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
. 2019 Jun;22(6):677-684.
doi: 10.1089/jpm.2018.0441. Epub 2019 Mar 23.

How Do Blood Cancer Doctors Discuss Prognosis? Findings from a National Survey of Hematologic Oncologists

Affiliations

How Do Blood Cancer Doctors Discuss Prognosis? Findings from a National Survey of Hematologic Oncologists

Anand R Habib et al. J Palliat Med. 2019 Jun.

Abstract

Background: Although blood cancers are accompanied by a high level of prognostic uncertainty, little is known about when and how hematologic oncologists discuss prognosis. Objectives: Characterize reported practices and predictors of prognostic discussions for a cohort of hematologic oncologists. Design: Cross-sectional mailed survey in 2015. Setting/Subjects: U.S.-based hematologic oncologists providing clinical care for adult patients with blood cancers. Measurements: We conducted univariable and multivariable analyses assessing the association of clinician characteristics with reported frequency of initiation of prognostic discussions, type of terminology used, and whether prognosis is readdressed. Results: We received 349 surveys (response rate = 57.3%). The majority of respondents (60.3%) reported conducting prognostic discussions with "most" (>95%) of their patients. More than half (56.8%) preferred general/qualitative rather than specific/numeric terms when discussing prognosis. Although 91.3% reported that they typically first initiate prognostic discussions at diagnosis, 17.7% reported routinely never readdressing prognosis or waiting until death is imminent to revisit the topic. Hematologic oncologists with ≤15 years since medical school graduation (odds ratio [OR] 0.51; confidence interval (95% CI) 0.30-0.88) and those who considered prognostic uncertainty a barrier to quality end-of-life care (OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.35-0.90) had significantly lower odds of discussing prognosis with "most" patients. Conclusions: Although the majority of hematologic oncologists reported discussing prognosis with their patients, most prefer general/qualitative terms. Moreover, even though prognosis evolves during the disease course, nearly one in five reported never readdressing prognosis or only doing so near death. These findings suggest the need for structured interventions to improve prognostic communication for patients with blood cancers.

Keywords: communication; hematologic neoplasms; prognosis; terminal care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No competing financial interests exist.

References

    1. Sisk BA, Kang TI, Mack JW: Prognostic disclosures over time: Parental preferences and physician practices. Cancer 2017;123:4031–4038 - PubMed
    1. Lobb EA, Kenny DT, Butow PN, Tattersall MH: Women's preferences for discussion of prognosis in early breast cancer. Health Expect 2001;4:48–57 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hagerty RG, Butow PN, Ellis PA, et al. : Cancer patient preferences for communication of prognosis in the metastatic setting. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:1721–1730 - PubMed
    1. Degner LF, Kristjanson LJ, Bowman D, et al. : Information needs and decisional preferences in women with breast cancer. JAMA 1997;277:1485–1492 - PubMed
    1. The AM, Hak T, Koeter G, van Der Wal G: Collusion in doctor-patient communication about imminent death: An ethnographic study. BMJ 2000;321:1376–1381 - PMC - PubMed

Publication types