Factors influencing the degree of participation in surgical decision-making among Chinese patients with prostate cancer: A qualitative research

doi:10.1016/j.ajur.2021.08.003

Asian Journal of Urology, 2022, 9 (2): 177-185 doi: 10.1016/j.ajur.2021.08.003

Nursing Forum

Factors influencing the degree of participation in surgical decision-making among Chinese patients with prostate cancer: A qualitative research

Jie Cao^a,*(

),Chunxue Peng^a,Xiaoying Lu^b,Lingjun Zhou^c,Jing Wu^c

^a Department of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China
^b Department of Nursing, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China
^c School of Nursing, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China

Abstract
Related Citation (15)

Download:

HTML

PDF (470KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract

Objective: There was increasingly demand of participation in surgical decision-making among Chinese patients with prostate cancer. However, due to the complex healthcare system and advanced care settings, it is quite challenging for the patients to gain sufficient support from the institute and the government. This research aimed to investigate the factors that impact the degree of participation in surgical decision-making among Chinese prostate cancer patients.

Methods: A phenomenological approach of qualitative research based on the results of semi-structured interviews was adopted, to explore the influencing factors which hinder the participation in surgical decision-making. Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research were utilized. Up to 160 post-operative patients who had undergone radical prostatectomy along with 68 medical and nursing staffs, were purposively recruited in this research. This retrospective study was carried out from September 2018 to August 2019. After recording and transcribing the interviews, the interview materials were evaluated via the Colaizzi's seven step approach and the NVivo Version 10 software to analyze the interview content.

Results: According to the analysis and summary of the interviews, there were three factors affecting the degree of participation in surgical decision-making. Firstly, insufficient information was provided by medical and nursing staffs because of their lack of time, proper communication skills, and career experience, as well as difficulties in the development of patient decision aid and inconsistent resource availability. Secondly, the cognitive level of decision-making among patients was relatively low due to poor psychological endurance, insufficient amount of education, senility, and less knowledge and information demand. Ultimately, decisions were constantly made by family members with/without patients.

Conclusions: The degree of participation of Chinese prostate cancer patients in the surgical decision-making had much space for improvement.

Key words： Prostate cancer Participation Decision-making Surgery Influence factors Qualitative research

Received: 07 June 2020 Available online: 20 April 2022

Corresponding Authors: Jie Cao E-mail: celion2004@126.com

	Service
	E-mail this article
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	Articles by authors
	Jie Cao
	Chunxue Peng
	Xiaoying Lu
	Lingjun Zhou
	Jing Wu

TRENDMD:

Cite this article:

Jie Cao,Chunxue Peng,Xiaoying Lu, et al. Factors influencing the degree of participation in surgical decision-making among Chinese patients with prostate cancer: A qualitative research[J]. Asian Journal of Urology, 2022, 9(2): 177-185.

URL:

http://www.ajurology.com/EN/10.1016/j.ajur.2021.08.003 OR http://www.ajurology.com/EN/Y2022/V9/I2/177

