1
|
Loehberg CR, Meyer J, Häberle L, Hack CC, Jud S, Hein A, Wunderle M, Emons J, Gass P, Fasching PA, Egloffstein S, Krebs J, Erim Y, Beckmann MW, Lux MP, Wasner S. Analysis of motives and patient satisfaction in oncological second opinions provided by a certified university breast and gynecological cancer center. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2020; 301:1299-1306. [PMID: 32274639 PMCID: PMC7181428 DOI: 10.1007/s00404-020-05525-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/02/2019] [Accepted: 03/28/2020] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
Purpose Second opinions in oncology are becoming increasingly important in an era of more complex treatments and a growing demand for information by patients. Therefore, we analyzed their effects and influencing factors like patients’ motives, subjective extent of information and satisfaction with communications. Methods This prospective study evaluated second opinions for patients with breast cancer or gynecological malignancy. The patients received a questionnaire before and two months after, which inquired expectations, reasons, and satisfaction with the second opinion and the attending physicians. Results A total of 164 patients were included and the majority had breast cancer (75.0%). Receiving the second opinion made 89.7% feel better informed, their need for information decreased (from 75.3% to 39.2%, P < 0.0001), and satisfaction with doctor–patient communications increased (from 61.9 to 91.8%, P = 0.0002). There were various reasons for requesting a second opinion, e.g., the extremely stressful situation of a cancer diagnosis, hope for change in the treatment recommendation or dissatisfaction with the initial physicians. Conclusions Second opinions can lead to significantly greater patient satisfaction, meeting the need for information and leading to better management of patients in the extremely stressful situation of a cancer diagnosis. Doctor–patient communications play a key role. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00404-020-05525-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christian R Loehberg
- Department of Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, University Breast Center and University Gynecological Cancer Center for Franconia, Universitaetsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
| | - Julia Meyer
- Department of Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, University Breast Center and University Gynecological Cancer Center for Franconia, Universitaetsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Lothar Häberle
- Department of Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, University Breast Center and University Gynecological Cancer Center for Franconia, Universitaetsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Carolin C Hack
- Department of Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, University Breast Center and University Gynecological Cancer Center for Franconia, Universitaetsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Sebastian Jud
- Department of Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, University Breast Center and University Gynecological Cancer Center for Franconia, Universitaetsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Alexander Hein
- Department of Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, University Breast Center and University Gynecological Cancer Center for Franconia, Universitaetsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Marius Wunderle
- Department of Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, University Breast Center and University Gynecological Cancer Center for Franconia, Universitaetsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Julius Emons
- Department of Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, University Breast Center and University Gynecological Cancer Center for Franconia, Universitaetsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Paul Gass
- Department of Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, University Breast Center and University Gynecological Cancer Center for Franconia, Universitaetsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Peter A Fasching
- Department of Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, University Breast Center and University Gynecological Cancer Center for Franconia, Universitaetsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Sainab Egloffstein
- Office of the CCC Erlangen-EMN (Comprehensive Cancer Center of the European Metropolitan Region of Nuremberg-Erlangen), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Jessica Krebs
- Psychosomatic and Psychotherapeutic Department, Erlangen University Hospital, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Yesim Erim
- Psychosomatic and Psychotherapeutic Department, Erlangen University Hospital, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Matthias W Beckmann
- Department of Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, University Breast Center and University Gynecological Cancer Center for Franconia, Universitaetsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.,Office of the CCC Erlangen-EMN (Comprehensive Cancer Center of the European Metropolitan Region of Nuremberg-Erlangen), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Michael P Lux
- Department of Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, University Breast Center and University Gynecological Cancer Center for Franconia, Universitaetsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.,Breast and Gynecological Cancer Center, Women´s Hospital St. Louise, Paderborn, Women´s Hospital St. Josefs-Krankenhaus, Salzkotten, Frauen- und Kinderklinik St. Louise, St. Vincenz Hospital, Paderborn, Germany
| | - Sonja Wasner
- Department of Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, University Breast Center and University Gynecological Cancer Center for Franconia, Universitaetsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|