Eliciting patients’ preferences for adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: development and validation of a bedside decision‐making instrument in a French Regional Cancer Centre
- 1 June 2000
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Health Expectations
- Vol. 3 (2) , 97-113
- https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1369-6513.2000.00086.x
Abstract
Introduction: In developed countries, the physician‐patient relationship is moving from a paternalistic model to new decision‐making models that take patient preferences into account.Objectives: Our aim was to develop a Decision Board (DB) and to test its acceptability in a French Regional Cancer Centre regarding the decision on whether or not to use chemotherapy after surgery in postmenopausal women with breast cancer. This paper presents the development process for this instrument and reports the pretesting phase, as well as the corresponding results.Methods: A working group was created with oncologists, psychologists and economists. Following the first phase, i.e. the development process, a first version of the instrument was presented to health professionals. Their feedback led to important modifications of the instrument. The DB was then presented to experienced patients, which resulted in slight changes. The second phase consisted of pretesting the comprehension, internal and across‐time consistency of the DB on healthy volunteers.Results: The DB was pretested in a group of 40 healthy volunteers. Eighteen respondents chose chemotherapy and 22 chose not to have chemotherapy. Comprehension rates were very high (≥87.5%). Internal consistency was assessed considering option attitudes based on outcomes and option attitudes based on process. Women shifted their choices in a predictable way. Across‐time consistency was appraised using the test‐retest method with Visual Analog Scales. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient was 0.97.Discussion‐conclusion: Due to cultural differences, the DB developed in our French Cancer Centre is quite different from the DBs previously developed elsewhere. Our instrument showed good comprehension and consistency properties, which are corroborated by the DB literature. Whether our DB is acceptable for patients with breast cancer must still be tested. Patients’ reactions will tell us which type of decision‐making model is at work. Further research is needed in order to explore the shared decision‐making process and clarify the concept.Keywords
This publication has 58 references indexed in Scilit:
- Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trialsThe Lancet, 1998
- Development of a patient decision aid for choice of surgical treatment for breast cancerHealth Expectations, 1998
- Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: What does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango)Social Science & Medicine, 1997
- Patients’ Preferences for Therapy in Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Development, Testing, and Application of a Bedside Decision InstrumentGynecologic Oncology, 1996
- Offering Choice of treatment to patients with cancers. A review based on a symposium held at the 10th annual conference of the British psychosocial oncology group, December 1993European Journal Of Cancer, 1995
- Cancer patients, doctors and nurses vary in their willingness to undertake cancer chemotherapyEuropean Journal Of Cancer, 1995
- Reflections on the changing times.BMJ, 1990
- Attitudes to chemotherapy: comparing views of patients with cancer with those of doctors, nurses, and general public.BMJ, 1990
- When Competent Patients Make Irrational ChoicesNew England Journal of Medicine, 1990
- Describing Health StatesMedical Care, 1984