergius AB (2021) Observing the implementation of shared decision-making in routine radiotherapy cancer nursing: an explorative longitudinal questionnaire study. Cancer Nurs. 44(5):369–377. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0000000000000830
doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000830 pubmed: 32541208
Kehl KL, Landrum MB, Arora NK, Ganz PA, van Ryn M, Mack JW, Keating NL (2015) Association of actual and preferred decision roles with patient-reported quality of care: shared decision making in cancer care. JAMA Oncol 1(1):50–58. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2014.112
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2014.112 pubmed: 26182303 pmcid: 4937185
Eldh AC, Holmefur M, Luhr K, Wenemark M (2020) Assessing and reporting patient participation by means of patient preferences and experiences. BMC Health Serv Res 20(1):702. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05574-y
doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05574-y pubmed: 32727451 pmcid: 7391651
Kane HL, Halpern MT, Squiers LB, Treiman KA, McCormack LA (2014) Implementing and evaluating shared decision making in oncology practice. CA Cancer J Clin. 64(6):377–88. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21245
doi: 10.3322/caac.21245 pubmed: 25200391
Eldh AC, Ekman I, Ehnfors M (2010) A comparison of the concept of patient participation and patients’ descriptions as related to healthcare definitions. Int J Nurs Terminol Classif. 21(1):21–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-618X.2009.01141.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1744-618X.2009.01141.x pubmed: 20132355
Castro EM, Van Regenmortel T, Vanhaecht K, Sermeus W, Van Hecke A (2016) Patient empowerment, patient participation and patient-centeredness in hospital care: a concept analysis based on a literature review. Patient Educ Couns 99(12):1923–1939. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2016.07.026
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.07.026 pubmed: 27450481
Stiggelbout AM, Pieterse AH, De Haes JC (2015) Shared decision making: concepts, evidence, and practice. Patient Educ Couns 98(10):1172–1179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2015.06.022
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2015.06.022 pubmed: 26215573
Joosten EA, DeFuentes-Merillas L, de Weert GH, Sensky T, van der Staak CP, de Jong CA (2008) Systematic review of the effects of shared decision-making on patient satisfaction, treatment adherence and health status. Psychother Psychosom 77(4):219–226. https://doi.org/10.1159/000126073
doi: 10.1159/000126073 pubmed: 18418028
Légaré F, Thompson-Leduc P (2014) Twelve myths about shared decision making. Patient Educ Couns 96(3):281–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2014.06.014
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2014.06.014 pubmed: 25034637
Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T (1997) Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Soc Sci Med 44(5):681–692. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0277-9536(96)00221-3
doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(96)00221-3 pubmed: 9032835
Wallström S, Ekman I (2018) Person-centred care in clinical assessment. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 17(7):576–579. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474515118758139
doi: 10.1177/1474515118758139 pubmed: 29405743
Karazivan P, Dumez V, Flora L, Pomey MP, Del Grande C, Ghadiri DP, Fernandez N, Jouet E, Las Vergnas O, Lebel P (2015) The patient-as-partner approach in healthcare: a conceptual framework for a necessary transition. Acad Med 90(4):437–441. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000603
doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000603 pubmed: 25607943
Thorne S, Oliffe JL, Stajduhar KI (2013) Communicating shared decision-making: cancer patient perspectives. Patient Educ Couns 90(3):291–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2012.02.018
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.02.018 pubmed: 22464665
Ekman I, Swedberg K, Taft C, Lindseth A, Norberg A, Brink E, Carlsson J, Dahlin-Ivanoff S, Johansson IL, Kjellgren K, Lidén E, Öhlén J, Olsson LE, Rosén H, Rydmark M, Sunnerhagen KS (2011) Person-centered care–ready for prime time. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 10(4):248–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcnurse.2011.06.008
doi: 10.1016/j.ejcnurse.2011.06.008 pubmed: 21764386
Matthias MS, Salyers MP, Frankel RM (2013) Re-thinking shared decision-making: context matters. Patient Educ Couns 91(2):176–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2013.01.006
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.01.006 pubmed: 23410979
Heaton J (2008) Secondary analysis of qualitative data: an overview. Hist Soc Res 33(3):33–45