[1]	Lindsey AT, Freddie B, Rebecca LS, Jacques F, Joannie LT, Ahmedin J. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2015; 65: 87-108. doi: 10.3322/caac.21262
[2]	Bi XG, Han RQ, Zhou JY, Zhang SW, Zheng RS, Wu M, et al. Analysis of incidence and mortality of prostate cancer in China in 2009. China Cancer 2013; 22:417-22.
[3]	Charles C, Cafni 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; 44:681-92. pmid: 9032835
[4]	Barry MJ, Edgman-Levitan S. Shared decision making-pinnacle of patient-centered care. N Engl J Med 2012; 366:780-1. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1109283
[5]	Stacey D, Samant R, Bennett C. Decision making in oncology: A review of patient decision aids to support patient participation. CA A Cancer J Clin 2010; 58:293-304. doi: 10.3322/CA.2008.0006
[6]	Miao AY, Wu QY, Li L, Ye ZX. [Study on the status and influencing factors of the treatment mode of primary liver cancer patients]. J Nurs 2015; 22:5-9. [Article in Chinese].
[7]	Peng ZR, Wu JF, Zhou P, Cheng S. [Analysis of status quo and influencing factors of patients’ participation in surgical decision making in otolaryngology department]. Chin Nurs Res 2018; 32:3060-4. [Article in Chinese].
[8]	Huang R, Gionfriddo MR, Zhang L, Leppin A, Ting HH, Montori VM. Shared decision-making in the People’s Republic of China: Current status and future directions. Patient Prefer Adherence 2015; 6:1129-41.
[9]	Lamers RED, Cuybers MM, Vires M, Poll-Franse LV, Bosch JLHR, Kil PJM. How do patients choose between active surveillance, radical prostatectomy, and radiotherapy? The effect of a preference-sensitive decision aid on treatment decision making for localized prostate cancer. Urol Oncol 2017; 35:37.e9-37.e17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.09.007.
[10]	Baker C, Wuest J, Sterm PN. Method slurring: The ground theory/ phenomenology example. J Adv Nurs 1992; 17:1355e60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.1992.tb01859.x.
[11]	Korstjens I, Moser A. Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 3: Sampling, data collection and analysis. Eur J Gen Pract 2018; 24:9-18. doi: 10.1080/13814788.2017.1375091
[12]	Hsieh YT, Chao YMY, Shiao JSC. A qualitative study of psychosocial factors affecting expecting mothers who choose to continue a cleft lip and/or palate pregnancy to term. J Nurs Res 2013; 21:1-9. doi: 10.1097/jnr.0b013e3182828dbd
[13]	Morrow R, Rodrigues A, King N. Colaizzi’s descriptive phenomenological method. Psychol 2015; 28:643-4.
[14]	Shosha GA. Employment of Colaizzi’s strategy in descriptive phenomenology: A reflection of a researcher. Eur Sci J 2012; 8: 1857-81.
[15]	Zhang J, Liu D, Chen XY, Meng F, Deng YL. [Application of proceduralised version of grounded theory in psychological counseling training research]. Chin Ment Health J 2012; 26: 648-52. [Article in Chinese].
[16]	Carter N, Bryant-Lukosius D, Dicenso A, Blythe J, Neville AJ. The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncol Nurs Forum 2014; 41:545-7. doi: 10.1188/14.ONF.545-547 pmid: 25158659
[17]	Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care 2007; 19:349-57. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
[18]	Guba EG, Lincoln YS. Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic inquiry. ECTJ 1982; 30:233-52. doi: 10.1007/BF02765185
[19]	Gorawara-Bhat R, O’Muircheartaigh S, Mohile S, Dale W. Patients’ perceptions and attitudes on recurrent prostate cancer and hormone therapy: Qualitative comparison between decision-aid and control groups. J Geriatr Oncol 2017; 8:368-73. doi: S1879-4068(17)30099-1 pmid: 28602711
[20]	Lee EO, Emanuel EJ. Shared decision making to improve care and reduce costs. N Engl J Med 2013; 368:6e8.
[21]	Elwyn G, Scholl I, Tietbohl C, Mann M, Edwards AG, Clay C, et al. “Many miles to go.”: A systematic review of the implementation of patient decision support interventions into routine clinical practice. BMC Med Inf Decis Making 2013; 13: S14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-13-S2-S14.
[22]	Shield CG, Morrow GR, Griggs J, Mallinger J, Roscoe J, Wade JL, et al. Decision making role preferences of patients receiving adjuvant cancer treatment: A university of Rochester cancer center community clinical oncology program. Support Canc Ther 2004; 1:119-26.
[23]	Mandelbatt J, Kreling B, FigeuriedoM, Feng S. What is the impact of shared decision making on treatment and outcomes for older women with breast cancer? J Clin Oncol 2006; 24:4908-13. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.07.1159
[24]	Huber J, Maatz P, Muck T, Keck B, Friederich HC, Herzog W, et al. The effect of an online support group on patients’ treatment decisions for localized prostate cancer: An online survey. Urol Oncol 2017; 35:37.e19-28. https: //doi.org/10.1016/S1569-9056(15)60360-8.
[25]	Sattar S, Alibhai SMH, Fitch M, Krzyzanowska M, Leighl N, Puts MTE. Chemotherapy and radiation treatment decisionmaking experiences of older adults with cancer: A qualitative study. J Geriatr Oncol 2018; 9:47-52. doi: 10.1016/j.jgo.2017.07.013
[26]	Giguere A, Labrecque M, Nioya M, Thivierge R, Legre F. Development of PRIDe: A tool to assess physicians’ preference of role in clinical decision making. Patient Educ Counsel 2012; 88:277-83. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.03.003
[27]	Cao J, Zhang LJ, Wang TT, Qi L, Guo XJ, Peng CX. [Study and application of nursing diversified health education in improving urinary stoma self-care ability in patients]. Chin Nurs Res 2016; 30:4437-9. [Article in Chinese].
[28]	Brace C, Schmocker S, Huang H, Victor JC, McLeod RS, Kennedy ED. Physicians’ awareness and attitudes toward decision aids for patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28: 2286-92. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.25.2874