Cargando…

Interventions are needed to support patient–provider decision-making for DCIS: a scoping review

PURPOSE: Prognostic and treatment uncertainty make ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) complex to manage. The purpose of this study was to describe research that evaluated DCIS communication experiences, needs and interventions among DCIS patients or physicians. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and The...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Claire, Liang, Laurel, Wright, Frances C., Hong, Nicole J. Look, Groot, Gary, Helyer, Lucy, Meiers, Pamela, Quan, May Lynn, Urquhart, Robin, Warburton, Rebecca, Gagliardi, Anna R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5842253/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29273956
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-017-4613-x
_version_ 1783304861774774272
author Kim, Claire
Liang, Laurel
Wright, Frances C.
Hong, Nicole J. Look
Groot, Gary
Helyer, Lucy
Meiers, Pamela
Quan, May Lynn
Urquhart, Robin
Warburton, Rebecca
Gagliardi, Anna R.
author_facet Kim, Claire
Liang, Laurel
Wright, Frances C.
Hong, Nicole J. Look
Groot, Gary
Helyer, Lucy
Meiers, Pamela
Quan, May Lynn
Urquhart, Robin
Warburton, Rebecca
Gagliardi, Anna R.
author_sort Kim, Claire
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Prognostic and treatment uncertainty make ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) complex to manage. The purpose of this study was to describe research that evaluated DCIS communication experiences, needs and interventions among DCIS patients or physicians. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library were searched from inception to February 2017. English language studies that evaluated patient or physician DCIS needs, experiences or behavioural interventions were eligible. Screening and data extraction were done in duplicate. Summary statistics were used to describe study characteristics and findings. RESULTS: A total of 51 studies published from 1997 to 2016 were eligible for review, with a peak of 8 articles in year 2010. Women with DCIS lacked knowledge about the condition and its prognosis, although care partners were more informed, desired more information and experienced decisional conflict. Many chose mastectomy or prophylactic mastectomy, often based on physician’s recommendation. Following treatment, women had anxiety and depression, often at levels similar to those with invasive breast cancer. Disparities were identified by education level, socioeconomic status, ethnicity and literacy. Physicians said that they had difficulty explaining DCIS and many referred to DCIS as cancer. Despite the challenges reported by patients and physicians, only two studies developed interventions designed to improve patient–physician discussion and decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: As most women with DCIS undergo extensive treatment, and many experience treatment-related complications, the paucity of research on PE to improve and support informed decision-making for DCIS is profound. Research is needed to improve patient and provider discussions and decision-making for DCIS management. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10549-017-4613-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5842253
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58422532018-03-19 Interventions are needed to support patient–provider decision-making for DCIS: a scoping review Kim, Claire Liang, Laurel Wright, Frances C. Hong, Nicole J. Look Groot, Gary Helyer, Lucy Meiers, Pamela Quan, May Lynn Urquhart, Robin Warburton, Rebecca Gagliardi, Anna R. Breast Cancer Res Treat Review PURPOSE: Prognostic and treatment uncertainty make ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) complex to manage. The purpose of this study was to describe research that evaluated DCIS communication experiences, needs and interventions among DCIS patients or physicians. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library were searched from inception to February 2017. English language studies that evaluated patient or physician DCIS needs, experiences or behavioural interventions were eligible. Screening and data extraction were done in duplicate. Summary statistics were used to describe study characteristics and findings. RESULTS: A total of 51 studies published from 1997 to 2016 were eligible for review, with a peak of 8 articles in year 2010. Women with DCIS lacked knowledge about the condition and its prognosis, although care partners were more informed, desired more information and experienced decisional conflict. Many chose mastectomy or prophylactic mastectomy, often based on physician’s recommendation. Following treatment, women had anxiety and depression, often at levels similar to those with invasive breast cancer. Disparities were identified by education level, socioeconomic status, ethnicity and literacy. Physicians said that they had difficulty explaining DCIS and many referred to DCIS as cancer. Despite the challenges reported by patients and physicians, only two studies developed interventions designed to improve patient–physician discussion and decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: As most women with DCIS undergo extensive treatment, and many experience treatment-related complications, the paucity of research on PE to improve and support informed decision-making for DCIS is profound. Research is needed to improve patient and provider discussions and decision-making for DCIS management. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10549-017-4613-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer US 2017-12-23 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC5842253/ /pubmed/29273956 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-017-4613-x Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Review
Kim, Claire
Liang, Laurel
Wright, Frances C.
Hong, Nicole J. Look
Groot, Gary
Helyer, Lucy
Meiers, Pamela
Quan, May Lynn
Urquhart, Robin
Warburton, Rebecca
Gagliardi, Anna R.
Interventions are needed to support patient–provider decision-making for DCIS: a scoping review
title Interventions are needed to support patient–provider decision-making for DCIS: a scoping review
title_full Interventions are needed to support patient–provider decision-making for DCIS: a scoping review
title_fullStr Interventions are needed to support patient–provider decision-making for DCIS: a scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Interventions are needed to support patient–provider decision-making for DCIS: a scoping review
title_short Interventions are needed to support patient–provider decision-making for DCIS: a scoping review
title_sort interventions are needed to support patient–provider decision-making for dcis: a scoping review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5842253/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29273956
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-017-4613-x
work_keys_str_mv AT kimclaire interventionsareneededtosupportpatientproviderdecisionmakingfordcisascopingreview
AT lianglaurel interventionsareneededtosupportpatientproviderdecisionmakingfordcisascopingreview
AT wrightfrancesc interventionsareneededtosupportpatientproviderdecisionmakingfordcisascopingreview
AT hongnicolejlook interventionsareneededtosupportpatientproviderdecisionmakingfordcisascopingreview
AT grootgary interventionsareneededtosupportpatientproviderdecisionmakingfordcisascopingreview
AT helyerlucy interventionsareneededtosupportpatientproviderdecisionmakingfordcisascopingreview
AT meierspamela interventionsareneededtosupportpatientproviderdecisionmakingfordcisascopingreview
AT quanmaylynn interventionsareneededtosupportpatientproviderdecisionmakingfordcisascopingreview
AT urquhartrobin interventionsareneededtosupportpatientproviderdecisionmakingfordcisascopingreview
AT warburtonrebecca interventionsareneededtosupportpatientproviderdecisionmakingfordcisascopingreview
AT gagliardiannar interventionsareneededtosupportpatientproviderdecisionmakingfordcisascopingreview