Moumjid Nora, Carrère Marie-Odile, Charavel Marie, Brémond Alain
GRESAC UMR 5823 CNRS, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France.
Health Expect. 2003 Sep;6(3):222-7. doi: 10.1046/j.1369-6513.2003.00241.x.
To assess (1) the clinical issues addressed during the medical encounter; (2) the feasibility of the process of shared decision-making in clinical practice and (3) patients' desires concerning the question of 'who should take the decision in breast cancer treatments?'
Qualitative pilot study based on clinical encounters using decision boards and information booklets.
Centre Léon Bérard, a comprehensive cancer centre in the Rhône-Alpes region of France.
One breast cancer surgeon and 22 breast cancer patients.
Analysis of patients' reactions to a shared decision-making process concerning surgery and chemotherapy, and analysis of its practical feasibility (i.e. duration of the consultations).
(1) Twenty-one patients participated in the decision regarding surgery; all chose conservative treatment; 15 patients had their own say about chemotherapy (nine chose no chemotherapy, six chose chemotherapy). (2) Participating in treatment choice generated anxiety for a majority of patients. Some were dissatisfied because they had to make a choice and consequently to give up the other option. Finally, some were uncertain about making the right choice. Nevertheless, most were satisfied with the information given and the possibility of participating to the treatment decision-making process. (3) The total duration of the entire process of shared decision-making is consistent with the time spent with patients with such a severe disease.
DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Most of the patients expressed their satisfaction regarding the possibility to participate in treatment decision-making, knowing that offering treatment choice is very unusual in France. From this pilot study it appears that shared decision-making is feasible in clinical practice. Nevertheless, a quantitative study based on a large sample of patients is necessary to: (1) confirm this hypothesis, (2) ensure that patients are willing to participate in their treatment decision-making, and (3) measure the potential benefits related to this participation.
评估(1)医疗问诊过程中涉及的临床问题;(2)临床实践中共同决策过程的可行性;(3)患者对于“乳腺癌治疗应由谁来做决策”这一问题的意愿。
基于使用决策板和信息手册的临床问诊的定性试点研究。
法国罗纳-阿尔卑斯地区的综合癌症中心莱昂·贝拉尔中心。
一名乳腺癌外科医生和22名乳腺癌患者。
分析患者对手术和化疗共同决策过程的反应,以及分析其实际可行性(即问诊时长)。
(1)21名患者参与了手术决策;均选择了保守治疗;15名患者对化疗发表了自己的意见(9名选择不化疗,6名选择化疗)。(2)参与治疗选择使大多数患者产生焦虑。一些患者不满意,因为他们必须做出选择,从而不得不放弃另一种选择。最后,一些患者不确定自己是否做出了正确的选择。然而,大多数患者对所提供的信息以及参与治疗决策过程的可能性感到满意。(3)共同决策整个过程的总时长与诊治此类重症患者所花费的时间一致。
讨论/结论:大多数患者对能够参与治疗决策表示满意,因为在法国提供治疗选择并不常见。从这项试点研究来看,共同决策在临床实践中是可行的。然而,有必要基于大量患者样本进行定量研究,以:(1)证实这一假设;(2)确保患者愿意参与其治疗决策;(3)衡量与这种参与相关的潜在益处。