Shared decision-making in radiotherapy for rectal cancer – A systematic review

IF 2 Q1 Nursing
Lise Kjær Schou , Anne Wilhøft Kristensen , Johanne Hollands Steffensen , Marianne Grønlie Guren , Laurids Østergaard Poulsen , Karen-Lise Garm Spindler , Camilla Jensenius Skovhus Kronborg
{"title":"Shared decision-making in radiotherapy for rectal cancer – A systematic review","authors":"Lise Kjær Schou ,&nbsp;Anne Wilhøft Kristensen ,&nbsp;Johanne Hollands Steffensen ,&nbsp;Marianne Grønlie Guren ,&nbsp;Laurids Østergaard Poulsen ,&nbsp;Karen-Lise Garm Spindler ,&nbsp;Camilla Jensenius Skovhus Kronborg","doi":"10.1016/j.tipsro.2026.100384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Shared decision-making (SDM) is increasingly emphasized in the ESMO guidelines for rectal cancer (RC). This review aim to describe the current landscape for SDM for radiotherapy (RT) in RC, investigate patient and clinician preferences regarding SDM and treatment options, and identify gaps in SDM for RT in RC.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed and EMBASE on June 4, 2025. Eligible studies investigated SDM, Patient Decision aids (PDA), and patient and clinician preferences regarding SDM related to RT for RC. Data extraction included study characteristics, interventions and outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Results were synthesized narratively.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>This review included 18 articles, 2 used SDM or developed PDAs, 5 explored patient preferences, 11 explored both patient and clinician preferences. Only a limited number of PDAs were available for RT in RC and none have yet been implemented or validated. Preferences differed between patients and clinicians. Patients valued sexual function and bowel outcomes more highly, while clinicians empathized survival and local control. Gender disparities were reported for patients. Patients preferred an active role in decision-making, but systematic SDM was infrequently used in clinical practice. Barriers included time constraints and infrequent use of SDM.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Despite the complexity of decisions involving multiple treatment options and outcomes, no validated SDM tools exist for RT in RC, and significant gaps remain in development, implementation and use. Future research should focus on developing and implementing SDM and PDAs in clinical practice.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36328,"journal":{"name":"Technical Innovations and Patient Support in Radiation Oncology","volume":"37 ","pages":"Article 100384"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technical Innovations and Patient Support in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405632426000119","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Shared decision-making (SDM) is increasingly emphasized in the ESMO guidelines for rectal cancer (RC). This review aim to describe the current landscape for SDM for radiotherapy (RT) in RC, investigate patient and clinician preferences regarding SDM and treatment options, and identify gaps in SDM for RT in RC.

Methods

Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed and EMBASE on June 4, 2025. Eligible studies investigated SDM, Patient Decision aids (PDA), and patient and clinician preferences regarding SDM related to RT for RC. Data extraction included study characteristics, interventions and outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Results were synthesized narratively.

Results

This review included 18 articles, 2 used SDM or developed PDAs, 5 explored patient preferences, 11 explored both patient and clinician preferences. Only a limited number of PDAs were available for RT in RC and none have yet been implemented or validated. Preferences differed between patients and clinicians. Patients valued sexual function and bowel outcomes more highly, while clinicians empathized survival and local control. Gender disparities were reported for patients. Patients preferred an active role in decision-making, but systematic SDM was infrequently used in clinical practice. Barriers included time constraints and infrequent use of SDM.

Conclusion

Despite the complexity of decisions involving multiple treatment options and outcomes, no validated SDM tools exist for RT in RC, and significant gaps remain in development, implementation and use. Future research should focus on developing and implementing SDM and PDAs in clinical practice.

Abstract Image

直肠癌放射治疗的共同决策——系统综述。
背景:ESMO直肠癌(RC)指南越来越强调共同决策(SDM)。本综述旨在描述RC中SDM放射治疗(RT)的现状,调查患者和临床医生对SDM和治疗方案的偏好,并确定RC中SDM放射治疗的差距。方法:按照PRISMA指南,于2025年6月4日在PubMed和EMBASE进行系统文献检索。符合条件的研究调查了SDM,患者决策辅助(PDA),以及患者和临床医生对与RC RT相关的SDM的偏好。数据提取包括研究特征、干预措施和结果。使用混合方法评估工具评估偏倚风险。对结果进行叙述性综合。结果:本综述纳入18篇文章,2篇使用SDM或开发pda, 5篇探讨患者偏好,11篇探讨患者和临床医生的偏好。只有有限数量的pda可用于RC的RT,尚未实施或验证。患者和临床医生的偏好不同。患者更看重性功能和肠道结果,而临床医生更看重生存和局部控制。报告了患者的性别差异。患者倾向于在决策中发挥积极作用,但系统的SDM在临床实践中很少使用。障碍包括时间限制和不经常使用SDM。结论:尽管涉及多种治疗方案和结果的决策很复杂,但目前还没有针对RC中的RT的经过验证的SDM工具,并且在开发、实施和使用方面仍存在重大差距。未来的研究应侧重于SDM和pda在临床实践中的开发和实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
48
审稿时长
67 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书