Author
Listed:
- Semra Ozdemir
(Lien Centre for Palliative Care, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore
Signature Programme in Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore
Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore)
- Sean Ng
(Lien Centre for Palliative Care, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore
Signature Programme in Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore)
- Isha Chaudhry
(Lien Centre for Palliative Care, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore
Signature Programme in Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore)
- Irene Teo
(Lien Centre for Palliative Care, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore
Signature Programme in Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore
National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore)
- Chetna Malhotra
(Lien Centre for Palliative Care, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore
Signature Programme in Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore)
- Eric Andrew Finkelstein
(Lien Centre for Palliative Care, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore
Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore
Signature Programme in Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore
Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA)
Abstract
Objective To longitudinally examine caregiver-reported treatment decision-making roles and to investigate the associations of these roles with caregiver burden, caregiving esteem, caregiver anxiety, and depression. Methods 281 caregivers of patients with stage IV solid cancers were recruited from outpatient clinics in Singapore. Caregivers were eligible if they were aged ≥21 y, primary informal caregiver, and involved in treatment decision making. We used 3 y of longitudinal data. The decision-making roles were grouped into 4 categories: no family involvement, patient/physician-led, joint, and family-led/alone decision making. Mixed-effects linear regressions were used to assess associations between decision-making roles and caregiver outcomes. Results On average, 72% of caregivers reported family involvement in decision making. Compared with baseline, a higher proportion of caregivers at the 36-mo follow-up reported no family involvement (from 23% to 34%, P = 0.05) and patient/physician-led decision making (from 22% to 34%, P = 0.02), while a lower proportion reported family-led/alone (from 19% to 7%, P = 0.01) decision making. Compared with family-led/alone decision making, caregivers reporting no family involvement reported lower impact on finances (−0.15 [−0.28, −0.01], P = 0.03) while caregivers who reported patient/physician-led decision making reported lower impact on schedule and health (−0.12 [−0.20, −0.03], P = 0.01), and finances (−0.15 [−0.28, −0.03], P = 0.02), and lower anxiety (−0.69 [−1.17, −0.22], P
Suggested Citation
Semra Ozdemir & Sean Ng & Isha Chaudhry & Irene Teo & Chetna Malhotra & Eric Andrew Finkelstein, 2023.
"Caregiver-Reported Roles in Treatment Decision Making in Advanced Cancer and Associated Caregiving Burden and Psychological Distress: A Longitudinal Study,"
Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(2), pages 191-202, February.
Handle:
RePEc:sae:medema:v:43:y:2023:i:2:p:191-202
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X221125408
Download full text from publisher
Most related items
These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
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:43:y:2023:i:2:p:191-202. 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.
If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.