Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Jun;19(6):654-60.
doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2013-0268. Epub 2014 Apr 23.

Medical expertise and patient involvement: a multiperspective qualitative observation study of the patient's role in oncological decision making

Sabine Salloch  1 , Peter Ritter  2 , Sebastian Wäscher  2 , Jochen Vollmann  2 , Jan Schildmann  2
Affiliations

Medical expertise and patient involvement: a multiperspective qualitative observation study of the patient's role in oncological decision making

Sabine Salloch et al. Oncologist. 2014 Jun.

Abstract

Background: Decision making in oncology poses intricate ethical questions because treatment decisions should account not only for evidence-based standards but also for the patient's individual values and preferences. However, there is a scarcity of empirical knowledge about patient involvement in oncological decision making.

Methods: Direct, nonparticipant observation was used as a qualitative research method to gain an understanding of the interplay between medical expertise and patient participation in oncological decision making. Based on a multiperspective approach, observations were performed in three settings (tumor conference, ward round, and outpatient clinic) in the oncology department of a German university hospital. The observation transcripts were analyzed using central features of qualitative data analysis.

Results: Major differences were identified regarding the decision-making processes in the three settings related to the patient's presence or absence. When the patient was absent, his or her wishes were cited only irregularly; however, patients actively advanced their wishes when present. Preselection of treatments by physicians was observed, narrowing the scope of options that were finally discussed with the patient. Dealing with decisions about risky treatments was especially regarded as part of the physician's professional expertise.

Conclusion: The study reveals aspects of decision making for cancer patients that have been underexposed in the empirical and theoretical literature so far. Among these are the relevance of structural aspects for the decisions made and the practice of preselection of treatment options. It should be further discussed how far medical expertise reaches and whether therapeutic decisions can be made without consulting the patient.

Keywords: Decision making; Observation; Patient participation; Qualitative research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article.

References

    1. Buiting HM, Rurup ML, Wijsbek H, et al. Understanding provision of chemotherapy to patients with end stage cancer: Qualitative interview study. BMJ. 2011;342:d1933. - PMC - PubMed
    1. van Leeuwen AF, Voogt E, Visser A, et al. Considerations of healthcare professionals in medical decision-making about treatment for clinical end-stage cancer patients. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2004;28:351–355. - PubMed
    1. Winkler EC, Hiddemann W, Marckmann G. Ethical assessment of life-prolonging treatment. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:720–722. - PubMed
    1. Say R, Murtagh M, Thomson R. Patients’ preference for involvement in medical decision making: A narrative review. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;60:102–114. - PubMed
    1. Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T. Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: What does it mean? (Or it takes at least two to tango) Soc Sci Med. 1997;44:681–692. - PubMed

Publication types