切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华乳腺病杂志(电子版) ›› 2021, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (05) : 295 -301. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0807.2021.05.005

论著

乳腺癌患者手术决策冲突和决策满意度相关因素分析
陈彦博1, 李倩1, 胡婷婷1, 陈凯1, 苏逢锡1,†()   
  1. 1. 510000 广州,中山大学孙逸仙纪念医院乳腺肿瘤中心
  • 收稿日期:2019-12-10 出版日期:2021-10-01
  • 通信作者: 苏逢锡
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金资助项目(81672619); 广东省医学科研基金资助项目(A2021280)

Factors related to surgical decision conflict and decision satisfaction in breast cancer patients

Yanbo Chen1, Qian Li1, Tingting Hu1, Kai Chen1, Fengxi Su1,†()   

  1. 1. Breast Tumor Center, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510000, China
  • Received:2019-12-10 Published:2021-10-01
  • Corresponding author: Fengxi Su
引用本文:

陈彦博, 李倩, 胡婷婷, 陈凯, 苏逢锡. 乳腺癌患者手术决策冲突和决策满意度相关因素分析[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(05): 295-301.

Yanbo Chen, Qian Li, Tingting Hu, Kai Chen, Fengxi Su. Factors related to surgical decision conflict and decision satisfaction in breast cancer patients[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Breast Disease(Electronic Edition), 2021, 15(05): 295-301.

目的

探讨与乳腺癌患者手术决策冲突和决策满意度有关的因素。

方法

本回顾性研究通过问卷调查的形式收集2018年6月至2018年12月在中山大学孙逸仙纪念医院乳腺肿瘤中心就诊的121例乳腺癌患者的一般资料(包括年龄、婚姻状况、教育程度、子女个数、职业状况、家庭收入、宗教信仰等)、决策冲突和决策满意度情况,采用单因素方差分析和多因素线性回归分析与患者决策冲突和决策满意度有关的因素。

结果

(1)117例患者有完整的一般资料和决策冲突、决策满意度分数,有效问卷回收率为96.7%(117/121)。117例患者的决策冲突平均为(2.68 ±2.55)分,满意度分数平均为(4.03±2.73)分;(2)不同特征乳腺癌患者之间决策冲突分数比较,发现婚姻状况与决策冲突分数有关(F=3.778,P=0.013)。多因素分析显示,患者的婚姻状况、宗教信仰状况与其决策冲突分数有关,已婚、离异或丧偶患者的决策冲突分数较未婚者低(B=-2.794, 95%CI: -4.837~-0.750, t=-2.709,P=0.008;B=-4.189, 95%CI: -6.823~-1.546, t=-3.140 ,P=0.002),无宗教信仰患者的决策冲突分数低于有宗教信仰患者(B=-1.482,95%CI:-2.776~-0.189,t=-2.271,P=0.025)。(3)不同临床特征乳腺癌患者之间决策满意度比较,发现婚姻状况、家庭月收入与决策满意度分数有关(F=2.736、5.339,P=0.047、0.006)。多因素分析显示,婚姻状况、宗教信仰状况与其决策满意度分数有关,离异或丧偶患者的决策满意度分数低于未婚患者,无宗教信仰患者的决策满意度分数低于有宗教信仰的患者(B=-3.905,95%CI:-6.749~-1.061,t=-2.721,P=0.008;B=-1.793,95%CI:-3.185~-0.401,t=-2.553,P=0.012),未婚患者和有宗教信仰患者的决策满意度更低。

结论

未婚和有宗教信仰的患者更容易出现决策冲突和更低的决策满意度。在临床工作中应该重点关注这部分患者并对其进行辅助决策,从而减少其决策冲突,增加决策满意度。

Objective

To explore the factors related to surgical decision conflict and decision satisfaction of breast cancer patients.

Methods

This retrospective study enrolled 121 patients with breast cancer in the Breast Tumor Center of Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University from June to December 2018 and analyzed their general data (including age, marital status, education, number of children, occupational status, family income and religious belief), decision conflict and decision satisfaction. The analysis of variance and linear regression were used to analyze the factors concerning to decision conflict and decision satisfaction.

