"I need to know what makes somebody tick …": Challenges and Strategies of Implementing Shared Decision-Making in Individualized Oncology
- PMID: 30190300
- PMCID: PMC6459243
- DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2017-0615
"I need to know what makes somebody tick …": Challenges and Strategies of Implementing Shared Decision-Making in Individualized Oncology
Abstract
Background: Shared decision-making (SDM) has been advocated as an ethical framework for decision-making in cancer care. According to SDM, patients make decisions in light of their values and based on the available evidence. However, SDM is difficult to implement in cancer care. A lack of applicability in practice is often reported. This empirical-ethical study explores factors potentially relevant to current difficulties in translating the concept of SDM into clinical practice.
Methods: This study was conducted with nonparticipant observation of the decision-making process in patients with gastrointestinal cancers for whom the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy was uncertain according to clinical guidelines. Triangulation of qualitative data analysis was conducted by means of semistructured interviews subsequent to the observation. Observation notes and interview transcripts were analyzed according to the principles of grounded theory.
Results: Deviating from the concept of SDM, oncologists initiated a process of eliciting values and medical information prior to conveying information. The purpose of this approach was to select and individualize information relevant to the treatment decision. In doing so, the oncologists observed used two strategies: "biographical communication" and a "metacommunicative approach." Both strategies could be shown to be effective or to fail depending on patients' characteristics such as their view of the physicians' role and the relevance of value-related information for medical decision-making.
Conclusion: In contrast to the conceptual account of SDM, oncologists are in need of patient-related information prior to conveying information. Both strategies observed to elicit such information are in principle justifiable but need to be adapted in accordance with patient preferences and decision-making styles.
Implications for practice: This study showed that knowledge of patients' values and preferences is very important to properly adapt the giving of medical information and to further the process of shared decision-making. Shared decision-making (SDM) trainings should consider different strategies of talking about values. The right strategy depends largely on the patient's preferences in communication. To be aware of the role of values in SDM and to be able to switch communicative strategies might prove to be of particular value. A more systematic evaluation of the patient's decision-making preferences as part of routine procedures in hospitals might help to reduce value-related barriers in communication.
Keywords: Chemotherapy; Decision‐making; Ethics; Shared decision‐making; Uncertainty.
© AlphaMed Press 2018.
Conflict of interest statement
Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Shared decision making in oncology practice: what do oncologists need to know?Oncologist. 2012;17(1):91-100. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2011-0261. Epub 2012 Jan 10. Oncologist. 2012. PMID: 22234632 Free PMC article. Review.
-
A qualitative systematic review of internal and external influences on shared decision-making in all health care settings.JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2012;10(58):4633-4646. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2012-432. JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2012. PMID: 27820528
-
Prospectively investigating the impact of AI onshared decision-making in post kidney transplant care (PRIMA-AI): protocol for a longitudinal qualitative study among patients, their support persons and treating physicians at a tertiary care centre.BMJ Open. 2024 Oct 1;14(10):e081318. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-081318. BMJ Open. 2024. PMID: 39353696 Free PMC article.
-
[Physicians' awareness and assessment of shared decision making in oncology practice.].Rev Esp Salud Publica. 2019 Oct 9;93:e201910066. Rev Esp Salud Publica. 2019. PMID: 31594916 Free PMC article. Spanish.
-
Implementing and evaluating shared decision making in oncology practice.CA Cancer J Clin. 2014 Nov-Dec;64(6):377-88. doi: 10.3322/caac.21245. Epub 2014 Sep 8. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014. PMID: 25200391 Review.
Cited by
-
Discussing Prognosis with Empathy to Cancer Patients.Curr Oncol Rep. 2021 Mar 14;23(4):42. doi: 10.1007/s11912-021-01027-9. Curr Oncol Rep. 2021. PMID: 33718973 Review.
-
Using value-focused thinking to elicit oncologic inpatients' life and treatment objectives: a qualitative interview study.J Int Med Res. 2024 Jul;52(7):3000605241266224. doi: 10.1177/03000605241266224. J Int Med Res. 2024. PMID: 39082318 Free PMC article.
-
Analysis of Influencing Factors and Strategies of Implementing Shared Decision-Making Among Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Qualitative Studies.Ann Surg Oncol. 2025 Jul;32(7):5183-5199. doi: 10.1245/s10434-025-17317-6. Epub 2025 Apr 16. Ann Surg Oncol. 2025. PMID: 40238064
-
Can Large Language Models Aid Caregivers of Pediatric Cancer Patients in Information Seeking? A Cross-Sectional Investigation.Cancer Med. 2025 Jan;14(1):e70554. doi: 10.1002/cam4.70554. Cancer Med. 2025. PMID: 39776222 Free PMC article.
-
Navigating the patient-provider relationship during severe illness with lessons from a qualitative perspective of calciphylaxis.Sci Rep. 2025 Jul 2;15(1):23515. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-09116-6. Sci Rep. 2025. PMID: 40604220 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Braithwaite RS, Stevens ER, Caplan A. Is risk stratification ever the same as ‘profiling’? J Med Ethics 2016;42:325–329. - PubMed
-
- Engelhardt EG, Pieterse AH, Han PK et al. Disclosing the uncertainty associated with prognostic estimates in breast cancer. Med Decis Making 2017;37:179–192. - PubMed
-
- Yurki Ewicz S. The prospects for personalized medicine. Hastings Cent Rep 2012;40:14–16. - PubMed
-
- Kalia M. Personalized oncology: Recent advances and future challenges. Metabolism 2013;62 (suppl 1):S11–S14. - PubMed
-
- Pollard S, Bansback N, Bryan S. Physician attitudes toward shared decision making: A systematic review. Patient Educ Counsel 2015;98:1046–1057. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources