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: 17.88). 09/2009; 27(31):5160-7. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2009.22.9773
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT 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.

  • [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 · 3.32 Impact Factor
    This article is viewable in ResearchGate's enriched format
  • Source
    [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 · 0.56 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Rationale: Minority patients with lung cancer are less likely to receive stage-appropriate treatment. Along with access to care and provider factors, cultural factors such as patients' lung cancer beliefs, fatalism, and medical mistrust, may help explain this disparity. Objectives: To determine cultural factors associated with disparities in lung cancer treatment. Methods: Patients with newly-diagnosed lung cancer were recruited from four medical centers in New York City from 2008 to 2011. Participants were surveyed about their beliefs regarding lung cancer, fatalism, and medical mistrust using validated tools. Rates of stage-appropriate treatment were compared among blacks, Hispanics and non-minority patients. Multiple regression analyses and structural equation modeling were used to assess if cultural factors are associated with or mediate disparities in care. Measurements and Main Results: Of the 352 lung cancer patients in the study, 21% were black and 20% were Hispanic. Blacks were less likely to receive stage-appropriate treatment (odds ratio [OR]: 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.27-0.93) compared with whites, even after adjusting for age, gender, marital status, insurance, income, comorbidities and performance status. No differences in treatment rates were observed among Hispanics (OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.53-2.07). Structural equation modeling showed that cultural factors (negative surgical beliefs, fatalism and medical mistrust) partially mediated the relationship between black race and lower rates of stage-appropriate treatment (total effect -0.43, indirect effect = -0.13, 30% of total effect explained by cultural factors). Conclusions: Negative surgical beliefs, fatalism, and mistrust are more prevalent among minorities and appear to explain almost a third of the observed disparities in lung cancer treatment among black patients. Interventions targeting cultural factors may help reduce undertreatment of minorities.
    04/2014; DOI:10.1513/AnnalsATS.201402-055OC

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 29, 2014