对延长生命的抗癌治疗的关注阻碍了晚期癌症患者的共同决策:一项嵌入式多病例定性研究。

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Daisy Jm Ermers, Maartje J van Geel, Yvonne Engels, Demi Kellenaers, Anouk Sj Schuurmans, Floortje K Ploos van Amstel, Carla Ml van Herpen, Yvonne Schoon, Henk J Schers, Kris Cp Vissers, Evelien Jm Kuip, Marieke Perry
{"title":"对延长生命的抗癌治疗的关注阻碍了晚期癌症患者的共同决策:一项嵌入式多病例定性研究。","authors":"Daisy Jm Ermers, Maartje J van Geel, Yvonne Engels, Demi Kellenaers, Anouk Sj Schuurmans, Floortje K Ploos van Amstel, Carla Ml van Herpen, Yvonne Schoon, Henk J Schers, Kris Cp Vissers, Evelien Jm Kuip, Marieke Perry","doi":"10.1177/02692163241281145","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Implementing shared decision-making in oncology practice is often limited, particularly integrating the patient's context into decision-making. To improve this, we conducted a quality improvement project, <i>CONtext. CONtext</i> attempts to accomplish this by: (1) Integrating the patient's context into shared decision-making during consultation with the medical oncologist; (2) Actively involving the GP and case manager (a specialized oncology nurse), who often have knowledge about the patient's context, and; (3) Giving the person with advanced cancer a time-out period of up to 2 weeks to consider and discuss treatment options with others, including close family and friends.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore how persons with advanced cancer and their involved professionals experienced shared decision-making after the introduction of <i>CONtext</i>.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A qualitative embedded multiple-case study using in-depth interviews analysed with inductive content analysis.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A purposive sample of 14 cases, each case consisting of a patient with advanced cancer and ideally their medical oncologist, case manager, and GP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four themes were identified: shared decision-making is a dynamic and continuous process (1), in which the medical oncologist's treatment recommendation is central (2), fuelled by the patients' experience of not having a choice (3), and integrating the patient's context into shared decision-making was considered important but hampered (4), for example, by the association with the terminal phase.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The prevailing tendency among medical oncologists and persons with advanced cancer to prioritize life-prolonging anticancer treatments restricts the potential for shared decision-making. This undermines integrating individual context into decision-making, a critical aspect of the palliative care continuum.</p>","PeriodicalId":19849,"journal":{"name":"Palliative Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"2692163241281145"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The focus on life-prolonging anticancer treatment hampers shared decision-making in people with advanced cancer: A qualitative embedded multiple-case study.\",\"authors\":\"Daisy Jm Ermers, Maartje J van Geel, Yvonne Engels, Demi Kellenaers, Anouk Sj Schuurmans, Floortje K Ploos van Amstel, Carla Ml van Herpen, Yvonne Schoon, Henk J Schers, Kris Cp Vissers, Evelien Jm Kuip, Marieke Perry\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02692163241281145\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Implementing shared decision-making in oncology practice is often limited, particularly integrating the patient's context into decision-making. To improve this, we conducted a quality improvement project, <i>CONtext. CONtext</i> attempts to accomplish this by: (1) Integrating the patient's context into shared decision-making during consultation with the medical oncologist; (2) Actively involving the GP and case manager (a specialized oncology nurse), who often have knowledge about the patient's context, and; (3) Giving the person with advanced cancer a time-out period of up to 2 weeks to consider and discuss treatment options with others, including close family and friends.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore how persons with advanced cancer and their involved professionals experienced shared decision-making after the introduction of <i>CONtext</i>.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A qualitative embedded multiple-case study using in-depth interviews analysed with inductive content analysis.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A purposive sample of 14 cases, each case consisting of a patient with advanced cancer and ideally their medical oncologist, case manager, and GP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four themes were identified: shared decision-making is a dynamic and continuous process (1), in which the medical oncologist's treatment recommendation is central (2), fuelled by the patients' experience of not having a choice (3), and integrating the patient's context into shared decision-making was considered important but hampered (4), for example, by the association with the terminal phase.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The prevailing tendency among medical oncologists and persons with advanced cancer to prioritize life-prolonging anticancer treatments restricts the potential for shared decision-making. This undermines integrating individual context into decision-making, a critical aspect of the palliative care continuum.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19849,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Palliative Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2692163241281145\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Palliative Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163241281145\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Palliative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163241281145","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在肿瘤学实践中,共同决策的实施往往受到限制,尤其是将患者的背景纳入决策。为了改善这一状况,我们开展了一项质量改进项目--CONtext。CONtext 试图通过以下方式实现这一目标(目的:探讨晚期癌症患者及其相关专业人员在引入 CONtext 后如何体验共同决策:设计:一项嵌入式多案例定性研究,采用归纳内容分析法对深入访谈进行分析:14 个案例的目的性样本,每个案例由一名晚期癌症患者及其肿瘤内科医生、病例管理员和全科医生组成:结果:确定了四个主题:共同决策是一个动态和持续的过程(1),其中肿瘤内科医生的治疗建议是核心(2),患者没有选择权的经历助长了这一过程(3),将患者的背景纳入共同决策被认为是重要的,但却受到阻碍(4),例如与晚期有关的因素:肿瘤内科医生和晚期癌症患者普遍倾向于优先考虑延长生命的抗癌治疗,这限制了共同决策的可能性。结论:肿瘤内科医生和晚期癌症患者普遍倾向于优先考虑延长生命的抗癌治疗,这限制了共同决策的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The focus on life-prolonging anticancer treatment hampers shared decision-making in people with advanced cancer: A qualitative embedded multiple-case study.

Background: Implementing shared decision-making in oncology practice is often limited, particularly integrating the patient's context into decision-making. To improve this, we conducted a quality improvement project, CONtext. CONtext attempts to accomplish this by: (1) Integrating the patient's context into shared decision-making during consultation with the medical oncologist; (2) Actively involving the GP and case manager (a specialized oncology nurse), who often have knowledge about the patient's context, and; (3) Giving the person with advanced cancer a time-out period of up to 2 weeks to consider and discuss treatment options with others, including close family and friends.

Aim: To explore how persons with advanced cancer and their involved professionals experienced shared decision-making after the introduction of CONtext.

Design: A qualitative embedded multiple-case study using in-depth interviews analysed with inductive content analysis.

Participants: A purposive sample of 14 cases, each case consisting of a patient with advanced cancer and ideally their medical oncologist, case manager, and GP.

Results: Four themes were identified: shared decision-making is a dynamic and continuous process (1), in which the medical oncologist's treatment recommendation is central (2), fuelled by the patients' experience of not having a choice (3), and integrating the patient's context into shared decision-making was considered important but hampered (4), for example, by the association with the terminal phase.

Conclusions: The prevailing tendency among medical oncologists and persons with advanced cancer to prioritize life-prolonging anticancer treatments restricts the potential for shared decision-making. This undermines integrating individual context into decision-making, a critical aspect of the palliative care continuum.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Palliative Medicine
Palliative Medicine 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
125
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Palliative Medicine is a highly ranked, peer reviewed scholarly journal dedicated to improving knowledge and clinical practice in the palliative care of patients with far advanced disease. This outstanding journal features editorials, original papers, review articles, case reports, correspondence and book reviews. Essential reading for all members of the palliative care team. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信