Results

(1) Totally 117 patients had complete general information, decision conflict, and decision satisfaction scores. The recovery rate of valid questionnaires was 96.7% (117/121). The decision conflict score of 117 patients was 2.68 ± 2.55, and the satisfaction score was 4.03 ± 2.73. (2) The comparison of decision conflict scores among breast cancer patients with different characteristics showed that marital status was related to decision conflict scores (F=3.778, P=0.013). Multivariate analysis showed that patients’ marital status and religious belief were related to their decision conflict scores. Married, divorced or widowed patients had a significantly lower decision conflict score compared with unmarried patients (B=-2.794, 95%CI: -4.837--0.750, t=-2.709, P=0.008; B=-4.189, 95%CI: -6.823--1.546, t=-3.140, P=0.002). The decision conflict score of patients without religious belief was significantly lower than that of patients with religious belief (B=-1.482, 95%CI: -2.776--0.189, t=-2.271, P=0.025). (3) The comparison of decision satisfaction among breast cancer patients with different clinical characteristics showed that marital status and family income were related to decision satisfaction scores (F=2.736, 5.339, P=0.047, 0.006). Multivariate analysis shows that marital status and religious belief status were related to decision satisfaction scores. Divorced or widowed patients had a significantly lower decision satisfaction score compared with unmarried patients, and the patients without religious belief had a significantly lower decision satisfaction score compared with those with religious belief (B=-3.905, 95%CI: -6.749--1.061, t=-2.721, P=0.008; B=-1.793, 95%CI: -3.185- -0.401, t=-2.553, P=0.012).

Conclusions

Unmarried patients and patients with religious belief are more likely to have decision conflict and lower decision satisfaction. In clinical practice, we should pay more attention to these patients and give decision aids, so as to reduce decision conflict and increase decision satisfaction.

