Cargando…

Communication about Prognosis during Patient-Initiated Second Opinion Consultations in Advanced Cancer Care: An Observational Qualitative Analysis

Prognostic communication is essential for patients with advanced cancer to enable informed medical decision-making and end-of-life planning. Discussing prognosis is challenging, and might be especially complex for oncologists conducting a second opinion (SO). Survival data are often lacking, and con...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van der Velden, N. C. A., van der Kleij, M. B. A., Lehmann, V., Smets, E. M. A., Stouthard, J. M. L., Henselmans, I., Hillen, M. A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8199300/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34073341
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18115694
_version_ 1783707344281010176
author van der Velden, N. C. A.
van der Kleij, M. B. A.
Lehmann, V.
Smets, E. M. A.
Stouthard, J. M. L.
Henselmans, I.
Hillen, M. A.
author_facet van der Velden, N. C. A.
van der Kleij, M. B. A.
Lehmann, V.
Smets, E. M. A.
Stouthard, J. M. L.
Henselmans, I.
Hillen, M. A.
author_sort van der Velden, N. C. A.
collection PubMed
description Prognostic communication is essential for patients with advanced cancer to enable informed medical decision-making and end-of-life planning. Discussing prognosis is challenging, and might be especially complex for oncologists conducting a second opinion (SO). Survival data are often lacking, and consulting oncologists need to consider previously conveyed information and patients’ relationship with the referring oncologist. We qualitatively investigated how advanced cancer patients and consulting oncologists discuss prognosis during audio-recorded SO consultations (N = 60), including prognostic information received from the referring oncologist. Our results show that patients regularly expressed implicit cues to discuss prognosis or posed explicit questions tentatively. Consulting oncologists were mostly unresponsive to patients’ cues and cautious to prognosticate. They also seemed cautious when patients brought up the referring oncologist. Consulting oncologists checked which prognostic information patients had received from the referring oncologist, before estimating prognosis. They agreed with the first opinion or rectified discrepancies carefully. Altogether, this study exposes missed opportunities for open prognostic discussions in SOs. Consulting oncologists could explicitly explore patients’ information preferences and perceptions of prognosis. If desired, they can provide tailored, independent information to optimise patients’ prognostic awareness and informed medical decision-making. They may additionally support patients in dealing with prognosis and the uncertainties associated with it.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8199300
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81993002021-06-14 Communication about Prognosis during Patient-Initiated Second Opinion Consultations in Advanced Cancer Care: An Observational Qualitative Analysis van der Velden, N. C. A. van der Kleij, M. B. A. Lehmann, V. Smets, E. M. A. Stouthard, J. M. L. Henselmans, I. Hillen, M. A. Int J Environ Res Public Health Article Prognostic communication is essential for patients with advanced cancer to enable informed medical decision-making and end-of-life planning. Discussing prognosis is challenging, and might be especially complex for oncologists conducting a second opinion (SO). Survival data are often lacking, and consulting oncologists need to consider previously conveyed information and patients’ relationship with the referring oncologist. We qualitatively investigated how advanced cancer patients and consulting oncologists discuss prognosis during audio-recorded SO consultations (N = 60), including prognostic information received from the referring oncologist. Our results show that patients regularly expressed implicit cues to discuss prognosis or posed explicit questions tentatively. Consulting oncologists were mostly unresponsive to patients’ cues and cautious to prognosticate. They also seemed cautious when patients brought up the referring oncologist. Consulting oncologists checked which prognostic information patients had received from the referring oncologist, before estimating prognosis. They agreed with the first opinion or rectified discrepancies carefully. Altogether, this study exposes missed opportunities for open prognostic discussions in SOs. Consulting oncologists could explicitly explore patients’ information preferences and perceptions of prognosis. If desired, they can provide tailored, independent information to optimise patients’ prognostic awareness and informed medical decision-making. They may additionally support patients in dealing with prognosis and the uncertainties associated with it. MDPI 2021-05-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8199300/ /pubmed/34073341 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18115694 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
van der Velden, N. C. A.
van der Kleij, M. B. A.
Lehmann, V.
Smets, E. M. A.
Stouthard, J. M. L.
Henselmans, I.
Hillen, M. A.
Communication about Prognosis during Patient-Initiated Second Opinion Consultations in Advanced Cancer Care: An Observational Qualitative Analysis
title Communication about Prognosis during Patient-Initiated Second Opinion Consultations in Advanced Cancer Care: An Observational Qualitative Analysis
title_full Communication about Prognosis during Patient-Initiated Second Opinion Consultations in Advanced Cancer Care: An Observational Qualitative Analysis
title_fullStr Communication about Prognosis during Patient-Initiated Second Opinion Consultations in Advanced Cancer Care: An Observational Qualitative Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Communication about Prognosis during Patient-Initiated Second Opinion Consultations in Advanced Cancer Care: An Observational Qualitative Analysis
title_short Communication about Prognosis during Patient-Initiated Second Opinion Consultations in Advanced Cancer Care: An Observational Qualitative Analysis
title_sort communication about prognosis during patient-initiated second opinion consultations in advanced cancer care: an observational qualitative analysis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8199300/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34073341
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18115694
work_keys_str_mv AT vanderveldennca communicationaboutprognosisduringpatientinitiatedsecondopinionconsultationsinadvancedcancercareanobservationalqualitativeanalysis
AT vanderkleijmba communicationaboutprognosisduringpatientinitiatedsecondopinionconsultationsinadvancedcancercareanobservationalqualitativeanalysis
AT lehmannv communicationaboutprognosisduringpatientinitiatedsecondopinionconsultationsinadvancedcancercareanobservationalqualitativeanalysis
AT smetsema communicationaboutprognosisduringpatientinitiatedsecondopinionconsultationsinadvancedcancercareanobservationalqualitativeanalysis
AT stouthardjml communicationaboutprognosisduringpatientinitiatedsecondopinionconsultationsinadvancedcancercareanobservationalqualitativeanalysis
AT henselmansi communicationaboutprognosisduringpatientinitiatedsecondopinionconsultationsinadvancedcancercareanobservationalqualitativeanalysis
AT hillenma communicationaboutprognosisduringpatientinitiatedsecondopinionconsultationsinadvancedcancercareanobservationalqualitativeanalysis