ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Lung cancer surgery leads to long term survival for some patients but little is known about how patients decide whether to accept the associated surgical risks. The objective of this qualitative study was to explore patients' attitudes to the risks associated with lung cancer surgery. METHODS: Fifteen patients with resectable lung cancer, recruited via multi-disciplinary team meetings at an English tertiary referral centre, participated in semi-structured interviews to explore their attitudes to the morbidity and mortality risks associated with lung cancer surgery. Transcripts were analysed using the framework method. RESULTS: Participants reported being 'pleased' to hear that they were suitable for surgery and felt that surgery was not a treatment to be turned down because they did not see any alternatives. Participants had some knowledge of perioperative risks, including mortality estimates; however, many voiced a preference not to know these risks and to let the medical team decide their treatment plan. Some found it difficult to relate the potential risks and complications of surgery to their own situation and appeared willing to accept high perioperative mortality risks. Generally, participants were willing to accept quite severe long-term postoperative breathlessness; however, it was apparent that many actually found this possibility difficult to imagine. CONCLUSION: Patients do not necessarily wish to know details of risks associated with lung cancer surgery and may wish to defer decisions about treatment to their medical team. Investment in the doctor-patient relationship, particularly for the surgeon, is therefore important in the management of patients with lung cancer.
Subject(s)
Lung Neoplasms/psychology , Lung Neoplasms/surgery , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/psychology , Pulmonary Surgical Procedures/psychology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Attitude , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Physician-Patient Relations , RiskABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) for patients undergoing lung resection for cancer remains controversial. We studied the effects of PR, its impact on quality of life and the level of anxiety and depression. METHODS: In 2011 and 2012, PR was offered to all patients referred to our institution after lung resection for cancer. Patients were evaluated between admission and discharge by a 6 minutes walking test (6MWD), a Visual Analogue Pain Intensity Scale, a quality of life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ C30) and by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HAD). The same questionnaires were mailed 6 months after completing PR. RESULTS: Between early 2011 and late 2012, 133 patients were admitted to our institution following lung resection for cancer. Of these, 59 (44%) patients completed PR and returned their questionnaires 6 months after discharge. During PR of these 59 patients, the mean quality of life score increased from 56.3 to 65.9 (P<0.05), the median anxiety score decreased from 5.5 to 4 (P<0.05) and that of depression from 3 to 2 (P<0.05). At 6 months post-discharge, the mean quality of life score remained stable at 66.3 (P=0.8), the median anxiety score reverted to 6 (P<0.05) and the median depression score reverted to 4.5 (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: This observational study during PR, showed that quality of life and the levels of anxiety and depression were improved at the end of the course. After returning home, the average quality of life score remained stable but the level of anxiety and depression increased.
