|
|||||
|
|
||||||
Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 25, No 21 (July 20), 2007: pp. 3096-3100 © 2007 American Society of Clinical Oncology. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2006.07.4955 Doctors and Patients Preferences for Participation and Treatment in Curative Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy
From the Departments of Radiation Oncology and Medical Technology Assessment, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen; and Arnhems Radiotherapeutic Institute, Arnhem, the Netherlands Address reprint requests to Peep F.M. Stalmeier, PhD, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, MTA 138, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, the Netherlands; e-mail: p.stalmeier{at}mta.umcn.nl Purpose Physicians hold opinions about unvoiced patient preferences, so-called substitute preferences. We studied whether doctors can predict preferences of patients supported with a decision aid. Methods A total of 150 patients with prostate cancer facing radiotherapy were included. After the initial consultation, without discussing any treatment choice, physicians gave substitute judgments for patients' decision-making and radiation dose preferences. Physicians knew that several weeks later, patients would be empowered by a decision aid supporting a choice between two radiation doses involving a trade-off between disease-free survival and adverse effects. Subsequently, patient preferences for decision making (whether or not they wanted to choose a radiation dose) and for treatment (low or high dose) were obtained. The chosen radiation dose actually was administered.
Results Of the patients studied, 79% chose a treatment; physicians believed that 66% of the patients wanted to choose. Agreement was poor (64%; Conclusion Physicians had problems predicting the preferences of patients empowered with a decision aid. They slightly underestimated patients' decision-making preferences, and underestimated patients' preferences for the less toxic treatment. Counseling might be improved by first informing patients—possibly using a decision aid—before discussing patient preferences. Supported in part by a grant from the Dutch Cancer Society, Amsterdam, the Netherlands (Project No. KUN 2001-2379 and KUN 2005-3457). The funding agreement ensured the authors' independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, and writing and publishing the report. P.F.M.S. and J.J.V.T.-G. are supported by the sponsor. Presented at the 10th Biennial European Meeting of the Society for Medical Decision Making, June 11-13, 2006, Birmingham, United Kingdom. Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article. Clinical Trials Registry ISRCTN97145188.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
Copyright © 2007 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Online ISSN: 1527-7755. Print ISSN: 0732-183X
|