Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Involvement in decision-making and breast cancer survivor quality of life

  • Published:
Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Advances in treatment for breast cancer have improved women’s chances of surviving this disease, while giving patients more treatment options than in the past. This study examined the influence of patient involvement in decision-making on survivor quality of life. A prevalence sample of breast cancer survivors were interviewed about their involvement in decision-making about their cancer treatment and follow-up care. A series of multivariate regression analyses were then conducted to examine how involvement in decision-making about cancer treatment and follow-up care contributed to survivor quality of life. Analyses revealed involvement in decision-making about the use of testing for recurrent disease (TFR) as part of follow-up care is associated with improved quality of life in several domains (p<0.05). This association of improved quality of life with involvement in decision-making about follow-up TFR was independent of associations of quality of life with surgical treatment received, involvement in decision-making about surgical treatment, frequency of TFR, use of mammography, age, income, education, and years since diagnosis. This suggests that efforts to increase patient involvement in decision-making about follow-up care may improve quality of lifeffor breast cancer survivors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Serrazin D, Dewar JA, Arrigada R: Conservative management of breast cancer.British Journal of Surgery. 1986,73:604–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Veronesi U, Zucall R, Luini A: Local control and survival in early breast cancer: The Milan Trial.International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics. 1986,12:717–720.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kiebert GM, de-Haes JC, van-de-Velde CJ: The impact of breast-conserving treatment and mastectomy on the quality of life of early-stage breast cancer patients: A review.Journal of Clinical Oncology. 1991,9:1059–1070.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Fallowfield LJ, Hall A, Maguire GP, Baum M: Psychological outcomes of different treatment policies in women with early breast cancer outside a clinical trial.British Medical Journal. 1990,301:575–580.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ganz PA, Schag AC, Lee JJ, Polinsky ML, Tan SJ: Breast conservation versus mastectomy. Is there a difference in psychological adjustment or quality of life in the year after surgery?Cancer. 1992,69:1729–1738.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hall A, Fallowfield L: Psychological outcome of treatment for early breast cancer: A review.Stress Medicine. 1989,5:167–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Levy SM, Haynes LT, Herberman RB, et al: Mastectomy versus breast conservation surgery: Mental health effects at long-term follow-up.Health Psychology. 1992,11:349–354.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ganz PA: Treatment options for breast cancer—Beyond survival [editorial; comment].New England Journal of Medicine. 1992,326:1147–1149.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Morris J, Royle GT: Offering patients a choice of surgery for early breast cancer: A reduction in anxiety and depression in patients and their husbands.Social Science and Medicine. 1988,26:583–585.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Pozo C, Carver CS, Noriega V, et al: Effects of mastectomy versus lumpectomy on emotional adjustment to breast cancer: A prospective study of the first year postsurgery.Journal of Clinical Oncology. 1992,10:1292–1298.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. The GIVIO Investigators: Impact of follow-up testing on survival and health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients. A multicenter randomized controlled trial.Journal of the American Medical Association. 1994,271:1587–1592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Morris S, Corder AP, Taylor I: What are the benefits of routine breast cancer follow-up?Postgraduate Medicine. 1992,68:904–907.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. National Cancer Institute: Breast Cancer. PDQ (Physician Data Query) [database online]. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  14. American Society of Clinical Oncology: Recommended breast cancer surveillance guidelines.Journal of Clinical Oncology. 1997,15:2149–2156.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cocconi G: Follow-up of patients with breast cancer [letter; comment].Journal of the American Medical Association. 1994,272: 1657.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kiebert GM, Welvaart K, Kievit J: Psychological effects of routine follow-up on cancer patients after surgery.European Journal of Surgery. 1993,159:601–607.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Klaff RA: Follow-up of patients with breast cancer [letter; comment].Journal of the American Medical Association. 1994,272: 1658.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Muss HB, Tell GS, Case LD, Robertson P, Attwell BM: Perceptions of follow-up care in women with breast cancer.American Journal of Clinical Oncology. 1991,14:55–59.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Ryo UY: Follow-up of patients with breast cancer [letter; comment].Journal of the American Medical Association. 1994,272:1658–1659.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Wertheimer MD: Against minimalism in breast cancer follow-up.Journal of the American Medical Association. 1991,265:396–397.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Andersen BL: Surviving cancer.Cancer. 1994,74:1484–1495.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Taylor SE, Helgeson VS, Reed GM, Skokan LA: Self-generated feeling of control and adjustment to physical illness.Journal of Social Issues. 1991,47:91–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Taylor SE, Lichtman RR, Wood VJ: Attributions, beliefs about control, and adjustment to breast cancer.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1984,46:489–502.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Thompson SC: Will it hurt less if I can control it? A complex answer to a simple question.Psychological Bulletin. 1981,90:89–101.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Thompson SC, Cheek PR, Graham MA: The other side of perceived control: Disadvantages and negative effects. In Spaceapan S, Oskamp S (eds),The Social Psychology of Health (Claremont Symposium on Applied Social Psychology, 1987) Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 1988, 69–93.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Fredette SL: Breast cancer survivors: Concerns and coping.Cancer Nursing. 1995,18(1):35–46.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Lasry JM, Margolese RG: Fear of recurrence, breast conserving surgery, and the trade-off hypothesis.Cancer. 1991,69:2111–2115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kash KM, Holland JC, Halper MS, Miller DG: Psychological distress and surveillance behaviors of women with a family history of breast cancer.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1992,84:24–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Stoddard AM, Lipkus I, Lane D, et al., for the National Cancer Institute Breast Cancer Screening Consortium: Characteristics of under-users of mammogram screening aged 50 to 80.Preventative Medicine. 1998,27:478–487.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, Gandek B:SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lerman C, Trock B, Rimer B, et al: Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms.Annals of Internal Medicine. 1991,114:657–661.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Lerman C, Lustbadder E, Rimer B, et al: Effects of individualized breast cancer risk counseling: A randomized trial.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1995,87:286–292.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Dalberg K, Mattsson A, Rutqvist LE, et al: Breast-conserving surgery for invasive breast cancer: Risk factors for ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences.Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 1997,43:73–86.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Demicheli R, Abbattista A, Miceli R, Valagussa P, Bonadonna G: Time distribution of the recurrence risk for breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy: Further support about the concept of tumor dormancy.Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 1996,41:177–185.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. McCaul KD, Branstetter AD, Schroeder DM, Glasgow RE: What is the relationship between breast cancer risk and mammography screening? A meta-analytic review.Health Psychology. 1996,15:423–429.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Leventhal H, Cameron L: Behavioral theories and the problem of compliance.Patient Education and Counseling. 1987,10:117–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cancer Prevention Research Project, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Avenue, North, MP-804, 98109-1024, Seattle, WA

    M. Robyn Andersen & Nicole Urban

  2. University of Washington, Washington, USA

    Nicole Urban

  3. Marsha Rivkin Ovarian Cancer Research Center, Seattle, USA

    Nicole Urban

Authors
  1. M. Robyn Andersen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nicole Urban
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Preparation of this manuscript was supported in part by grant 3 R01 CA 60131-03S1 from U.S. Public Health Service, Office of Women’s Health as part of the National Action Plan on Breast Cancer initiative and by grant CA 63146 from the National Cancer Institute.

The authors would like to thank Dr. Erin Ellis, Dr. Ben Anderson, Dr. Julie Gralow, and Susan Wilson, M.P.H., for their comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript.

About this article

Cite this article

Andersen, M.R., Urban, N. Involvement in decision-making and breast cancer survivor quality of life. ann. behav. med. 21, 201–209 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02884834

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02884834

Keywords

Search

Navigation