Skip Navigation


Annals of Oncology Advance Access originally published online on June 6, 2005
Annals of Oncology 2005 16(7):1005-1053; doi:10.1093/annonc/mdi211
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
16/7/1005    most recent
mdi211v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (38)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hagerty, R. G.
Right arrow Articles by Tattersall, M. H. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hagerty, R. G.
Right arrow Articles by Tattersall, M. H. N.
Related Collections
Right arrow 2005 - Review Articles
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2005 European Society for Medical Oncology

Review

Communicating prognosis in cancer care: a systematic review of the literature

R. G. Hagerty1,3,4, P. N. Butow1,3,*, P. M. Ellis5, S. Dimitry5 and M. H. N. Tattersall1,2,4

1 Medical Psychology Research Unit, School of Psychology and Department of Medicine, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia; 2 Department of Cancer Medicine, University of Sydney, Australia; 3 School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Australia; 4 Royal Prince Alfred Hospital; 5 Department of Medical Oncology, Hamilton Health Sciences, Juravinski Cancer Center, Ontario, Canada

* Correspondence to: Prof. P. Butow, Medical Psychology Research Unit, School of Psychology, Griffith Taylor Building (A19), University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia. Tel: +61-2-9351-2859; Fax: +61-2-9036-5292; Email: phyllisb{at}psych.usyd.edu.au

Prognosis is an issue that most doctors and patients describe as difficult to discuss and the best way of presenting prognostic information to optimise patient understanding, psychological adjustment and decision-making is uncertain. A systematic review of the literature was conducted with the aim of clarifying the current available knowledge of patient preferences, clinician views and current practice regarding the communication of prognosis. Eleven primary research questions guided organisation of the review findings, which were: patient preferences for prognostic information and preferred style of communicating prognosis; disclosure of prognosis to family members; physicians' views on communication of prognosis; current practice of delivering prognostic information; patient understanding and awareness of prognostic information; cultural differences in preferences and understanding; impact of prognostic information on patient outcomes; and interventions to facilitate prognostic discussion. Predictors of patient preferences for and understanding of prognostic information were also summarised. Studies are summarised under the subcategories according to the participants' disease stage. It was found that the majority of the published research has been conducted in the early stage cancer setting providing mostly descriptive evidence, and there is little evidence of the best method of communicating prognosis or of the impact of prognostic information on patient outcomes.

Key words: communication, prognosis, review


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Clin EthicsHome page
A. Slowther
Truth-telling in health care
Clin Ethics, December 1, 2009; 4(4): 173 - 175.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
InnovAiTHome page
J. Thistlethwaite
Patient-doctor interactions: emotional cues and discussing prognosis
InnovAiT, October 1, 2009; 2(10): 598 - 604.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CA Cancer J ClinHome page
E. Finlay and D. Casarett
Making Difficult Discussions Easier: Using Prognosis to Facilitate Transitions to Hospice
CA Cancer J Clin, July 1, 2009; 59(4): 250 - 263.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Arch Intern MedHome page
H. A. Huskamp, N. L. Keating, J. L. Malin, A. M. Zaslavsky, J. C. Weeks, C. C. Earle, J. M. Teno, B. A. Virnig, K. L. Kahn, Y. He, et al.
Discussions With Physicians About Hospice Among Patients With Metastatic Lung Cancer
Arch Intern Med, May 25, 2009; 169(10): 954 - 962.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann OncolHome page
G. Numico, M. Anfossi, G. Bertelli, E. Russi, G. Cento, N. Silvestris, C. Granetto, G. Di Costanzo, M. Occelli, E. Fea, et al.
The process of truth disclosure: an assessment of the results of information during the diagnostic phase in patients with cancer
Ann. Onc., May 1, 2009; 20(5): 941 - 945.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
F. Giorgi and R. Bascioni
Another Infusion of Hope
J. Clin. Oncol., April 1, 2009; 27(10): 1722 - 1723.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Palliat MedHome page
S Innes and S Payne
Advanced cancer patients' prognostic information preferences: a review
Palliative Medicine, January 1, 2009; 23(1): 29 - 39.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
BMJHome page
S. Audrey, J. Abel, J. M Blazeby, S. Falk, and R. Campbell
What oncologists tell patients about survival benefits of palliative chemotherapy and implications for informed consent: qualitative study
BMJ, July 31, 2008; 337(jul31_3): a752 - a752.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
S. Gabrijel, L. Grize, E. Helfenstein, M. Brutsche, P. Grossman, M. Tamm, and A. Kiss
Receiving the Diagnosis of Lung Cancer: Patient Recall of Information and Satisfaction With Physician Communication
J. Clin. Oncol., January 10, 2008; 26(2): 297 - 302.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Palliat MedHome page
K. Hancock, J. M Clayton, S. M Parker, S. Wal der, P. N Butow, S. Carrick, D. Currow, D. Ghersi, P. Glare, R. Hagerty, et al.
Truth-telling in discussing prognosis in advanced life-limiting illnesses: a systematic review
Palliative Medicine, September 1, 2007; 21(6): 507 - 517.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
The OncologistHome page
R. T. Penson, F. Gu, S. Harris, M. M. Thiel, N. Lawton, A. F. Fuller Jr., and T. J. Lynch Jr.
Hope
Oncologist, September 1, 2007; 12(9): 1105 - 1113.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Palliat MedHome page
C. Cartwright, B. D. Onwuteaka-Philipsen, G. Williams, K. Faisst, F. Mortier, T. Nilstun, M. Norup, A. van der Heide, and G. Miccinesi
Physician discussions with terminally ill patients: a cross-national comparison
Palliative Medicine, June 1, 2007; 21(4): 295 - 303.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
BMJHome page
D. K Sokol
Can deceiving patients be morally acceptable?
BMJ, May 12, 2007; 334(7601): 984 - 986.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
A. L. Back and R. M. Arnold
Discussing Prognosis: "How Much Do You Want to Know?" Talking to Patients Who Are Prepared for Explicit Information
J. Clin. Oncol., September 1, 2006; 24(25): 4209 - 4213.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann OncolHome page
M. Costantini, G. Morasso, M. Montella, P. Borgia, R. Cecioni, M. Beccaro, E. Sguazzotti, P. Bruzzi, and On behalf of the ISDOC Study Group
Diagnosis and prognosis disclosure among cancer patients. Results from an Italian mortality follow-back survey
Ann. Onc., May 1, 2006; 17(5): 853 - 859.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
E. Bruera
Process and Content of Decision Making by Advanced Cancer Patients
J. Clin. Oncol., March 1, 2006; 24(7): 1029 - 1030.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Qual Health ResHome page
S. Thorne, T. G. Hislop, M. Kuo, and E.-A. Armstrong
Hope and Probability: Patient Perspectives of the Meaning of Numerical Information in Cancer Communication
Qual Health Res, March 1, 2006; 16(3): 318 - 336.
[Abstract] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.