Second opinion and self-efficacy in German skin cancer patients.
Skin cancer
decision making
second opinion
treatment
Journal
Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG
ISSN: 1610-0387
Titre abrégé: J Dtsch Dermatol Ges
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101164708
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 Sep 2024
12 Sep 2024
Historique:
received:
07
12
2023
accepted:
16
06
2024
medline:
12
9
2024
pubmed:
12
9
2024
entrez:
12
9
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
The global incidence of skin cancer has steadily increased in recent years. Accordingly, patients require information on diagnosis and treatment options while dealing with the perceived impact of the diagnosis. In 2015, the German government enacted legislation under the Social Code (SGB V, § 27b), granting patients the right to obtain a second medical opinion. Utilizing a standardized questionnaire, our study aims to explore whether patients diagnosed with skin cancer actively pursue a second medical opinion and to evaluate any potential disruptions to their daily lives. We collected a total of 714 completed questionnaires. The majority of those seeking a second opinion were diagnosed with malignant melanoma (96, 58%). Primary motivations for seeking a second opinion included seeking reassurance regarding treatment decisions and obtaining further information. Additionally, seeking a second opinion was correlated with a significantly lower internal locus of control, indicating a belief that their actions are not solely determined by their own abilities. Notably, we observed a greater impairment of daily life among younger participants and those with advanced cancer. Overall, our study shows that second opinions often strengthened the patient-physician interaction and provided additional reassurance, especially in patients with a weak perception of control. Moreover, we found that the impairment of quality of life and both internal and external locus of control decrease significantly in advanced tumor stages. Hence, it is imperative to identify additional interventions aimed at bolstering internal resilience and locus of control, thereby enhancing patients' capacity to cope with their cancer diagnosis.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The global incidence of skin cancer has steadily increased in recent years. Accordingly, patients require information on diagnosis and treatment options while dealing with the perceived impact of the diagnosis. In 2015, the German government enacted legislation under the Social Code (SGB V, § 27b), granting patients the right to obtain a second medical opinion.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
METHODS
Utilizing a standardized questionnaire, our study aims to explore whether patients diagnosed with skin cancer actively pursue a second medical opinion and to evaluate any potential disruptions to their daily lives. We collected a total of 714 completed questionnaires.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The majority of those seeking a second opinion were diagnosed with malignant melanoma (96, 58%). Primary motivations for seeking a second opinion included seeking reassurance regarding treatment decisions and obtaining further information. Additionally, seeking a second opinion was correlated with a significantly lower internal locus of control, indicating a belief that their actions are not solely determined by their own abilities. Notably, we observed a greater impairment of daily life among younger participants and those with advanced cancer.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, our study shows that second opinions often strengthened the patient-physician interaction and provided additional reassurance, especially in patients with a weak perception of control. Moreover, we found that the impairment of quality of life and both internal and external locus of control decrease significantly in advanced tumor stages. Hence, it is imperative to identify additional interventions aimed at bolstering internal resilience and locus of control, thereby enhancing patients' capacity to cope with their cancer diagnosis.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft.
Références
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(1): 7‐34.
Stege H, Haist M, Nikfarjam U, et al. The Status of Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Melanoma Therapy, New Developments and Upcoming Challenges. Target Oncol. 2021;16(5): 537‐552.
Passalacqua S, di Rocco ZC, Di Pietro C, et al. Information needs of patients with melanoma: a nursing challenge. Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2012;16(6):625‐632.
Brütting J, Bergmann M, Garzarolli M, et al., Unmet information needs of patients with melanoma in Germany. Melanoma Res. 2019;29(2):196‐204.
Hillen MA, Gutheil CM, Smets EMA, et al. The evolution of uncertainty in second opinions about prostate cancer treatment. Health Expect. 2017;20(6):1264‐1274.
Tattersall MH, Dear RF, Jansen J, et al. Second opinions in oncology: the experiences of patients attending the Sydney Cancer Centre. Med J Aust. 2009;191(4):209‐212.
Moore MR, Davis C, Cadet T, et al. Understanding the Factors Related to Trauma‐Induced Stress in Cancer Patients: A National Study of 17 Cancer Centers. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(14).
Molina Y, Yi JC, Martinez‐Gutierrez J, Reding KW, et al. Resilience among patients across the cancer continuum: diverse perspectives. Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2014;18(1):93‐101.
Gouzman J, Cohen M, Ben‐Zur H, et al. Resilience and psychosocial adjustment in digestive system cancer. J Clin Psychol Med Settings. 2015;22(1):1‐13.
Seiler A, Jenewein J, Resilience in Cancer Patients. Front Psychiatry. 2019;10.
Stiggelbout AM, Van der Weijden T, De Wit MP, et al. Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare. BMJ. 2012;344:e256.
