suggested that improved information provision is important. 31 – 36 In fact, information provision is a prerequisite of shared decision-making, which, in turn, has been related to satisfaction with care. 8 , 28 , 37 Additionally, if patients are well
Search Results
Tara M. Mackay, Lennart B. van Rijssen, Jurr O. Andriessen, Mustafa Suker, Geert-Jan Creemers, Ferry A. Eskens, Ignace H. de Hingh, Lonneke V. van de Poll-Franse, Mirjam A.G. Sprangers, Olivier R. Busch, Johanna W. Wilmink, Casper H. van Eijck, Marc G. Besselink, Hanneke W. van Laarhoven, and on behalf of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group
Leigh Gallo, Ronald S. Walters, Jeff Allen, Jenny Ahlstrom, Clay Alspach, Yelak Biru, Alyssa Schatz, Kara Martin, and Robert W. Carlson
interoperability and encourage the aggregation of patient data that will promote shared decision-making and increase understanding between patients, providers, and payers. Access to personal health data empowers patients to make informed decisions about their
Terrell Johnson, Lindsey A.M. Bandini, Darryl Mitteldorf, Elizabeth Franklin, Justin E. Bekelman, and Robert W. Carlson
’ve lost the ability to listen to patients, to capture the patient voice,” stated Dr. Bekelman, “There’s a serious disconnect.” To enhance providers’ ability to engage in shared decision-making interventions, it is essential that oncology practices make
Robert B. Hines, Alina Barrett, Philip Twumasi-Ankrah, Dominique Broccoli, Kimberly K. Engelman, Joaquina Baranda, Elizabeth A. Ablah, Lisette Jacobson, Michelle Redmond, Wei Tu, and Tracie C. Collins
highlight the need for improved physician-patient communication during the clinical encounter to inform the treatment plan. A shared decision-making process has been advocated to improve patient perceptions of the quality of the care experience and to
Matthew J. Ehrhardt, Jamie E. Flerlage, Saro H. Armenian, Sharon M. Castellino, David C. Hodgson, and Melissa M. Hudson
randomized clinical trials given the short duration of follow-up relative to the long latency to incident late effects. Simulation models offer one avenue for estimating an individual’s risk for a given late effect and can be integrated into shared decision-making
Maxwell T. Vergo and Al B. Benson III
absolute benefits patients may expect from adjuvant therapy in their situation. This can be weighed against known long-term adverse effects from receiving adjuvant chemotherapy, optimizing the shared decision-making process between patient and physician
Julia T. van Groningen, Pieter van Hagen, Rob A.E.M. Tollenaar, Jurriaan B. Tuynman, Perla J. Marang-van de Mheen, Pascal G. Doornebosch, Pieter J. Tanis, Eelco J.R. de Graaf, and on behalf of the Dutch Colorectal Audit
and performance of cTME after neoadjuvant therapy. When discussing treatment options with an individual patient after local excision, shared decision-making may lead to refraining from cTME. Several factors may contribute to this: first, patient
Andrew T. Kuykendall and Rami Komrokji
routinely recommend cytoreductive therapy; however, this is another situation in which shared decision-making is vital. Broadly speaking, the lack of consensus regarding the impact of platelet count in ET suggests this is a complex relationship that is
Jordan M. Cloyd, Chengli Shen, Heena Santry, John Bridges, Mary Dillhoff, Aslam Ejaz, Timothy M. Pawlik, and Allan Tsung
-making occurs for patients with resectable PDAC and whether specific barriers to the use of NT exist. Further data on patient and physician preferences and the patient experience during NT may highlight opportunities to improve shared decision-making and
Aysegul A. Sahin, Timothy D. Gilligan, and Jimmy J. Caudell
undergo surveillance unless there is compelling reason not to. However, patients with larger tumors may prefer radiation or chemotherapy if they know they have a higher risk of relapse. So tumor size can facilitate shared decision-making.” The other area
