Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Supportive Care in Cancer
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer 5/2011

01-05-2011 | Short Communication

Development and pilot testing of a communication aid to assist clinicians to communicate with women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)

Authors: Simone E. De Morgan, Phyllis N. Butow, Elizabeth A. Lobb, Melanie A. Price, Caroline Nehill

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 5/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The literature highlights the confusion amongst women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) about aspects of their disease and treatment and the wide variation in how doctors communicate about DCIS. The DCIS communication aid (CA) was developed to assist clinicians to communicate with women diagnosed with DCIS and to improve women's understanding about their disease, prognosis and treatment options. This study aimed to assess patient and clinician perceptions of the CA.

Methods

The CA included information and diagrams about key aspects of the diagnosis, prognosis, treatment and support. It was designed to be used in clinical consultations and taken home after the consultation. Australian women with DCIS (n=18) participated in structured interviews and clinicians (n=7), including surgeons and radiation oncologists, completed surveys to assess their perceptions of the CA. Main outcome measures included satisfaction with the content, design and diagrams in the CA, and perceptions of the benefits of the CA and its impact on doctor–patient communication.

Results

All clinicians and women with DCIS reported that the CA would assist communication and help women understand their diagnosis.

Conclusions

This is the first intervention designed to decrease the confusion amongst women with DCIS and improve doctor–patient communication in this area. This study highlights that interventions such as the DCIS communication aid may be a valuable resource for clinicians and women with DCIS. This study also highlights key communication challenges relating to DCIS.
Literature
1.
Arpino G, Laucirica R, Elledge R (2005) Premalignant and in situ breast disease: biology and clinical implications. Ann Intern Med 143:446–457PubMed
2.
Erbas B, Provenzano E, Armes J, Gertig D (2006) The natural history of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a review. Breast Cancer Res Treat 97:135–144PubMedCrossRef
3.
Leonard GD, Swain SM (2004) Ductal carcinoma in situ, complexities and challenges. J Natl Cancer Inst 96:906–920PubMedCrossRef
4.
De Morgan S, Redman S, White KJ, Cakir B, Boyages J (2002) "Well, have I got cancer or haven't I?" The psycho-social issues for women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ. Health Expect 5:310–318PubMedCrossRef
5.
Welch HG, Woloshin S, Schwartz (2008) The sea of uncertainty surrounding ductal carcinoma in situ- the price of screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:228–229PubMedCrossRef
6.
Virnig BA, Tuttle TM, Shamliyan, Kane RL (2010) Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a systematic review of incidence, treatment, and options. J Natl Cancer Inst 102:170–178PubMedCrossRef
7.
Bijker N, Meihnen P, Johannes LP, Peterse JB, Van Hoorebeeck IV, Julien JP, Gennaro M, Rouanet P, Avril A, Fentiman IS, Bartelink H, Rutgers EJ (2006) Breast-conserving treatment with or without radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma in situ: ten-year results of European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer randomized phase III trial 10853—a study by the EORTC Breast Cancer Cooperative Group and EORTC Radiotherapy Group. J Clin Oncol 24:3381–3387PubMedCrossRef
8.
Tang P, Hajdu SI, Lyman GH (2007) Ductal carcinoma in situ: a review of recent advances. Obstet Gynecol 19:63–67
9.
Silverstein MJ (2003) The University of Southern California/Van Nuys prognostic index for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Am J Surg 186:337–343PubMedCrossRef
10.
De Morgan S, Redman S, D’Este C, Rogers K (2010) Knowledge, satisfaction with information, decisional conflict and psychological morbidity amongst women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Patient Educ Couns doi:10.​1016/​j.​pec.​2010.​07.​002
11.
Kennedy F, Harcourt D, Rumsey N (2008) The challenge of being diagnosed and treated for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Eur J Oncol Nurs 12:103–111PubMedCrossRef
12.
