Reducing uncertainty: motivations and consequences of seeking a second opinion in oncology

9Citations
Citations of this article
18Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Cancer patients increasingly seek second opinion (SO) consultations, but there is scarce empirical evidence to substantiate medical and psychological benefits for patients. This is the first study to examine patient- and oncologist-reported (1) motivations and expectations of patients to seek a SO, (2) the perceived medical outcome, and (3) psychological consequences of SOs over time (i.e. patients’ uncertainty and anxiety). Material and methods: This multi-informant longitudinal cohort study (SO-COM) included consecutive cancer patients referred for a SO (N = 70; age 28–85), as well as their referring and consulting oncologists. Outcome measures were completed at three time points: Patients and referring oncologists reported motivations and expectations before the SO (T0), patients and consulting oncologists reported the medical outcome of the SO (i.e. discrepancy between first and second opinion) immediately following the SO (T1), and patients reported their uncertainty and anxiety at T0, T1, and two months following the SO (T2). Results: Cancer patients most frequently reported wanting expert advice, exhausting all options, and/or needing more information as motivations for SOs. Referring oncologists rather accurately anticipated these motivations, except most did not recognize patients’ information needs. The vast majority of patients (90.0%) received a medical advice similar to the first opinion, although 65.7% had expected to receive a different opinion. Patients’ uncertainty (F = 6.82, p=.002; η2 =.22), but not anxiety (F = 3.074, p=.055, η2 =.11) was significantly reduced after the SO. Conclusions: SOs can yield psychological benefits by reducing patients’ uncertainty, but the added medical value remains debatable. Referring oncologists may not be fully aware of their patients’ information needs. Patients should be better informed about goals and benefits of SOs to better manage their expectations. More cost-effective ways of optimally providing medically and psychologically valuable SOs need to be explored.

References Powered by Scopus

The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies

6883Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The measurement of uncertainty in illness

583Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Surgeon recommendations and receipt of mastectomy for treatment of breast cancer

316Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Communication about prognosis during patient-initiated second opinion consultations in advanced cancer care: An observational qualitative analysis

15Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Suicide, other externally caused injuries, and cardiovascular disease within 2 years after cancer diagnosis: A nationwide population-based study in Japan (J-SUPPORT 1902)

13Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Patient-provider communication during second opinion consultations in oncology

6Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lehmann, V., Smets, E. M. A., de Jong, M., de Vos, F. Y. F., Kenter, G. G., Stouthard, J. M., & Hillen, M. A. (2020). Reducing uncertainty: motivations and consequences of seeking a second opinion in oncology. Acta Oncologica, 1512–1519. https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2020.1794036

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

Professor / Associate Prof. 3

60%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

20%

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 1

20%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceut... 2

29%

Nursing and Health Professions 2

29%

Medicine and Dentistry 2

29%

Chemistry 1

14%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free