IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v34y2014i6p720-730.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Understanding of Terminal Cancer and Its Relationship with Attitudes toward End-of-Life Care Issues

Author

Listed:
  • June Koo Lee
  • Young Ho Yun
  • Ah Reum An
  • Dae Seog Heo
  • Byeong-Woo Park
  • Chi-Heum Cho
  • Sung Kim
  • Dae Ho Lee
  • Soon Nam Lee
  • Eun Sook Lee
  • Jung Hun Kang
  • Si-Young Kim
  • Jung Lim Lee
  • Chang Geol Lee
  • Yeun Keun Lim
  • Samyong Kim
  • Jong Soo Choi
  • Hyun Sik Jeong
  • Mison Chun

Abstract

Background. Although terminal cancer is a widely used term, its meaning varies, which may lead to different attitudes toward end-of-life issues. The study was conducted to investigate differences in the understanding of terminal cancer and determine the relationship between this understanding and attitudes toward end-of-life issues. Methods. A questionnaire survey was performed between 2008 and 2009. A total of 1242 cancer patients, 1289 family caregivers, 303 oncologists from 17 hospitals, and 1006 participants from the general population responded. Results. A “6-month life expectancy†was the most common understanding of terminal cancer (45.6%), followed by “treatment refractoriness†(21.1%), “metastatic/recurrent disease†(19.4%), “survival of a few days/weeks†(11.4%), and “locally advanced disease†(2.5%). The combined proportion of “treatment refractoriness†and “6-month life expectancy†differed significantly between oncologists and the other groups combined (76.0% v. 65.9%, P = 0.0003). Multivariate analyses showed that patients and caregivers who understood terminal cancer as “survival of a few days/weeks†showed more negative attitudes toward disclosure of terminal status compared with participants who chose “treatment refractoriness†(adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22–0.79 for patients; aOR 0.34, 95% CI 0.18–0.63 for caregivers). Caregivers who understood terminal cancer as “locally advanced†or “metastatic/recurrent disease†showed a significantly lower percentage of agreement with withdrawal of futile life-sustaining treatment compared with those who chose “treatment refractoriness†(aOR 0.19, 95% CI 0.07–0.54 for locally advanced; aOR 0.39, 95% CI 0.21–0.72 for metastatic/recurrent). Conclusions. The understanding of terminal cancer varied among the 4 participant groups. It was associated with different preferences regarding end-of-life issues. Standardization of these terms is needed to better understand end-of-life care.

Suggested Citation

  • June Koo Lee & Young Ho Yun & Ah Reum An & Dae Seog Heo & Byeong-Woo Park & Chi-Heum Cho & Sung Kim & Dae Ho Lee & Soon Nam Lee & Eun Sook Lee & Jung Hun Kang & Si-Young Kim & Jung Lim Lee & Chang Geo, 2014. "The Understanding of Terminal Cancer and Its Relationship with Attitudes toward End-of-Life Care Issues," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 34(6), pages 720-730, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:34:y:2014:i:6:p:720-730
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X13501883
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X13501883
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X13501883?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:34:y:2014:i:6:p:720-730. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.