Oncologists and Breaking Bad News—From the Informed Patients’ Point of View. The Evaluation of the SPIKES Protocol Implementation
The way that bad news is disclosed to a cancer patient has a crucial impact on physician-patient cooperation and trust. Consensus-based guidelines provide widely accepted tools for disclosing unfavorable information. In oncology, the most popular one is called the SPIKES protocol. A 17-question surv...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of cancer education 2019-04, Vol.34 (2), p.375-380 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | The way that bad news is disclosed to a cancer patient has a crucial impact on physician-patient cooperation and trust. Consensus-based guidelines provide widely accepted tools for disclosing unfavorable information. In oncology, the most popular one is called the SPIKES protocol. A 17-question survey was administered to a group of 226 patients with cancer (mean age 59.6 years) in order to determine a level of SPIKES implementation during first cancer disclosure. In our assessment, the patients felt that the highest compliance with the SPIKES protocol was with Setting up (70.6%), Knowledge (72.8%), and Emotions (75.3%). The lowest was with the Perception (27.7%), Invitation (30.4%), and Strategy & Summary (56.9%) parts. There could be improvement with each aspect of the protocol, but especially in Perception, Invitation, and Strategy & Summary. The latter is really important and must be done better. Older patients felt the doctors’ language was more comprehensible (
r
= 0.17;
p
= 0.011). Patients’ satisfaction of their knowledge about the disease and follow-up, regarded as an endpoint, was insufficient. Privacy was important in improving results (
p
|
---|---|
ISSN: | 0885-8195 1543-0154 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s13187-017-1315-3 |