Ways to obtain a breast cancer diagnosis, consistency of information, patient satisfaction, and the presence of relatives.

Henning Brake, Heike Sassmann, Dorothee Noeres, Mechthild Neises, Siegfried Geyer
Author Information
  1. Henning Brake: Medical Sociology Unit, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Strasse 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany.

Abstract

GOALS OF WORK: What physicians told breast cancer patients about their diagnosis, who informed them, and how this information was conveyed were examined in this study. Finally, the relatives' role in this communication process was considered.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women with primary breast cancer (N = 222) below the age of 70 were interviewed after surgery and after they were informed about their diagnosis.
MAIN RESULTS: One hundred twenty-one women consulted their primary gynecologist first, then they were referred to a radiologist, and finally to the secondary care gynecologist. Forty-seven women omitted the radiologist and only five went directly to the hospital for treatment. In most cases (N = 199), the general practitioner was not involved. Receiving inconsistent information was associated with patient dissatisfaction. This also applies to women who received their diagnosis on the phone. Women awaiting a worse diagnosis were more likely to be accompanied by another person.
CONCLUSIONS: Future studies should focus on the possible involvement of family doctors and relatives during the diagnostic process. Giving inconsistent information should be avoided.

References

  1. Arch Surg. 1998 Sep;133(9):962-6 [PMID: 9749848]
  2. J Clin Oncol. 2002 Jan 15;20(2):503-13 [PMID: 11786580]
  3. Lancet. 1993 Feb 20;341(8843):473-6 [PMID: 8094498]
  4. Postgrad Med J. 1996 Jan;72(843):25-9 [PMID: 8746281]
  5. J Adv Nurs. 2005 Aug;51(3):217-26 [PMID: 16033589]
  6. Bioethics. 2003 Oct;17(5-6):417-24 [PMID: 14870764]
  7. J Med Ethics. 2001 Jun;27(3):192-7 [PMID: 11417028]
  8. JAMA. 1979 Mar 2;241(9):897-900 [PMID: 762865]
  9. JAMA. 1995 Sep 13;274(10):820-5 [PMID: 7650806]
  10. BMJ. 2002 Jun 29;324(7353):1567-9 [PMID: 12089097]
  11. Support Care Cancer. 2004 Mar;12(3):147-54 [PMID: 15074312]
  12. Ann Intern Med. 1980 Jun;92(6):832-6 [PMID: 7387025]
  13. West J Med. 1995 Jul;163(1):36-9 [PMID: 7667981]
  14. BMC Palliat Care. 2002 Apr 10;1(1):3 [PMID: 11945181]
  15. Ann Oncol. 1992 Jun;3(6):451-4 [PMID: 1498063]
  16. Psychooncology. 2004 Jan;13(1):1-13 [PMID: 14745741]
  17. Eur J Cancer. 1999 Oct;35(11):1592-7 [PMID: 10673967]
  18. BMJ. 2004 Apr 10;328(7444):864 [PMID: 15054034]
  19. Support Care Cancer. 2002 Jan;10(1):51-7 [PMID: 11777189]
  20. Support Care Cancer. 2000 Jan;8(1):40-5 [PMID: 10650896]
  21. Praxis (Bern 1994). 1996 Apr 2;85(14):440-4 [PMID: 8657980]
  22. Br J Hosp Med. 1992 Mar 4-17;47(5):364-7 [PMID: 1571737]
  23. Ir Med J. 2000 Jun;93(4):104-5 [PMID: 11037566]
  24. BMJ. 1996 Sep 21;313(7059):699-700 [PMID: 8819425]
  25. BMJ. 2002 Sep 28;325(7366):697-700 [PMID: 12351365]
  26. J Clin Oncol. 1989 May;7(5):583-9 [PMID: 2709087]
  27. Acad Med. 2001 Apr;76(4):390-3 [PMID: 11299158]
  28. BMC Med Ethics. 2004 Dec 01;5:E7 [PMID: 15571636]
  29. Eur J Cancer. 1999 Nov;35(12):1667-75 [PMID: 10674011]
  30. Support Care Cancer. 2004 Mar;12(3):143-6 [PMID: 14727171]
  31. J Clin Oncol. 2002 Feb 15;20(4):1008-16 [PMID: 11844824]
  32. Cancer Invest. 1987;5(2):151-4 [PMID: 3607572]
  33. J Fam Pract. 1991 Feb;32(2):175-81 [PMID: 1990046]
  34. West J Med. 2002 May;176(3):177-80 [PMID: 12016241]
  35. Cancer. 1996 Jun 15;77(12):2630-7 [PMID: 8640715]
  36. Psychosom Med. 2005 Nov-Dec;67(6):897-905 [PMID: 16314594]
  37. Br J Cancer. 1995 Jun;71(6):1132-3 [PMID: 7779699]
  38. West J Med. 1992 Sep;157(3):328-32 [PMID: 1413779]

MeSH Term

Adult
Aged
Breast Neoplasms
Communication
Family Relations
Female
Health Services
Health Surveys
Humans
Interviews as Topic
Middle Aged
Patient Education as Topic
Patient Satisfaction
Physician-Patient Relations

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0diagnosisinformationbreastcancerwomeninformedprocessWomenprimaryN=gynecologistradiologistinconsistentpatientrelativesGOALSOFWORK:physicianstoldpatientsconveyedexaminedstudyFinallyrelatives'rolecommunicationconsideredMATERIALSANDMETHODS:222age70interviewedsurgeryMAINRESULTS:Onehundredtwenty-oneconsultedfirstreferredfinallysecondarycareForty-sevenomittedfivewentdirectlyhospitaltreatmentcases199generalpractitionerinvolvedReceivingassociateddissatisfactionalsoappliesreceivedphoneawaitingworselikelyaccompaniedanotherpersonCONCLUSIONS:FuturestudiesfocuspossibleinvolvementfamilydoctorsdiagnosticGivingavoidedWaysobtainconsistencysatisfactionpresence

Similar Articles

Cited By