Decision-making experiences of breast cancer patients related to contralateral prophylactic mastectomy-a systematic meta-synthesis of qualitative studies

Behaviour, barriers and facilitators of shared decision making in breast cancer surgical treatment: A qualitative systematic review using a 'Best Fit' framework approach

BACKGROUND

Due to the diversity and high sensitivity of the treatment, there were difficulties and uncertainties in the breast cancer surgical decision-making process. We aimed to describe the patient's decision-making behaviour and shared decision-making (SDM)-related barriers and facilitators in breast cancer surgical treatment.

METHODS

We searched eight databases for qualitative studies and mixed-method studies about breast cancer patients' surgical decision-making process from inception to March 2021. The quality of the studies was critically appraised by two researchers independently. We used a 'best fit framework approach' to analyze and synthesize the evidence.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight qualitative studies and three mixed-method studies were included in this study. Four themes and 10 subthemes were extracted: (a) struggling with various considerations, (b) actual decision-making behaviours, (c) SDM not routinely implemented and (d) multiple facilitators and barriers to SDM.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients had various considerations of breast surgery and SDM was not routinely implemented. There was a discrepancy between information exchange behaviours, value clarification, decision support utilization and SDM due to cognitive and behavioural biases. When individuals made surgical decisions, their behaviours were affected by individual-level and system-level factors. Therefore, healthcare providers and other stakeholders should constantly improve communication skills and collaboration, and emphasize the importance of decision support, so as to embed SDM into routine practice.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This systematic review was conducted as part of a wider research entitled: Breast cancer patients' actual participation roles in surgical decision making: a mixed method research. The results of this project helped us to better analyze and generalize patients' views.

Patient-driven decisions and perceptions of the 'safest possible choice': insights from patient-provider conversations about how some breast cancer patients choose contralateral prophylactic mastectomy

OBJECTIVE

Observe patient-clinician communication to gain insight about the reasons underlying the choice of patients with unilateral breast cancer to undergo contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM), despite lack of survival benefit, risk of harms, and cautions expressed by surgical guidelines and clinicians.

METHODS & MEASURES

WORDS is a prospective study that explored patient-clinician communication and patient decision making. Participants recorded clinical visits through a downloadable mobile application. We analyzed 44 recordings from 22 patients: 9 who chose CPM, 8 who considered CPM but decided against it, and 5 who never considered CPM. We used abductive analysis combined with constructivist grounded theory methods.

RESULTS

Decisions to undergo CPM are patient-driven and motivated by perceptions that CPM is the most aggressive, and therefore safest, treatment option available. These decisions are shaped not primarily by the content of conversations with clinicians, but by the history of cancer in patients' families, their own first-hand experiences with cancers among loved ones, fear for their children, and anxiety about cancer recurrence.

CONCLUSION

The perception that CPM is the safest, most aggressive option strongly influences patients, despite scientific evidence to the contrary. Future efforts to address high CPM rates should focus on patient-driven decision making and cancer-related fears.