Departments of Internal Medicine and Health Management and Policy, Schools of Medicine and Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Department of Health Behavior and Education, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
JAMA Surg. 2017 Jul 1;152(7):658-664. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0458.
Guidelines assert that contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) should be discouraged in patients without an elevated risk for a second primary breast cancer. However, little is known about the impact of surgeons discouraging CPM on patient care satisfaction or decisions to seek treatment from another clinician.
To examine the association between patient report of first-surgeon recommendation against CPM and the extent of discussion about it with 3 outcomes: patient satisfaction with surgery decisions, receipt of a second opinion, and receipt of surgery by a second surgeon.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This population-based survey study was conducted in Georgia and California. We identified 3880 women with stages 0 to II breast cancer treated in 2013-2014 through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries of Georgia and Los Angeles County. Surveys were sent approximately 2 months after surgery (71% response rate, n = 2578). In this analysis conducted from February to May 2016, we included patients with unilateral breast cancer who considered CPM (n = 1140). Patients were selected between July 2013 and September 2014.
We examined report of surgeon recommendations, level of discussion about CPM, satisfaction with surgical decision making, receipt of second surgical opinion, and surgery from a second surgeon.
The mean (SD) age of patients included in this study was 56 (10.6) years. About one-quarter of patients (26.7%; n = 304) reported that their first surgeon recommended against CPM and 30.1% (n = 343) reported no substantial discussion about CPM. Dissatisfaction with surgery decision was uncommon (7.6%; n = 130), controlling for clinical and demographic characteristics. One-fifth of patients (20.6%; n = 304) had a second opinion about surgical options and 9.8% (n = 158) had surgery performed by a second surgeon. Dissatisfaction was very low (3.9%; n = 42) among patients who reported that their surgeon did not recommend against CPM but discussed it. Dissatisfaction was substantively higher for those whose surgeon recommended against CPM with no substantive discussion (14.5%; n = 37). Women who received a recommendation against CPM were not more likely to seek a second opinion (17.1% among patients with recommendation against CPM vs 15.1% of others; P = .52) nor to receive surgery by a second surgeon (7.9% among patients with recommendation against CPM vs 8.3% of others; P = .88).
Most patients are satisfied with surgical decision making. First-surgeon recommendation against CPM does not appear to substantively increase patient dissatisfaction, use of second opinions, or loss of the patient to a second surgeon.
指南主张,对于没有发生第二原发乳腺癌风险升高的患者,应劝阻其进行对侧预防性乳房切除术(CPM)。然而,对于外科医生劝阻 CPM 对患者护理满意度或寻求另一位临床医生治疗的决定的影响,我们知之甚少。
研究患者报告的第一外科医生建议反对 CPM 与以下 3 个结果之间的关联:患者对手术决策的满意度、接受第二意见和接受第二外科医生手术的情况:
接受第二意见;
接受第二外科医生手术。
设计、设置和参与者:这项基于人群的调查研究在佐治亚州和加利福尼亚州进行。我们通过佐治亚州和洛杉矶县的监测、流行病学和最终结果登记处,确定了 2013-2014 年间接受治疗的 3880 名患有 0 期至 2 期乳腺癌的女性。大约在手术后 2 个月(71%的应答率,n=2578)寄出了调查问卷。在 2016 年 2 月至 5 月进行的这项分析中,我们纳入了考虑 CPM 的单侧乳腺癌患者(n=1140)。患者于 2013 年 7 月至 2014 年 9 月间入选。
我们检查了外科医生建议、CPM 讨论程度、手术决策满意度、接受第二外科医生手术意见和接受第二外科医生手术情况。
这项研究纳入的患者平均(SD)年龄为 56(10.6)岁。大约四分之一的患者(26.7%;n=304)报告其第一外科医生建议反对 CPM,30.1%(n=343)报告对 CPM 没有进行实质性讨论。手术决策不满意的情况并不常见(7.6%;n=130),控制了临床和人口统计学特征。五分之一的患者(20.6%;n=304)对手术方案有第二意见,9.8%(n=158)由第二外科医生进行了手术。那些报告其外科医生不建议但讨论 CPM 的患者满意度非常低(3.9%;n=42)。那些报告外科医生建议反对 CPM 且没有实质性讨论的患者,满意度明显更高(14.5%;n=37)。接受 CPM 反对建议的患者不太可能寻求第二意见(CPM 反对建议患者中为 17.1%,其他患者中为 15.1%;P=0.52),也不太可能接受第二外科医生手术(CPM 反对建议患者中为 7.9%,其他患者中为 8.3%;P=0.88)。
大多数患者对手术决策感到满意。第一外科医生建议反对 CPM 似乎不会实质性增加患者的不满、第二意见的使用或患者流失到第二外科医生。