Understanding Breast Cancer Knowledge and Barriers to Treatment Adherence: A Qualitative Study Among Breast Cancer Survivors.

Q2 Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology BioResearch Open Access Pub Date : 2017-12-01 eCollection Date: 2017-01-01 DOI:10.1089/biores.2017.0028
Rachel A Freedman, Anna C Revette, Dawn L Hershman, Kathryn Silva, Nora J Sporn, Joshua J Gagne, Elena M Kouri, Nancy L Keating
{"title":"Understanding Breast Cancer Knowledge and Barriers to Treatment Adherence: A Qualitative Study Among Breast Cancer Survivors.","authors":"Rachel A Freedman,&nbsp;Anna C Revette,&nbsp;Dawn L Hershman,&nbsp;Kathryn Silva,&nbsp;Nora J Sporn,&nbsp;Joshua J Gagne,&nbsp;Elena M Kouri,&nbsp;Nancy L Keating","doi":"10.1089/biores.2017.0028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Disparities in breast cancer treatment receipt are common and multifactorial. Data are limited on how knowledge about one's breast cancer and understanding treatment rationales may impact treatment completion. In this qualitative analysis, we explored barriers to care with a focus on knowledge. We conducted 18 in-depth interviews with women from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds who were treated at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (<i>n</i> = 12; Boston, MA) and Columbia University Medical Center (<i>n</i> = 6; New York, NY) and had undergone neo/adjuvant breast cancer treatment within the prior 3 years. Interviews focused on treatments received, adherence, barriers experienced, and questions related to breast cancer knowledge and treatment rationales. We analyzed transcribed interview recordings in N'Vivo using a two-stage coding process that allowed for both preconfigured and emergent themes. Answers for breast cancer knowledge were confirmed using medical records. In our analysis, over one-third of women reported incomplete therapy, including never initiating treatment, stopping treatment prematurely, or missing/delaying treatments due to logistical reasons (childcare, transportation) or patient preferences. Others reported treatment modifications because of provider recommendations. Nearly all women were able to accurately describe the rationale for recommended treatments. Among 17 women for whom medical records were available, women correctly reported 18-71% of their tumor characteristics; incorrect reporting was not consistently associated with treatment incompletion. In conclusion, logistical issues and patient preferences were the main reasons for incomplete therapy in our study. Understanding of treatment rationale was high, but breast cancer knowledge was variable. Further assessment of how knowledge may impact cancer care is warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":9100,"journal":{"name":"BioResearch Open Access","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1089/biores.2017.0028","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BioResearch Open Access","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/biores.2017.0028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Disparities in breast cancer treatment receipt are common and multifactorial. Data are limited on how knowledge about one's breast cancer and understanding treatment rationales may impact treatment completion. In this qualitative analysis, we explored barriers to care with a focus on knowledge. We conducted 18 in-depth interviews with women from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds who were treated at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (n = 12; Boston, MA) and Columbia University Medical Center (n = 6; New York, NY) and had undergone neo/adjuvant breast cancer treatment within the prior 3 years. Interviews focused on treatments received, adherence, barriers experienced, and questions related to breast cancer knowledge and treatment rationales. We analyzed transcribed interview recordings in N'Vivo using a two-stage coding process that allowed for both preconfigured and emergent themes. Answers for breast cancer knowledge were confirmed using medical records. In our analysis, over one-third of women reported incomplete therapy, including never initiating treatment, stopping treatment prematurely, or missing/delaying treatments due to logistical reasons (childcare, transportation) or patient preferences. Others reported treatment modifications because of provider recommendations. Nearly all women were able to accurately describe the rationale for recommended treatments. Among 17 women for whom medical records were available, women correctly reported 18-71% of their tumor characteristics; incorrect reporting was not consistently associated with treatment incompletion. In conclusion, logistical issues and patient preferences were the main reasons for incomplete therapy in our study. Understanding of treatment rationale was high, but breast cancer knowledge was variable. Further assessment of how knowledge may impact cancer care is warranted.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
了解乳腺癌知识和治疗依从性障碍:乳腺癌幸存者的定性研究。
乳腺癌接受治疗的差异是常见的和多因素的。关于乳腺癌知识和治疗原理如何影响治疗完成的数据有限。在这个定性分析中,我们以知识为重点探讨了护理的障碍。我们对在丹娜-法伯癌症研究所接受治疗的来自不同社会经济背景的妇女进行了18次深度访谈(n = 12;波士顿,马萨诸塞州)和哥伦比亚大学医学中心(n = 6;纽约,纽约州),并在过去3年内接受过新/辅助乳腺癌治疗。访谈的重点是接受的治疗、依从性、遇到的障碍以及与乳腺癌知识和治疗原理有关的问题。我们使用两阶段编码过程分析了N'Vivo的转录采访录音,该过程允许预先配置和紧急主题。对乳腺癌知识的回答使用医疗记录进行确认。在我们的分析中,超过三分之一的女性报告治疗不完全,包括从未开始治疗,过早停止治疗,或由于后勤原因(托儿、交通)或患者偏好而错过/延迟治疗。其他报告称,由于医生的建议,治疗方法发生了改变。几乎所有的女性都能准确地描述推荐治疗的基本原理。在有医疗记录的17名妇女中,妇女正确报告了18-71%的肿瘤特征;不正确的报告并不总是与治疗不完全相关。总之,后勤问题和患者偏好是我们研究中治疗不完全的主要原因。对治疗原理的了解程度很高,但对乳腺癌的了解程度不一。进一步评估知识如何影响癌症治疗是有必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BioResearch Open Access
BioResearch Open Access Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology (all)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: BioResearch Open Access is a high-quality open access journal providing peer-reviewed research on a broad range of scientific topics, including molecular and cellular biology, tissue engineering, regenerative medicine, stem cells, gene therapy, systems biology, genetics, virology, and neuroscience. The Journal publishes basic science and translational research in the form of original research articles, comprehensive review articles, mini-reviews, rapid communications, brief reports, technology reports, hypothesis articles, perspectives, and letters to the editor.
期刊最新文献
An Innovative Physical Therapy Intervention for Chronic Pain Management and Opioid Reduction Among People Living with HIV. Characterization of Laminins in Healthy Human Aortic Valves and a Modified Decellularized Rat Scaffold. Why Do We Need Serological Tests for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 Diagnosis? Immunotherapy for Infarcts: In Vivo Postinfarction Macrophage Modulation Using Intramyocardial Microparticle Delivery of Map4k4 Small Interfering RNA. Comparative Evaluation of the Effects of Consumption of Colombian Agraz (Vaccinium meridionale Swartz) on Insulin Resistance, Antioxidant Capacity, and Markers of Oxidation and Inflammation, Between Men and Women with Metabolic Syndrome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1