Langegård U, Ahlberg K, Björk-Eriksson T, Fransson P, Johansson B, Ohlsson-Nevo E, Witt-Nyström P, Sjövall K (2020) The art of living with symptoms: a qualitative study among patients with primary brain tumors receiving proton beam therapy. Cancer Nurs. 43(2):E79–E86. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0000000000000692
doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000692 pubmed: 30688666
Sjövall K, Langegård U, Fransson P, Nevo-Ohlsson E, Kristensen I, Ahlberg K, Johansson B (2023) Evaluating patient reported outcomes and experiences in a novel proton beam clinic - challenges, activities, and outcomes of the ProtonCare project. BMC Cancer 23(1):132. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-023-10586-y
doi: 10.1186/s12885-023-10586-y pubmed: 36759789 pmcid: 9909877
Graneheim UH, Lundman B (2004) Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today 24(2):105–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001
doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001 pubmed: 14769454
Möllerberg ML, Langegård U, Ohlsson-Nevo E, Fransson P, Johansson B, Ahlberg K, Sjövall K (2020) Managing an altered social context-patients experiences of staying away from home while undergoing proton beam therapy. Nurs Open 7(4):1157–1163. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.490
doi: 10.1002/nop2.490 pubmed: 32587735 pmcid: 7308677
Hart NH, Crawford-Williams F, Crichton M, Yee J, Smith TJ, Koczwara B, Fitch MI, Crawford GB, Mukhopadhyay S, Mahony J, Cheah C, Townsend J, Cook O, Agar MR, Chan RJ (2022) Unmet supportive care needs of people with advanced cancer and their caregivers: a systematic scoping review. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 176:103728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2022.103728
doi: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2022.103728 pubmed: 35662585
Pan S, Mao J, Wang L, Dai Y, Wang W (2022) Patient participation in treatment decision-making of prostate cancer: a qualitative study. Support Care Cancer 30(5):4189–4200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06753-1
doi: 10.1007/s00520-021-06753-1 pubmed: 35083538
Clayman ML, Gulbrandsen P, Morris MA (2017) A patient in the clinic; a person in the world. Why shared decision making needs to center on the person rather than the medical encounter. Patient Educ Couns. 100(3):600–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2016.10.016
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.10.016 pubmed: 27780646
Joseph-Williams N, Elwyn G, Edwards A (2014) Knowledge is not power for patients: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of patient-reported barriers and facilitators to shared decision making. Patient Educ Couns 94(3):291–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2013.10.031
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.10.031 pubmed: 24305642
Boman LE, Sandelin K, Wengström Y, Silén C (2018) Patients’ participation during treatment and care of breast cancer - a possibility and an imperative. Eur J Oncol Nurs 37:35–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2018.09.002
doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2018.09.002 pubmed: 30473049
Yildiz B, Korfage IJ, Deliens L, Preston NJ, Miccinesi G, Kodba-Ceh H, Pollock K, Johnsen AT, van Delden JJM, Rietjens JAC, van der Heide A (2023) Self-efficacy of advanced cancer patients for participation in treatment-related decision-making in six European countries: the ACTION study. Support Care Cancer 31(9):512. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-023-07974-2
doi: 10.1007/s00520-023-07974-2 pubmed: 37552324 pmcid: 10409662
Kittang J, Ohlsson-Nevo E, Schröder A (2023) Quality of care in the oncological outpatient setting: individual interviews with people receiving cancer treatment. Eur J Oncol Nurs 64:102335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2023.102335
doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2023.102335 pubmed: 37290164

Auteurs

K Sjövall (K)

Faculty of Health Sciences, Kristianstad University, 291 88, Kristianstad, Sweden. Katarina.sjovall@hkr.se.

K Ahlberg (K)

Institute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.

P Fessé (P)

Institute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Centre for Research and Development, Uppsala University/Region Gävleborg, Gävle, Sweden.

P Fransson (P)

Department of Nursing, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.

I Kristensen (I)

Radiation Physics, Department of Haematology, Oncology and Radiation Physics, Lund University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.

E Ohlsson-Nevo (E)

Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.

L Åkeflo (L)

Institute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.

U Langegård (U)

Institute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Department of Oncology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH