Solomon Michael J, Pager Chet K, Keshava Anil, Findlay Michael, Butow Phyllis, Salkeld Glenn P, Roberts Rachael
Surgicak Outcomes Research Center (SOuRCe), University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Dis Colon Rectum. 2003 Oct;46(10):1351-7. doi: 10.1097/01.DCR.0000084432.45536.83.
Clinicians often make decisions for their patients, despite evidence that suggests that correspondence between patient and clinician decision making is poor. The management of colorectal cancer presents difficult decisions because the impact of treatment on quality of life might overshadow its survival efficacy. This study investigated whether patients are able to trade survival for quality of life as a means to express their preference for treatment options and to compare their preferences with those expressed by clinicians.
Patients undergoing curative surgery for colorectal cancer were interviewed postoperatively to elicit their preferences in four hypothetical treatment scenarios. A questionnaire was mailed to all Australian colorectal surgeons and medical oncologists that asked them to respond as if they themselves were patients.
One hundred patients (91 percent), 43 colorectal surgeons (77 percent), and 103 medical oncologists (50 percent) participated. In all four scenarios, patients were able to trade survival for quality of life. Patients' responses varied between scenarios, both in willingness to trade and the average amount traded. There were significant differences between patients and clinicians. Clinicians were more willing than patients to trade survival to avoid a permanent colostomy in favor of chemoradiotherapy. Patients' strongest preference was to avoid chemotherapy, more than to avoid a permanent colostomy.
Patients are able to trade survival as a measure of preference for quality of life and can do so differentially between treatment scenarios. Patients' preferences do not always accord with those of clinicians. Unless patients' preferences are explicitly sought and incorporated into clinical decision making, patients may not receive the treatment that is best for them.
尽管有证据表明患者与临床医生的决策之间存在差异,但临床医生仍经常为患者做出决策。结直肠癌的治疗面临艰难的决策,因为治疗对生活质量的影响可能会掩盖其生存疗效。本研究调查了患者是否能够用生存来换取生活质量,以此来表达他们对治疗方案的偏好,并将他们的偏好与临床医生表达的偏好进行比较。
对接受结直肠癌根治性手术的患者在术后进行访谈,以了解他们在四种假设治疗方案中的偏好。向所有澳大利亚结直肠外科医生和医学肿瘤学家邮寄了一份问卷,要求他们以患者的身份做出回应。
100名患者(91%)、43名结直肠外科医生(77%)和103名医学肿瘤学家(50%)参与了研究。在所有四种方案中,患者都能够用生存来换取生活质量。患者的反应在不同方案之间有所不同,在交易意愿和平均交易数量方面均是如此。患者和临床医生之间存在显著差异。在避免永久性结肠造口术而选择放化疗方面,临床医生比患者更愿意用生存来进行交易。患者最强烈的偏好是避免化疗,而不是避免永久性结肠造口术。
患者能够将生存作为衡量生活质量偏好的指标,并且在不同治疗方案之间能够有所差异地进行权衡。患者的偏好并不总是与临床医生的偏好一致。除非明确征求患者的偏好并将其纳入临床决策,否则患者可能无法接受最适合他们的治疗。