Patient-Reported Roles in Decision-Making Among Asian Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Multicountry Study. Issue 2 (November 2021)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- Patient-Reported Roles in Decision-Making Among Asian Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Multicountry Study. Issue 2 (November 2021)
- Main Title:
- Patient-Reported Roles in Decision-Making Among Asian Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Multicountry Study
- Authors:
- Ozdemir, Semra
Malhotra, Chetna
Teo, Irene
Tan, Si Ning Germaine
Wong, Wei Han Melvin
Joad, Anjum S. Khan
Hapuarachchi, Thushari
Palat, Gayatri
Tuong, Pham Nguyen
Bhatnagar, Sushma
Rahman, Rubayat
Mariam, Lubna
Ning, Xiaohong
Finkelstein, Eric Andrew - Abstract:
- Purpose. We investigated 1) perceived roles in decision-making among advanced cancer patients in 5 Asian countries 2) associations of patient characteristics with these roles, and 3) the association of perceived roles with quality of life and perceived quality of care.Methods. We surveyed 1585 patients with stage IV solid cancer. Multinomial logistic regressions were used to analyze associations of patient characteristics with decision-making roles. Multivariate regressions were used to analyze associations of decision-making roles with quality of life and care.Results. The most common perceived-role was no patient involvement. Most patients (73%) reported roles consistent with their preferences. Being male, nonminority, higher educated, aware of advanced cancer diagnosis, and knowledge of cancer diagnosis for ≥1 year were associated with higher levels of patient involvement in decision-making. Compared to no patient involvement, joint decision-making (together with physicians/family) was associated with higher social (β = 2.49, P < 0.01) and spiritual (β = 2.64, P < 0.01) well-being, and better quality of physician communication (β = 9.73, P < 0.01) and care coordination (β = 13.96, P < 0.01) while making decisions alone was associated with lower emotional (β = −1.43, P < 0.01), social (β = −2.39, P < 0.01), and spiritual (β = −2.98, P < 0.01) well-being.Conclusions. Findings suggest that a substantial number of advanced cancer patients were not (and preferred not to be)Purpose. We investigated 1) perceived roles in decision-making among advanced cancer patients in 5 Asian countries 2) associations of patient characteristics with these roles, and 3) the association of perceived roles with quality of life and perceived quality of care.Methods. We surveyed 1585 patients with stage IV solid cancer. Multinomial logistic regressions were used to analyze associations of patient characteristics with decision-making roles. Multivariate regressions were used to analyze associations of decision-making roles with quality of life and care.Results. The most common perceived-role was no patient involvement. Most patients (73%) reported roles consistent with their preferences. Being male, nonminority, higher educated, aware of advanced cancer diagnosis, and knowledge of cancer diagnosis for ≥1 year were associated with higher levels of patient involvement in decision-making. Compared to no patient involvement, joint decision-making (together with physicians/family) was associated with higher social (β = 2.49, P < 0.01) and spiritual (β = 2.64, P < 0.01) well-being, and better quality of physician communication (β = 9.73, P < 0.01) and care coordination (β = 13.96, P < 0.01) while making decisions alone was associated with lower emotional (β = −1.43, P < 0.01), social (β = −2.39, P < 0.01), and spiritual (β = −2.98, P < 0.01) well-being.Conclusions. Findings suggest that a substantial number of advanced cancer patients were not (and preferred not to be) involved in decision-making. Despite this finding, joint decision-making together with physicians/family was associated with better quality of life and care.Implications. Physicians should explain the benefits of shared decision making to patients and encourage participation in decision-making, while ensuring that patients feel supported and do not find decision-making overwhelming. … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- MDM policy & practice. Volume 6:Issue 2(2021)
- Journal:
- MDM policy & practice
- Issue:
- Volume 6:Issue 2(2021)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 6, Issue 2 (2021)
- Year:
- 2021
- Volume:
- 6
- Issue:
- 2
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2021-0006-0002-0000
- Page Start:
- Page End:
- Publication Date:
- 2021-11
- Subjects:
- shared decision making -- low- and middle-income countries -- LMICs -- advanced cancer
Medicine -- Decision making -- Periodicals
Medicine -- Decision making
Decision Making
Clinical Medicine
Health Policy
Periodicals
Periodicals
Electronic journals
616.075 - Journal URLs:
- http://journals.sagepub.com/home/mpp/ ↗
http://www.sagepublications.com/ ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1177/23814683211061398 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 2381-4683
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 18251.xml