Underuse of Breast Cancer Adjuvant Treatment: Patient Knowledge, Beliefs, and Medical Mistrust

Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Borough of Manhattan, New York, United States
Journal of Clinical Oncology (Impact Factor: 18.43). 09/2009; 27(31):5160-7. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2009.22.9773
Source: PubMed


Little is known about why women with breast cancer who have surgery do not receive proven effective postsurgical adjuvant treatments.
We surveyed 258 women who recently underwent surgical treatment at six New York City hospitals for early-stage breast cancer about their care, knowledge, and beliefs about breast cancer and its treatment. As per national guidelines, all women should have received adjuvant treatment. Adjuvant treatment data were obtained from inpatient and outpatient charts. Factor analysis was used to create scales scored to 100 of treatment beliefs and knowledge, medical mistrust, and physician communication about treatment. Bivariate and multivariate analyses assessed differences between treated and untreated women.
Compared with treated women, untreated women were less likely to know that adjuvant therapies increase survival (on a 100-point scale; 66 v 75; P < .0001), had greater mistrust (64 v 53; P = .001), and had less self-efficacy (92 v 97; P < .05); physician communication about treatment did not affect patient knowledge of treatment benefits (r = 0.8; P = .21). Multivariate analysis found that untreated women were more likely to be 70 years or older (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.11; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.13), to have comorbidities (aRR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.12), and to express mistrust in the medical delivery system (aRR, 1.003; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.007), even though they were more likely to believe adjuvant treatments were beneficial (aRR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98 to 0.99; model c, 0.84; P < or = .0001).
Patient knowledge and beliefs about treatment and medical mistrust are mutable factors associated with underuse of effective adjuvant therapies. Physicians may improve cancer care by ensuring that discussions about adjuvant therapy include a clear presentation of the benefits, not just the risks of treatment, and by addressing patient trust in and concerns about the medical system.

Download full-text


Available from: Jenny J Lin,
  • Source
    • "The value of obtaining patient self-report data is further demonstrated by research reporting that patients’ perceptions of quality of health care have been associated with important medical and psychological outcomes, including quality of life [5-8], anxiety and depression [6-9]. Patients’ perceptions of quality of care have also been associated with factors that directly affect the effectiveness and efficiency of health care such as the under-utilisation of treatments [10-12] and mistrust of the medical system [13,14]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Institute of Medicine (IOM) has endorsed six dimensions of patient-centredness as crucial to providing quality healthcare. These dimensions outline that care must be: 1) respectful to patients' values, preferences, and expressed needs; 2) coordinated and integrated; 3) provide information, communication, and education; 4) ensure physical comfort; 5) provide emotional support--relieving fear and anxiety; and 6) involve family and friends. However, whether patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) comprehensively cover these dimensions remains unexplored. This systematic review examined whether PROMs designed to assess the quality of patient-centred cancer care addressed all six IOM dimensions of patient-centred care and the psychometric properties of these measures. Medline, PsycINFO, Current Contents, Embase, CINAHL and Scopus were searched to retrieve published studies describing the development and psychometric properties of PROMs assessing the quality of patient-centred cancer care. Two authors determined if eligible PROMs included the six IOM dimensions of patient-centred care and evaluated the adequacy of psychometric properties based on recommended criteria for internal consistency, test-retest reliability, face/content validity, construct validity and cross-cultural adaptation. Across all 21 PROMs, the most commonly included IOM dimension of patient-centred care was "information, communication and education" (19 measures). In contrast, only five measures assessed the "involvement of family and friends." Two measures included one IOM-endorsed patient-centred care dimension, two measures had two dimensions, seven measures had three dimensions, five measures had four dimensions, and four measures had five dimensions. One measure, the Indicators (Non-small Cell Lung Cancer), covered all six IOM dimensions of patient-centred care, but had adequate face/content validity only. Eighteen measures met the recommended adequacy criteria for construct validity, 15 for face/content validity, seven for internal consistency, three for cross-cultural adaptation and no measure for test-retest reliability. There are no psychometrically rigorous PROMs developed with cancer patients that capture all six IOM dimensions of patient-centred care. Using more than one measure or expanding existing measures to cover all six patient-centred care dimensions could improve assessment and delivery of patient-centred care. Construction of new comprehensive measures with acceptable psychometric properties that can be used with the general cancer population may also be warranted.
    BMC Cancer 01/2014; 14(1):41. DOI:10.1186/1471-2407-14-41 · 3.36 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Considerable evidence across many disciplines has demonstrated that trust is associated with higher functioning of organizational units and societal entities, largely by reducing " transaction costs " and strengthening social support (Fukuyama 1995). In health care, lower levels of trust have also been associated with lower patient satisfaction, lower adherence to treatment and screening recommendations, and worse health status (Armstrong et al. 2006; Bickell et al. 2009; Carpenter et al. 2009; Nummela et al. 2009; Safran et al. 1998). Although most prior research on trust in health care has focused on interpersonal trust (i.e., trust in a physician), health care system distrust, a form of social/institutional trust, has recently been shown to be far more prevalent in the United States and to be associated with multiple important outcomes, including overall health status (Armstrong et al. 2006). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hospitals assume broad social roles in their communities as major health service institutions, large employers, and in some cases as philanthropic organizations. These roles create perceptions about the community commitment of hospitals to a local community. How these perceptions toward hospitals influence patients' decisions in choosing a hospital for care and trust in the health care system more generally has not been explored. As part of a study examining distrust in health care, we conducted a survey of African American and white non-Latino adults in metropolitan areas. We found that patients with very favorable views about the community commitment of their local hospital were more likely to choose that hospital for major surgery and less likely to report high health care system distrust.
    Inquiry: a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing 11/2013; 50(4):312-321. DOI:10.1177/0046958013516585 · 0.55 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Given the critical role of trust in facilitating people's engagement with the health system, it is surprising that there are few studies examining the correlates of medical mistrust, especially within migrant and refugee communities. The few available studies have mainly focused on examining differences between ethnic groups (Kirby et al., 2006; Armstrong et al., 2007) and the association between medical mistrust and access and utilization of healthcare services (Boulware et al., 2002; Ward and Coates, 2006; Bickell et al., 2009; LaVeist et al., 2009; Hammond, 2010; Bynum et al., 2012; Irving et al., 2012). However, the effects of broader socio-demographic (e.g., migration status, educational attainment, level of income or religion) and psycho-social (e.g., level of acculturation and discrimination) factors on medical mistrust remain poorly documented. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Studies on medical mistrust have mainly focused on depicting the association between medical mistrust and access/utilization of healthcare services. The effect of broader socio-demographic and psycho-social factors on medical mistrust remains poorly documented. The study examined the effect of broader socio-demographic factors, acculturation, and discrimination on medical mistrust among 425 African migrants living in Victoria and South Australia, Australia. After adjusting for socio-demographic factors, low medical mistrust scores (i.e., more trusting of the system) were associated with refugee (β=-4.27, p<0.01) and family reunion (β=-4.01, p<0.01) migration statuses, being Christian (β=-2.21, p<0.001), and living in rural or village areas prior to migration (β=-2.09, p<0.05). Medical mistrust did not vary by the type of acculturation, but was positively related to perceived personal (β=0.43, p<0.001) and societal (β=0.38, p<0.001) discrimination. In order to reduce inequalities in healthcare access and utilisation and health outcomes, programs to enhance trust in the medical system among African migrants and to address discrimination within the community are needed.
    Health & Place 10/2013; 24C:216-224. DOI:10.1016/j.healthplace.2013.09.010 · 2.81 Impact Factor
Show more