Axon A, Hassan M, Niv Y, et al. Ethical and legal implications in seeking and providing a second medical opinion. Dig Dis. 2008. 26(1):11‐17.
Mellink WA, Henzen‐Logmans SC, Bongaerts AH, et al. Discrepancy between second and first opinion in surgical oncological patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006;32(1):108‐112.
Sikora K. Second opinions for patients with cancer. BMJ. 1995;4;311(7014):1179‐1180.
Fuchs T, Hanaya H, Seilacher E, et al. Information Deficits and Second Opinion Seeking – A Survey on Cancer Patients. Cancer Invest. 2017;35(1):62‐69.
Keinki C, Seilacher E, Ebel M, et al. Information Needs of Cancer Patients and Perception of Impact of the Disease, of Self‐Efficacy, and Locus of Control. J Cancer Educ. 2016;31(3): 610‐616.
Rotter JB. Social learning and clinical psychology. Prentice‐Hall, Inc., 1954.
Rotter JB. Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychol Monogr. 1966;80(1):1‐28.
Ebel MD, Rudolph I, Keinki C, et al. Perception of cancer patients of their disease, self‐efficacy and locus of control and usage of complementary and alternative medicine. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2015;141(8):1449‐1455.
Huebner J, Ebel M, Muenstedt K, et al. A lecture program on complementary and alternative medicine for cancer patients–evaluation of the pilot phase. J Cancer Educ. 2015;30(2):340‐343.
Schwarzer R, M. Jerusalem. Measures in Health Psychology: A User's Portfolio. Causal and Control Beliefs. Causal and Control Beliefs, Windsor, UK: NFER‐NELSON, 1995;1:35‐37.
Larkin J, Del Vecchio M, Mandalá M, et al. 1310O – Adjuvant nivolumab (NIVO) versus ipilimumab (IPI) in resected stage III/IV melanoma: 3‐year efficacy and biomarker results from the phase III CheckMate 238 trial. Ann Oncol. 2019; 30:v533‐v534.
Hinz A, Schumacher J, Albani C, et al. Bevölkerungsrepräsentative Normierung der Skala zur Allgemeinen Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung. Diagnostica. 2006; 52(1):26‐32.
Broadbent E, Petrie KJ, Main J, et al. The brief illness perception questionnaire. J Psychosom Res. 2006;60(6):631‐637.
Kovaleva A, Beierlein C, Kemper CJ, et al. Internale‐Externale‐Kontrollüberzeugung‐4 (IE‐4). Zusammenstellung sozialwissenschaftlicher Items und Skalen (ZIS). Available from: https://zis.gesis.org/2014. [Last accessed May 22, 2024].
Ruetters D, Keinki C, Schroth S, et al. Is there evidence for a better health care for cancer patients after a second opinion? A systematic review. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2016;142(7): p. 1521‐1528.
Olver I, Carey M, Bryant J, et al. Second opinions in medical oncology. BMC Palliative Care, 2020;19(1):112.
Berglund E, Lytsy P, Westerling R. The influence of locus of control on self‐rated health in context of chronic disease: a structural equation modeling approach in a cross sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:492.
Zhang A, Jang Y, The Role of Internal Health Locus of Control in Relation to Self‐Rated Health in Older Adults. J Gerontol Soc Work. 2017. 60(1):68‐78.
Keung EZ, Gershenwald JE. The eighth edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) melanoma staging system: implications for melanoma treatment and care. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2018;18(8):775‐784.
van der Kloot WA, Uchida Y, Inoue K, et al. The effects of illness beliefs and chemotherapy impact on quality of life in Japanese and Dutch patients with breast or lung cancer. Chin Clin Oncol. 2016;5(1):3.
Zhang N, Fielding R, Soong I, et al. Illness perceptions among cancer survivors. Support Care Cancer. 2016;24(3):1295‐1304.
Adams ML. Differences Between Younger and Older US Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions. Prev Chronic Dis. 2017;14:E76.
McGrath R, Al Snih S, Markides K, et al. The burden of health conditions for middle‐aged and older adults in the United States: disability‐adjusted life years. BMC Geriatrics. 2019. 19(1):100.
Hillen MA, Medendorp NM, Daams JG, et al. Patient‐Driven Second Opinions in Oncology: A Systematic Review. Oncologist. 2017;22(10):1197‐1211.
Paul M, Davey B, Senf B, et al. Patients with advanced cancer and their usage of complementary and alternative medicine. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2013;139(9):1515‐1522.
Huebner J, Micke O, Muecke R, et al., User rate of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) of patients visiting a counseling facility for CAM of a German comprehensive cancer center. Anticancer Res. 2014;34(2):943‐948.