Search

Background: Patients with incurable cancer face complex medical decisions. Their family caregivers play a prominent role in shared decision making processes, but we lack insights into their experiences. In this study, we explored how bereaved family caregivers experienced the shared decision making process. Methods: We performed a qualitative interview study with in-depth interviews analysed with inductive content analysis. We used a purposive sample of bereaved family caregivers (n = 16) of patients with cancer treated in a tertiary university hospital in the Netherlands. Results: Four themes were identified: 1. scenarios of decision making, 2. future death of the patient 3. factors influencing choices when making a treatment decision, and 4. preconditions for the decision making process. Most family caregivers deferred decisions to the patient or physician. Talking about the patient's future death was not preferred by all family caregivers. All family caregivers reported life prolongation as a significant motivator for treatment, while the quality of life was rarely mentioned. A respectful relationship, close involvement, and open communication with healthcare professionals in the palliative setting were valued by many interviewees. Family caregivers' experiences and needs seemed to be overlooked during medical encounters. Conclusions: Family caregivers of deceased patients with cancer mentioned life prolongation, and not quality of life, as the most important treatment aim. They highly valued interactions with the medical oncologist and being involved in the conversations. We advise medical oncologists to take more effort to involve the family caregiver, and more explicitly address quality of life in the consultations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with incurable cancer face complex medical decisions. Their family caregivers play a prominent role in shared decision making processes, but we lack insights into their experiences. In this study, we explored how bereaved family caregivers experienced the shared decision making process. Methods: We performed a qualitative interview study with in-depth interviews analysed with inductive content analysis. We used a purposive sample of bereaved family caregivers (n = 16) of patients with cancer treated in a tertiary university hospital in the Netherlands. Results: Four themes were identified: 1. scenarios of decision making, 2. future death of the patient 3. factors influencing choices when making a treatment decision, and 4. preconditions for the decision making process. Most family caregivers deferred decisions to the patient or physician. Talking about the patient's future death was not preferred by all family caregivers. All family caregivers reported life prolongation as a significant motivator for treatment, while the quality of life was rarely mentioned. A respectful relationship, close involvement, and open communication with healthcare professionals in the palliative setting were valued by many interviewees. Family caregivers' experiences and needs seemed to be overlooked during medical encounters. Conclusions: Family caregivers of deceased patients with cancer mentioned life prolongation, and not quality of life, as the most important treatment aim. They highly valued interactions with the medical oncologist and being involved in the conversations. We advise medical oncologists to take more effort to involve the family caregiver, and more explicitly address quality of life in the consultations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective therapy to reduce pain in patients who suffer from failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). In order to inform patients optimally prior to this therapy, knowing their expectations is crucial. Methods: Thirteen patients suffering from FBSS and scheduled for SCS were interviewed using a semistructured protocol. Patients were interviewed either at home or at their treating hospital. Data from these interviews were analyzed using directed content analysis. In addition to the qualitative interviews, an adjusted Brief Pain Inventory questionnaire was used to quantify expectations. Results: The expectations of patients with regard to SCS could be subdivided into 13 categories, which could be grouped into 6 general themes: (1) physical well‐being, (2) social well‐being, (3) material well‐being, (4) emotional well‐being, (5) development and activity, and (6) constraints of the procedure of SCS. These findings confirm patients’ expectations about the improvement of their quality of life by SCS for FBSS. This indicates that assessing pain relief is not enough to adequately evaluate the effects of SCS. The small diversity within the studied population and the lack of patient‐to‐patient education are 2 possible limitations of this study. Conclusions: To improve education for patients prior to SCS surgery and to evaluate the effects of SCS, a multidimensional approach needs to be implemented. Possible disadvantages of SCS need to be discussed prior to the treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]