亚洲晚期癌症患者中患者报告的决策作用:一项多国研究

IF 1.7
MDM policy & practice Pub Date : 2021-11-18 eCollection Date: 2021-07-01 DOI:10.1177/23814683211061398
Semra Ozdemir, Chetna Malhotra, Irene Teo, Si Ning Germaine Tan, Wei Han Melvin Wong, Anjum S Khan Joad, Thushari Hapuarachchi, Gayatri Palat, Pham Nguyen Tuong, Sushma Bhatnagar, Rubayat Rahman, Lubna Mariam, Xiaohong Ning, Eric Andrew Finkelstein
{"title":"亚洲晚期癌症患者中患者报告的决策作用:一项多国研究","authors":"Semra Ozdemir,&nbsp;Chetna Malhotra,&nbsp;Irene Teo,&nbsp;Si Ning Germaine Tan,&nbsp;Wei Han Melvin Wong,&nbsp;Anjum S Khan Joad,&nbsp;Thushari Hapuarachchi,&nbsp;Gayatri Palat,&nbsp;Pham Nguyen Tuong,&nbsp;Sushma Bhatnagar,&nbsp;Rubayat Rahman,&nbsp;Lubna Mariam,&nbsp;Xiaohong Ning,&nbsp;Eric Andrew Finkelstein","doi":"10.1177/23814683211061398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose.</b> 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. <b>Methods.</b> 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. <b>Results.</b> 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, <i>P</i> < 0.01) and spiritual (β = 2.64, <i>P</i> < 0.01) well-being, and better quality of physician communication (β = 9.73, <i>P</i> < 0.01) and care coordination (β = 13.96, <i>P</i> < 0.01) while making decisions alone was associated with lower emotional (β = -1.43, <i>P</i> < 0.01), social (β = -2.39, <i>P</i> < 0.01), and spiritual (β = -2.98, <i>P</i> < 0.01) well-being. <b>Conclusions.</b> 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. <b>Implications.</b> 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.</p>","PeriodicalId":520707,"journal":{"name":"MDM policy & practice","volume":" ","pages":"23814683211061398"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/05/f4/10.1177_23814683211061398.PMC8606935.pdf","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient-Reported Roles in Decision-Making Among Asian Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Multicountry Study.\",\"authors\":\"Semra Ozdemir,&nbsp;Chetna Malhotra,&nbsp;Irene Teo,&nbsp;Si Ning Germaine Tan,&nbsp;Wei Han Melvin Wong,&nbsp;Anjum S Khan Joad,&nbsp;Thushari Hapuarachchi,&nbsp;Gayatri Palat,&nbsp;Pham Nguyen Tuong,&nbsp;Sushma Bhatnagar,&nbsp;Rubayat Rahman,&nbsp;Lubna Mariam,&nbsp;Xiaohong Ning,&nbsp;Eric Andrew Finkelstein\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23814683211061398\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Purpose.</b> 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. <b>Methods.</b> 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. <b>Results.</b> 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, <i>P</i> < 0.01) and spiritual (β = 2.64, <i>P</i> < 0.01) well-being, and better quality of physician communication (β = 9.73, <i>P</i> < 0.01) and care coordination (β = 13.96, <i>P</i> < 0.01) while making decisions alone was associated with lower emotional (β = -1.43, <i>P</i> < 0.01), social (β = -2.39, <i>P</i> < 0.01), and spiritual (β = -2.98, <i>P</i> < 0.01) well-being. <b>Conclusions.</b> 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. <b>Implications.</b> 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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520707,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MDM policy & practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"23814683211061398\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/05/f4/10.1177_23814683211061398.PMC8606935.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"MDM policy & practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23814683211061398\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MDM policy & practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23814683211061398","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

目的。我们调查了1)5个亚洲国家晚期癌症患者决策中的感知角色2)患者特征与这些角色的关联,以及3)感知角色与生活质量和感知护理质量的关联。方法。我们调查了1585名IV期实体癌患者。使用多项逻辑回归分析患者特征与决策角色的关联。采用多变量回归分析决策角色与生活质量和护理的关系。结果。最常见的感知角色是没有患者参与。大多数患者(73%)报告的角色与他们的偏好一致。男性、非少数民族、受过高等教育、了解晚期癌症诊断和癌症诊断知识≥1年的患者参与决策的程度较高。相比没有病人参与,共同决策(连同医生/家庭)与更高的社会(β= 2.49,P < 0.01)和精神(β= 2.64,P < 0.01)幸福,和医生的沟通更好的质量(β= 9.73,P < 0.01)和护理协调(β= 13.96,P < 0.01),而决策就降低情感(β= -1.43,P < 0.01)、社会(β= -2.39,P < 0.01),和精神(β= -2.98,P < 0.01)。结论。研究结果表明,相当多的晚期癌症患者没有(也不愿意)参与决策。尽管有这一发现,与医生/家庭共同决策与更好的生活质量和护理有关。的影响。医生应该向患者解释共同决策的好处,并鼓励患者参与决策,同时确保患者感到得到支持,而不会觉得决策难以承受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Patient-Reported Roles in Decision-Making Among Asian Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Multicountry Study.

Patient-Reported Roles in Decision-Making Among Asian Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Multicountry Study.

Patient-Reported Roles in Decision-Making Among Asian Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Multicountry Study.

Patient-Reported Roles in Decision-Making Among Asian Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Multicountry Study.

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.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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