Patridge A, Adloff K, Blood E, Dees C, Kaelin C, Golshan M, Ligibel J, De Moor JS, Weeks J, Winer E (2008) Risk perceptions and psychosocial outcomes of women with ductal carcinoma in situ: longitudinal results from a cohort study. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:243–251CrossRef
13.
van Gestel YRBM, Voogd AC, Vingerhoets AJJM, Mols F, Nieuwenhuijzen GAP, van Driel OJ, van Berlo CLH, van de Poll-Franse LV (2007) A comparison of quality of life, disease impact and risk perception in women with invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ. Eur J Cancer 47:549–556
14.
Rakovitch E, Franssen E, Kim J, Ackerman I, Pignol J-P, Paszat L et al (2003) A comparison of risk perception and psychological morbidity in women with ductal carcinoma in situ and early invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 77:285–293PubMedCrossRef
15.
Whelan T, Levine M, Willan A, Gafni A, Sanders K, Mirsky D, Chambers S, O’Brien M, Reid S, Dubois S (2004) Effect of a decision aid on knowledge and treatment decision making for breast cancer surgery. JAMA 292:435–441PubMedCrossRef
16.
Silvia KA, Sepucha KR (2006) Decision aids in routine practice: lessons from the breast cancer initiative. Health Expect 9:225–264CrossRef
17.
Lobb EA, Butow PH, Moore A, Barratt A, Tucker K, Gaff C, Kirk J, Dudding T, Butt D (2006) Development of a communication aid to facilitate risk communication in consultations with unaffected women from high risk breast cancer families: A pilot study. J Genet Couns 15:393–405PubMedCrossRef
18.
Fleisher L, Buzaglo J, Collins M, Millard J, Miller SM, Egleston BL, Solarino N, Trinastic J, Cegala DJ, Benson AB, Schulman KA, Weinfurt KP, Sulmasy D, Diefenbach MA, Meropol NJ (2008) Using health communication best practices to develop a web-based provider–patient communication aid: The CONNECTTM study. Patient Educ Counsel 71:378–387CrossRef
19.
O'Connor AM, Bennett CL, Stacey D, Barry M, Col NF, Eden KB, EntwistleVA, Fiset V, Holmes-Rovner M, Khangura S, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Rovner D (2009) Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD001431. doi:10.​1002/​14651858.​CD001431.​pub2
20.
O’Connor AM, Fiset V, DeGrasse C, Graham ID, Evans W, Stacey D, Laupacis A, Tugwell P (1999) Decision aids for patients considering options affecting cancer outcomes: evidence or efficacy and policy implications. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 25:67–80PubMed
21.
O’Connor AM, Tugwell P, Wells GA, Elmslie T, Jolly E, Hollingworth G, McPherson R, Bunn H, Graham I, Drake E (1998) A decision aid for women considering hormone therapy after menopause: Decision support framework and evaluation. Patient Educ Counsel 33:267–279CrossRef
22.
Juraskova I, Butow P, Lopez A, Seccombe M, Coates A, Boyle F, McCarthy N, Reaby L, Forbes JF (2008) Improving informed consent: pilot of a decision aid for women invited to participate in a breast cancer prevention trial (IBIS-II DCIS). Health Expect 11:252–262PubMedCrossRef
23.
Lerman C, Lustbader E, Rimer B, Daly M, Miller S, Sands C et al (1995) Effects of individualized breast cancer risk counseling: A randomized trail. J Natl Cancer Inst 87:286–301PubMedCrossRef
24.
Lipkus IM, Hollands JG (1999) The visual communication of risk. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 25:149–163PubMed
25.
Patton MQ (2001) Qualitative research and evaluation methods, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks
Metadata
Title
Development and pilot testing of a communication aid to assist clinicians to communicate with women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)
Authors
Simone E. De Morgan
Phyllis N. Butow
Elizabeth A. Lobb
Melanie A. Price
Caroline Nehill
Publication date
01-05-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 5/2011
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-010-1040-5

Other articles of this Issue 5/2011

Supportive Care in Cancer 5/2011 Go to the issue

Original Article

Palonosetron for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in glioblastoma patients treated with temozolomide: a phase II study

Review Article

Coping processes relevant to posttraumatic growth: an evidence-based review

Original Article

Six- versus 12-h conversion method from intravenous to transdermal fentanyl in chronic cancer pain: a randomized study

Original Article

Breast cancer treatment-related lymphedema self-care: Education, practices, symptoms, and quality of life

Original Article

Antiemetic activity of megestrol acetate in patients receiving chemotherapy

Original Article

The short-term effects of low-level laser therapy in the management of breast-cancer-related lymphedema
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits