Poster Presentation Clinical Oncology Society of Australia Annual Scientific Meeting 2019

Differences in experiences and preferences for cancer treatment decision making among patients undergoing radiotherapy in Australia, Japan and Vietnam     (#417)

Megumi Uchida 1 2 , Alix Hall 3 , Tran Van Thuan 4 , Natasha Noble 3 5 , Tatsuo Akechi 1 2 , Rob Sanson-Fisher 3 5
  1. Division of Palliative Care and Psycho-oncology, Nagoya City University Hospital, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan
  2. Department of Psychiatry and Cognitive-Behavioral Medicine, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan
  3. Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, Australia
  4. National Cancer Institute, National Cancer Hospital, Hanoi, Vietnam
  5. Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health, The University of Newcastle,, Newcastle, Australia

Aims:

The aim of this study was to explore experiences and preferences of cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy in Australia, Japan and Vietnam regarding their treatment decision making. We also investigated whether a significant other was present when they received their treatment information and patient satisfaction with the treatment decision.

Methods:

Participants were ambulatory adult cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy at one clinic in Australia, two university hospitals in Japan and one oncology hospital in VietnamParticipants were sampled consecutively and asked to complete a self-administered, pen and paper survey in the clinic (Australia) or at home (Japan). In Vietnam, patients answered via a face-to-face interview or pen-and-paper survey.The survey included questionnaires about treatment decision making and patient sociodemographic factors.

Results:

The proportion of Australian patients (n=285) who experienced, compared to had a preference for, shared, passive, and active treatment decision making was: 64% vs 80%, 28% vs 17% and 8% vs 3.6% respectively. Amongst Japanese patients (n=263), these proportions were 70% vs 84%, 20% vs 12%, and 10% vs  3.8%. For Vietnamese patients (n=300), they were 83% vs 89%, 11% vs 10%, and 5% vs 1% respectively. 83% (Australia), 72% (Japan) and 96% (Vietnam) of patients attended with significant other.95% Australian and 75% Japanese patients were satisfied with their treatment decision while only 0.3% Vietnamese indicated they would make the same treatment decision if they had the chance to make the decision again.

Conclusion:

Majority of patients both in western and eastern culture experienced and preferred shared decision making. Most patients attended with significant others. But satisfaction with the treatment decision varied across countries, and was particularly low in Vietnam. We need to explore factors associated with treatment satisfaction.