表1 121例乳腺癌患者的一般资料
图1 121例乳腺癌患者决策冲突量表调查中问卷难易程度分布图
图2 117例乳腺癌患者决策冲突量表调查中决策冲突分数分布图
图3 117例乳腺癌患者决策冲突量表调查中决策满意分数分布图
表2 117例不同特征乳腺癌患者决策冲突分数比较
表3 影响乳腺癌患者决策冲突的多因素线性回归分析(n=117)
表4 117例不同特征乳腺癌患者决策满意度分数比较
表5 乳腺癌患者决策满意度多因素线性回归分析结果(n=117)
表6 决策冲突影响子因素得分对乳腺癌患者决策冲突总分的影响[例(%)](n=117)
[1]
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries [J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2018, 68(6): 394-424.
[2]
Chen W, Zheng R, Baade PD, et al. Cancer statistics in China, 2015 [J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2016, 66(2): 115-132.
[3]
Fan L, Strasser-Weippl K, Li JJ, et al. Breast cancer in China [J]. Lancet Oncol, 2014, 15(7): e279-289.
[4]
Chewning GB, Bylund CL, Shan B, et al. Patient preferences for shared decisions: a systematic review [J]. Patient Educ Couns, 2012, 86(1): 9-18.
[5]
Livaudais JC, Franco R, Fei K, et al. Breast cancer treatment decision-making: Are we asking too much of patients? [J]. J Gen Intern Med, 2013, 28(5): 630-636.
[6]
Molenaar S, Sprangers MA, Rutgers EJ, et al. Decision support for patients with early-stage breast cancer: effects of an interactive breast cancer CDROM on treatment decision, satisfaction, and quality of life [J]. J Clin Oncol, 2001, 19(6): 1676-1687.
[7]
Waljee JF, Rogers MA, Alderman AK. Decision aids and breast cancer: Do they influence choice for surgery and knowledge of treatment options? [J]. J Clin Oncol, 2007, 25(9): 1067-1073.
[8]
Obeidat R, Finnell DS, Lally RM. Decision aids for surgical treatment of early stage breast cancer: a narrative review of the literature [J]. Patient Educ Couns, 2011, 85(3): e311-321.
[9]
Whelan T, Levine M, Willan A, et al. Effect of a decision aid on knowledge and treatment decision making for breast cancer surgery: a randomized trial [J]. JAMA, 2004, 292(4): 435-441.
[10]
Green MJ, Peterson SK, Baker MW, et al. Effect of a computer-based decision aid on knowledge, perceptions, and intentions about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: A randomized controlled trial [J]. JAMA, 2004, 292(4): 442-452.
[11]
O’Connor AM. Validation of a decisional conflict scale [J]. Med Decis Making, 1995, 15(1): 25-30.
[12]
Lam WW, Kwok M, Liao Q, et al. Psychometric assessment of the Chinese version of the decisional conflict scale in Chinese women making decision for breast cancer surgery [J]. Health Expect, 2015, 18(2): 210-220.
[13]
Peate M, Meiser B, Cheah BC, et al. Making hard choices easier: a prospective, multicentre study to assess the efficacy of a fertility-related decision aid in young women with early-stage breast cancer [J]. Brit J Cancer, 2012, 106(6): 1053-1061.
[14]
O’Brien MA, Whelan TJ, Villasis-Keever M, et al. Are cancer-related decision aids effective? A systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. J Clin Oncol, 2009, 27(6): 974-985.
[15]
Lam WW, Chan M, Or A, et al. Reducing treatment decision conflict difficulties in breast cancer surgery: a randomized controlled trial [J]. J Clin Oncol, 2013, 31(23): 2879-2885.
[16]
Au AH, Lam WW, Chan MC, et al. Development and pilot-testing of a decision aid for use among Chinese women facing breast cancer surgery [J]. Health Expect, 2011, 14(4): 405-416.
[17]
童静韬,方汉萍,陈敏,等.术前决策辅助方案在乳腺癌患者决策参与中的应用[J].上海护理,2019,19(8):38-41.
[1] 李洋, 蔡金玉, 党晓智, 常婉英, 巨艳, 高毅, 宋宏萍. 基于深度学习的乳腺超声应变弹性图像生成模型的应用研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(06): 563-570.
[2] 河北省抗癌协会乳腺癌专业委员会护理协作组. 乳腺癌中心静脉通路护理管理专家共识[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 321-329.
[3] 刘晨鹭, 刘洁, 张帆, 严彩英, 陈倩, 陈双庆. 增强MRI 影像组学特征生境分析在预测乳腺癌HER-2 表达状态中的应用[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 339-345.
[4] 张晓宇, 殷雨来, 张银旭. 阿帕替尼联合新辅助化疗对三阴性乳腺癌的疗效及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 346-352.
[5] 邱琳, 刘锦辉, 组木热提·吐尔洪, 马悦心, 冷晓玲. 超声影像组学对致密型乳腺背景中非肿块型乳腺癌的诊断价值[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 353-360.
[6] 李友, 唐林峰, 杜伟伟, 刘海亮, 余新水, 沈佳宇, 巨积辉. 皮瓣联合掌长肌腱折叠单排三点式固定治疗指背侧创面伴锤状指畸形的临床效果观察[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2024, 19(06): 485-490.
[7] 刘敏, 唐恩溢, 刘喆, 葛苏蒙, 刘梅, 孙国文. 计算机导航技术在口腔颌面部微小异物取出手术中的应用[J/OL]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 375-379.
[8] 高杰红, 黎平平, 齐婧, 代引海. ETFA和CD34在乳腺癌中的表达及与临床病理参数和预后的关系研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 64-67.
[9] 孙莲, 马红萍, 吴文英. 局部进展期甲状腺癌患者外科处理[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 112-114.
[10] 韩萌萌, 冯雪园, 马宁. 乳腺癌改良根治术后桡神经损伤1例[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 117-118.
[11] 张志兆, 王睿, 郜苹苹, 王成方, 王成, 齐晓伟. DNMT3B与乳腺癌预后的关系及其生物学机制[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 624-629.
[12] 王玲艳, 高春晖, 冯雪园, 崔鑫淼, 刘欢, 赵文明, 张金库. 循环肿瘤细胞在乳腺癌新辅助及术后辅助治疗中的应用[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 630-633.
[13] 赵林娟, 吕婕, 王文胜, 马德茂, 侯涛. 超声引导下染色剂标记切缘的梭柱型和圆柱型保乳区段切除术的效果研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 634-637.
[14] 陈宗杰, 胡添松. 肝外伤破裂患者治疗后胆漏发生影响因素分析[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 836-840.
[15] 刘卓, 张宗明, 张翀, 刘立民, 赵月, 齐晖. 腹腔镜手术治疗高龄急性梗阻性化脓性胆管炎患者的安全性与术式选择[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 795-800.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI
小
编
AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?