Cargando…
Impact of the shared decision‐making process on lung cancer screening decisions
BACKGROUND: Professional organizations recommend the use of shared decision‐making (SDM) in supporting patients’ decisions about lung cancer screening (LCS). The objective of this study was to assess the impact of the SDM process on patient knowledge about LCS, decisional conflict, intentions to adh...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8817098/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34964284 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.4445 |
_version_ | 1784645563653816320 |
---|---|
author | Tan, Naomi Q. P. Nishi, Shawn P. E. Lowenstein, Lisa M. Mendoza, Tito R. Lopez‐Olivo, Maria A. Crocker, Laura C. Sepucha, Karen R. Volk, Robert J. |
author_facet | Tan, Naomi Q. P. Nishi, Shawn P. E. Lowenstein, Lisa M. Mendoza, Tito R. Lopez‐Olivo, Maria A. Crocker, Laura C. Sepucha, Karen R. Volk, Robert J. |
author_sort | Tan, Naomi Q. P. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Professional organizations recommend the use of shared decision‐making (SDM) in supporting patients’ decisions about lung cancer screening (LCS). The objective of this study was to assess the impact of the SDM process on patient knowledge about LCS, decisional conflict, intentions to adhere to screening recommendations, and its role in how the patient made the final decision. METHODS: This study surveyed patients screened for lung cancer within 12 months of the survey, recruited from two academic tertiary care centers in the South Central Region of the U.S. (May to July 2018). RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty‐four patients completed the survey (87.9% White, 52% male, and mean age of 64.81). Higher SDM process scores (which indicates a better SDM process reported by patients) were significantly associated with greater knowledge of LCS (b = 0.17 p < 0.01). Higher SDM process scores were associated with less decisional conflict about their screening choice (b = 0.45, p < 0.001), greater intentions to make the same decision again (OR = 1.42, 95% CI = [1.06–1.89]), and greater intentions to undergo LCS again (OR = 1.32, 95% CI = [1.08–1.62]). The SDM process score was not associated with patients’ report of whether or not they shared the final decision with the healthcare provider (OR = 1.07, 95% CI = [0.85–1.35]). CONCLUSION(S): This study found that a better SDM process was associated with better affective‐cognitive outcomes among patients screened for lung cancer. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8817098 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88170982022-02-08 Impact of the shared decision‐making process on lung cancer screening decisions Tan, Naomi Q. P. Nishi, Shawn P. E. Lowenstein, Lisa M. Mendoza, Tito R. Lopez‐Olivo, Maria A. Crocker, Laura C. Sepucha, Karen R. Volk, Robert J. Cancer Med Cancer Prevention BACKGROUND: Professional organizations recommend the use of shared decision‐making (SDM) in supporting patients’ decisions about lung cancer screening (LCS). The objective of this study was to assess the impact of the SDM process on patient knowledge about LCS, decisional conflict, intentions to adhere to screening recommendations, and its role in how the patient made the final decision. METHODS: This study surveyed patients screened for lung cancer within 12 months of the survey, recruited from two academic tertiary care centers in the South Central Region of the U.S. (May to July 2018). RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty‐four patients completed the survey (87.9% White, 52% male, and mean age of 64.81). Higher SDM process scores (which indicates a better SDM process reported by patients) were significantly associated with greater knowledge of LCS (b = 0.17 p < 0.01). Higher SDM process scores were associated with less decisional conflict about their screening choice (b = 0.45, p < 0.001), greater intentions to make the same decision again (OR = 1.42, 95% CI = [1.06–1.89]), and greater intentions to undergo LCS again (OR = 1.32, 95% CI = [1.08–1.62]). The SDM process score was not associated with patients’ report of whether or not they shared the final decision with the healthcare provider (OR = 1.07, 95% CI = [0.85–1.35]). CONCLUSION(S): This study found that a better SDM process was associated with better affective‐cognitive outcomes among patients screened for lung cancer. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-12-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8817098/ /pubmed/34964284 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.4445 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Cancer Prevention Tan, Naomi Q. P. Nishi, Shawn P. E. Lowenstein, Lisa M. Mendoza, Tito R. Lopez‐Olivo, Maria A. Crocker, Laura C. Sepucha, Karen R. Volk, Robert J. Impact of the shared decision‐making process on lung cancer screening decisions |
title | Impact of the shared decision‐making process on lung cancer screening decisions |
title_full | Impact of the shared decision‐making process on lung cancer screening decisions |
title_fullStr | Impact of the shared decision‐making process on lung cancer screening decisions |
title_full_unstemmed | Impact of the shared decision‐making process on lung cancer screening decisions |
title_short | Impact of the shared decision‐making process on lung cancer screening decisions |
title_sort | impact of the shared decision‐making process on lung cancer screening decisions |
topic | Cancer Prevention |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8817098/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34964284 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.4445 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tannaomiqp impactoftheshareddecisionmakingprocessonlungcancerscreeningdecisions AT nishishawnpe impactoftheshareddecisionmakingprocessonlungcancerscreeningdecisions AT lowensteinlisam impactoftheshareddecisionmakingprocessonlungcancerscreeningdecisions AT mendozatitor impactoftheshareddecisionmakingprocessonlungcancerscreeningdecisions AT lopezolivomariaa impactoftheshareddecisionmakingprocessonlungcancerscreeningdecisions AT crockerlaurac impactoftheshareddecisionmakingprocessonlungcancerscreeningdecisions AT sepuchakarenr impactoftheshareddecisionmakingprocessonlungcancerscreeningdecisions AT volkrobertj impactoftheshareddecisionmakingprocessonlungcancerscreeningdecisions |