[Shared decision making from the perspective of the cancer patient: participatory roles and evaluation of the process]. / La toma de decisiones compartidas desde la perspectiva del paciente oncológico: roles de participación y valoración del proceso.

BACKGROUND: In Spain there is no clear knowledge about the degree to which Shared Decision Making (SDM) is carried out in the normal practice of oncology. Our article analyses the preferred role and the perceived role of oncological patients and measures the SDM process from their perspective. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Descriptive transversal study using a self-conducted questionnaire with patients with different types of cancer. To evaluate the role preferred and perceived by the patient we used The Control Preference Scales (CPS) and to measure SDM we used The nine-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). RESULTS: Out of the 132 patients surveyed, only 118 provided analysable data. No evidence was found that sex, age, educational level or type of tumour affected the preferred role or the perceived role. Only 59.3% was in agreement with the role exercised. All of those who preferred a passive role achieved this (21.2%), while out of those who wanted a shared role (78.8%), this was achieved by only 48.39% while the remaining 51.61% played a passive role. None preferred or played an active role. The set of patients evaluated the SDM process with a score of 41.07±5.94, on a scale of 0 to 100, with the highest score of 61.39 ± 13.24 reached by urological patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found no evidence that, from the point of view of the oncological patient, the SDM model is being implemented in practice.

[Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in oncology: Patient perceptions]. / Barreras y facilitadores para la implementación de la toma de decisiones compartidas en oncología: percepciones de los pacientes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine, from the point of view of the oncological patient, who made the decision about their treatment, as well as the major barriers and facilitators that enabled Shared Decision Making to be implemented. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A cross-sectional, descriptive, sand association study using a self-report questionnaire to selected cancer patients, with casual sampling in different oncology clinics and random time periods. A total of 108 patients provided analysable data. The information was collected on sociodemographic and clinical variables, who made the decision about treatment, and level of agreement or disagreement with various barriers and facilitators. RESULTS: More than one-third (38.1%) of patients claimed to have participated in shared decision making with their doctor. Barriers such as, time, the difficulty of understanding, the paternalism, lack of fluid communication, and having preliminary and often erroneous information influenced the involvement in decision-making. However, to have or not have sufficient tools to aid decision making or the patient's interest to participate had no effect. As regards facilitators, physician motivation, their perception of improvement, and the interest of the patient had a positive influence. The exception was the possibility of financial incentives to doctors. CONCLUSIONS: The little, or no participation perceived by cancer patients in decisions about their health makes it necessary to introduce improvements in the health care model to overcome barriers and promote a more participatory attitude in the patient.

Initialization of adjuvant hormonal treatment for breast cancer.

The introduction of aromatase inhibitors (AI) has resulted in practice change approaches in the treatment of early breast cancer. In this paper, we analyze the most relevant studies including the ATAC, BIG 1-98, TEAM, MA-17, NSABP B-33, and ABSCG-6 studies. Postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer should be treated with AI for 5 years. For patients who have been initiated with tamoxifen (TAM), switching to an AI to complete 5 years of treatment is also recommended. The results of the extended adjuvant therapy studies recommend the use of an AI (anastrozole, letrozole, or exemestane) after the completion of standard TAM treatment. With regards to premenopausal women, TAM is the recommended adjuvant hormonal treatment for pre- and perimenopausal women. There is no indication for the use of AI in these subgroups of patients. Finally, determination of CYP 2D6 polymorphisms could be considered when choosing the best adjuvant hormonal treatment option.