• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

主动参与乳腺癌患者对侧预防性乳房切除术的决策。

Active Participation in Decision-Making in Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy for Patients With Breast Cancer.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.

Department of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.

出版信息

J Surg Res. 2019 Oct;242:129-135. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2019.04.037. Epub 2019 May 7.

DOI:10.1016/j.jss.2019.04.037
PMID:31075657
Abstract

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine how patient-physician communication affects patients' decision-making when choosing between contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) and unilateral mastectomy (UM).

METHODS

atients with breast cancer who underwent mastectomy at our institution were approached with a survey regarding patient-physician communication in CPM.

RESULTS

Of 101 patients who completed the survey, 55 underwent CPM (54.5%). Thirty-three patients (33%) stated that their physician recommended UM, six (6%) stated their physician recommended CPM, and 61 (61%) stated they engaged in active participation in decision-making. Most patients whose doctors recommended UM chose UM (78.8%); similarly, 83.3% of those whose doctors recommended CPM chose CPM. Of 39 patients whose doctors recommended a particular surgical option, eight (20.5%) did not follow their doctor's advice. These patients were equally as satisfied with their decisions as those who followed their doctor's advice (P = 0.441). Patients engaging in active participation in decision-making tended to choose CPM (68.3% versus 30.8%, P < 0.001). Patients who did not engage in active participation were similarly satisfied with their decision as those who did (P = 0.286). Twelve patients (12%) stated they preferred their doctor to provide a recommendation, seven (7%) preferred to make the decision on their own, and 81 (81%) preferred to actively participate in their decision-making with the physician.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients tend to follow physicians' recommendation of UM or CPM; patients engaging in SDM tend to choose CPM. Most patients prefer to engage in active participation in decision-making with their physician but were equally satisfied with their surgical decision whether they engaged in active participation or not.

摘要

背景

我们旨在探讨医患沟通如何影响患者在选择对侧预防性乳房切除术(CPM)与单侧乳房切除术(UM)时的决策。

方法

在我院接受乳房切除术的乳腺癌患者接受了一项关于 CPM 中医患沟通的调查。

结果

在完成调查的 101 名患者中,55 名患者接受了 CPM(54.5%)。33 名患者(33%)表示医生建议进行 UM,6 名患者(6%)表示医生建议进行 CPM,61 名患者(61%)表示他们积极参与了决策过程。大多数医生建议进行 UM 的患者选择了 UM(78.8%);同样,83.3%的医生建议进行 CPM 的患者选择了 CPM。在 39 名医生建议特定手术方案的患者中,有 8 名(20.5%)未遵循医生的建议。这些患者对自己的决策与听从医生建议的患者一样满意(P=0.441)。积极参与决策的患者更倾向于选择 CPM(68.3%比 30.8%,P<0.001)。未积极参与决策的患者与积极参与决策的患者满意度相当(P=0.286)。12 名患者(12%)表示他们希望医生提供建议,7 名患者(7%)希望自己做决定,81 名患者(81%)希望与医生一起积极参与自己的决策。

结论

患者倾向于遵循医生对 UM 或 CPM 的建议;积极参与 SDM 的患者更倾向于选择 CPM。大多数患者希望与医生积极参与决策,但无论是否积极参与,他们对手术决策的满意度相当。

相似文献

1
Active Participation in Decision-Making in Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy for Patients With Breast Cancer.主动参与乳腺癌患者对侧预防性乳房切除术的决策。
J Surg Res. 2019 Oct;242:129-135. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2019.04.037. Epub 2019 May 7.
2
Factors associated with decision to undergo contralateral prophylactic mastectomy versus unilateral mastectomy.与选择接受对侧预防性乳房切除术与单侧乳房切除术相关的因素。
Am J Surg. 2019 Jul;218(1):170-174. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.11.040. Epub 2018 Dec 8.
3
Effect of decision-making resources on satisfaction with decision to undergo contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM).决策资源对接受预防性对侧乳房切除术(CPM)决策满意度的影响。
Am J Surg. 2020 Jun;219(6):1036-1038. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2019.09.021. Epub 2019 Sep 21.
4
Local Therapy Decision-Making and Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy in Young Women with Early-Stage Breast Cancer.早期乳腺癌年轻女性的局部治疗决策与对侧预防性乳房切除术
Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Nov;22(12):3809-15. doi: 10.1245/s10434-015-4572-6. Epub 2015 May 1.
5
Long-Term Satisfaction and Body Image After Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy.对侧预防性乳房切除术后的长期满意度和身体形象
Ann Surg Oncol. 2017 Jun;24(6):1499-1506. doi: 10.1245/s10434-016-5753-7. Epub 2017 Jan 5.
6
Patient Reactions to Surgeon Recommendations About Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy for Treatment of Breast Cancer.患者对医生关于乳腺癌治疗的对侧预防性乳房切除术建议的反应。
JAMA Surg. 2017 Jul 1;152(7):658-664. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0458.
7
Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy Decisions in a Population-Based Sample of Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer.早期乳腺癌患者基于人群样本的对侧预防性乳房切除术决策
JAMA Surg. 2017 Mar 1;152(3):274-282. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.4749.
8
Women's decision-making roles regarding contralateral prophylactic mastectomy.女性在对侧预防性乳房切除方面的决策角色。
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2005(35):55-60. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgi038.
9
Surgical Decision-Making Surrounding Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy: Comparison of Treatment Goals, Preferences, and Psychosocial Outcomes from a Multicenter Survey of Breast Cancer Patients.围绕着对侧预防性乳房切除术的手术决策:一项对乳腺癌患者进行的多中心调查的治疗目标、偏好和心理社会结果比较。
Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 Dec;28(13):8752-8765. doi: 10.1245/s10434-021-10426-y. Epub 2021 Jul 12.
10
"It felt like unfinished business, it feels like that's finished now": Women's experiences of decision making around contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM).“感觉就像未竟之事,现在感觉已经结束了”:女性在决定是否进行对侧预防性乳房切除术(CPM)时的体验。
Psychooncology. 2019 Jun;28(6):1328-1334. doi: 10.1002/pon.5086. Epub 2019 Apr 24.

引用本文的文献

1
Integrating Palliative Care Into Self-management of Breast Cancer: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.将姑息治疗融入乳腺癌自我管理中:一项试点随机对照试验。
Cancer Nurs. 2023;46(3):E169-E180. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000001078. Epub 2022 Dec 1.
2
Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in breast cancer: what to discuss with patients.乳腺癌的对侧预防性乳房切除术:与患者讨论的内容。
Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2020 Mar;20(3):159-166. doi: 10.1080/14737140.2020.1732213. Epub 2020 Feb 28.