8521 Background: The extent of patient involvement in the decision making process for cancer treatment can impact satisfaction with care. A pooled-analysis of clinical studies from the US and Canada incorporating the Control Preferences Scale (CPS) was conducted to produce normalized data regarding patient preferences and examine differences in role preference related to country, tumor type, gender and other demographics. Methods: Patient data culled from six trials indicated the treatment decision making role preferred and the role actually experienced clinically. Fisher’s Exact Tests were performed to compare role distribution concordance and association with clinical and demographic variables. Results: Data available for 3,491 patients indicated that 25% preferred an active role, 46% a collaborative role, and 29% a passive role in their medical treatment decision making. In terms of actual experience, 30% of patients reported taking on an active role, 34% collaborative, and 36% passive. Overall, 61% of patients reported playing the role they prefer. Differences between genders in the preferred role were slight, but males achieved their preferred role more often than females (66% vs. 60%, p=0.011). More women actually took a passive role than men (40% vs. 24%, p<0.0001) as did more patients in the US than Canada (84% vs. 54%, p<0.001). Canadian patients preferred more passive than active roles (33% vs 22.4%) and US patients preferred more active to passive roles (31.9% vs 14.2%) (p<0.001). Older patients preferred a more passive role and took on that role. Differences in role preference across tumor types were negligible. Conclusions: Roughly one half of the cancer patients studied indicated that they preferred to have a collaborative relationship with physicians, the remaining patients split equally between an active and passive role. The US cohort seemed to want to be more assertive than their Canadian counterparts and women ended up playing a more passive role than they preferred. Given these gender and cross-county differences these findings highlight the need for individualized patient communication styles to be incorporated into treatment plans No significant financial relationships to disclose.
The relationship between cancer patient treatment decision-making roles and quality of life (QOL)
6075 Background: Failing to meet patient expectations for participating in treatment decisions impacts satisfaction with care, but it is unknown whether this translates into QOL deficits. As part of a larger survey of cancer survivors conducted by the American Cancer Society (ACS), data were gathered on the role patients in Minnesota preferred and the role actually experienced during the treatment decision-making process. Methods: Patients who were diagnosed with one of the ten most common cancers in 2000 completed a survey containing the Profile of Mood States (POMS), the SF-36, and the Control Preferences Scale (CPS). Fisher’s exact tests compared role preference distributions across demographic categories. Two-sample t-tests compared the POMS and SF-36 scores between patients whose preferred role preference was concordant with the role experienced and those with discordant preferred and actual roles. Results: 33% of the 599 consenting patients preferred an active role in treatment decision-making, 52% preferred a collaborative role, and 13% preferred a passive role. The actual roles experienced were 33% active, 50% collaborative, 17% passive. Over 88% of patients had concordant preferred and actual roles. Patients with concordant roles had higher SF-36 physical scores (45 vs 40, p=0.004), higher vitality (50 vs 42, p=0.005), less fatigue (70.2 vs 60.1, p=0.001), better concentration (84 vs 79, p=0.008) and better overall mood (77 vs 73, p=0.006). Role preference differed across gender (p=0.0002) in that more women preferred a collaborative role than men (57.8% vs 45.5%) and fewer women preferred a passive role (9% vs 17.3%). Patients under age 50 experienced more active roles in treatment decisions than those aged 50+ (p=0.04). Patients reporting an active actual role had higher SF-36 physical scores (p=0.005) and higher POMS vigor subscale scores (p=0.04). There were no differences in QOL scores for preferred roles. Conclusions: Patients who experienced discordance between their preferred role and their experience reported substantial QOL deficits in both physical and emotional domains. Oncologists can improve patient satisfaction with care and QOL by meeting patient expectations with respect to the amount of input they have in making treatment decisions. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
The relation between cancer patient treatment decision‐making roles and quality of life