Publication:
Evaluation of the Use of Shared Decision Making in Breast Cancer: International Survey

dc.contributor.authorMaes-Carballo, Marta
dc.contributor.authorMartín-Díaz, Manuel
dc.contributor.authorMignini, Luciano
dc.contributor.authorKhan, Khalid Saeed
dc.contributor.authorTrigueros, Rubén
dc.contributor.authorBueno-Cavanillas, Aurora
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Maes-Carballo,M] Unidad de Patología Mamaria del Servicio de Cirugía General, Complexo Universitario Hospitalario de Ourense, Ourense, Spain. [Maes-Carballo,M; Khan,KS; Bueno-Cavanillas,A] Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Granada, Granada, Spain. [Martín-Díaz,M] Hospital Básico Santa Ana de Motril, Granada, Spain. [Mignini,L] Unidad de Mastología del Grupo Oroño, Rosario, Argentina. [Khan,KS; Bueno-Cavanillas,A] CIBER of Epidimiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain. [Trigueros,R] Department of Language and Education, University of Antonio de Nebrija, Madrid, Spain. [Bueno-Cavanillas,A] Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria (IBS), Granada, Spain.
dc.date.accessioned2022-12-13T07:45:12Z
dc.date.available2022-12-13T07:45:12Z
dc.date.issued2021-02-22
dc.description.abstractObjectives: To assess shared decision-making (SDM) knowledge, attitude and application among health professionals involved in breast cancer (BC) treatment. Materials and Methods: A cross sectional study based on an online questionnaire, sent by several professional societies to health professionals involved in BC management. There were 26 questions which combined demographic and professional data with some items measured on a Likert-type scale. Results: The participation (459/541; 84.84%) and completion (443/459; 96.51%) rates were high. Participants strongly agreed or agreed in 69.57% (16/23) of their responses. The majority stated that they knew of SDM (mean 4.43 (4.36–4.55)) and were in favour of its implementation (mean 4.58 (4.51–4.64)). They highlighted that SDM practice was not adequate due to lack of resources (3.46 (3.37–3.55)) and agreed on policies that improved its implementation (3.96 (3.88–4.04)). The main advantage of SDM for participants was patient satisfaction (38%), and the main disadvantage was the patients’ paucity of knowledge to understand their disease (24%). The main obstacle indicated was the lack of time and resources (40%). Conclusions: New policies must be designed for adequate training of professionals in integrating SDM in clinical practice, preparing them to use SDM with adequate resources and time provided.es_ES
dc.description.versionYeses_ES
dc.identifier.citationMaes-Carballo M, Martín-Díaz M, Mignini L, Khan KS, Trigueros R, Bueno-Cavanillas A. Evaluation of the Use of Shared Decision Making in Breast Cancer: International Survey. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Feb 22;18(4):2128es_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/ijerph18042128es_ES
dc.identifier.essn1660-4601
dc.identifier.issn1661-7827
dc.identifier.pmcPMC7926688
dc.identifier.pmid33671649es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10668/4487
dc.journal.titleInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
dc.language.isoen
dc.organizationAGS Sur de Granada
dc.page.number15 p.
dc.publisherMDPIes_ES
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/2128es_ES
dc.rightsAtribución 4.0 Internacional*
dc.rights.accessRightsopen access
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.subjectShared decision makinges_ES
dc.subjectBreast canceres_ES
dc.subjectUse of shared decision makinges_ES
dc.subjectSurveyes_ES
dc.subjectLongitudinal studyes_ES
dc.subjectToma de decisiones compartidases_ES
dc.subjectNeoplasias de la mamaes_ES
dc.subjectToma de decisiones conjuntaes_ES
dc.subjectEncuestas y cuestionarioses_ES
dc.subjectEstudios longitudinaleses_ES
dc.subject.meshMedical Subject Headings::Analytical, Diagnostic and Therapeutic Techniques and Equipment::Investigative Techniques::Epidemiologic Methods::Epidemiologic Study Characteristics as Topic::Epidemiologic Studies::Cross-Sectional Studieses_ES
dc.subject.meshMedical Subject Headings::Psychiatry and Psychology::Psychological Phenomena and Processes::Mental Processes::Thinking::Decision Makinges_ES
dc.subject.meshMedical Subject Headings::Organisms::Eukaryota::Animals::Chordata::Vertebrates::Mammals::Primates::Haplorhini::Catarrhini::Hominidae::Humanses_ES
dc.subject.meshMedical Subject Headings::Health Care::Health Care Facilities, Manpower, and Services::Health Services::Community Health Services::Consumer Participation::Patient Participationes_ES
dc.subject.meshMedical Subject Headings::Information Science::Information Science::Data Collection::Questionnaireses_ES
dc.subject.meshMedical Subject Headings::Diseases::Neoplasms::Neoplasms by Site::Breast Neoplasmses_ES
dc.subject.meshMedical Subject Headings::Analytical, Diagnostic and Therapeutic Techniques and Equipment::Investigative Techniques::Epidemiologic Methods::Epidemiologic Study Characteristics as Topic::Epidemiologic Studies::Cohort Studies::Longitudinal Studieses_ES
dc.titleEvaluation of the Use of Shared Decision Making in Breast Cancer: International Surveyes_ES
dc.typeresearch article
dc.type.hasVersionVoR
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
MaesCarballo_EvaluationOf.pdf
Size:
782.3 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Artículo publicado