4.5 Article

Probabilities of benefit and harms of preoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer: What do radiation oncologists tell and what do patients understand?

Journal

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
Volume 98, Issue 9, Pages 1092-1098

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2015.05.009

Keywords

Rectal cancer; Risk communication; Information provision; Preoperative radiotherapy; Shared decision making

Funding

  1. Dutch Cancer Society [UL2009-4431]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Probabilities of benefits and harms of treatment may help patients when making a treatment decision. This study aimed to examine (1) whether and how radiation oncologists convey probabilities to rectal cancer patients, and (2) patients' estimates of probabilities of major outcomes of rectal cancer treatment. Methods: First consultations of oncologists and patients eligible for preoperative radiotherapy (PRT) (N=90) were audio taped. Tapes were transcribed verbatim and coded to identify probabilistic information presented. Patients (N=56) filled in a post-consultation questionnaire on their estimates of probabilities. Results: Probabilities were mentioned in 99% (local recurrence), 75% (incontinence), 72% and 40% (sexual dysfunction in males and females, respectively) of cases. Most patients (89%) correctly estimated that PRT decreases the probability of local recurrence, and 10% and 38%/54% that it increases the probability of incontinence and sexual dysfunction in males/females, respectively. Patients tended to underestimate the probabilities of harms of treatment. Conclusion: Our results show that oncologists almost always mention probabilities of benefit of PRT. In contrast, probabilities of harms often go unmentioned. The effect of PRT on adverse events is often underestimated. Practice implications: Oncologists should stay alert to patients' possible misunderstanding of probabilistic information and should check patients' perceptions of probabilities. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available