Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Attitudes of Gastroenterologists Regarding Delivery of Cancer Diagnoses: a Cross-Sectional Study

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Goals

To determine the attitudes and practices of gastroenterologists regarding the delivery of cancer diagnoses.

Background

Gastroenterologists frequently diagnose colorectal cancer. Receiving the news of a cancer diagnosis is difficult, and the delivery of the diagnosis can influence a patient’s understanding of their disease. No study to date has reported how gastroenterologists deliver cancer diagnoses to their patients.

Study

An anonymous questionnaire was sent online to gastroenterologists of the American College of Gastroenterology to assess views regarding the delivery of cancer diagnoses.

Results

Of the 280 complete responses (response rate = 1.64%), most respondents were male (n = 205, 73.21%), in practice between 0 and 9 years (n = 133, 47.50%), and at the attending/faculty level (n = 69.53%, 194). Most responded that they would disclose a cancer diagnosis to the patient themselves if they had made the discovery on endoscopy/colonoscopy (n = 255, 94.80%), with the preferred methods being an in person discussion (n = 187, 71.65%). Most respondents were not familiar with any guidelines for delivering cancer diagnoses (n = 202, 75.94%) and would be open to receiving training on cancer diagnosis delivery (n = 207, 78.11%).

Conclusions

Most gastroenterologists take personal responsibility in the delivery of cancer diagnoses. Many gastroenterologists receive no specific training on how to deliver this news and are unaware of any guidelines to follow that may be helpful in their practice. However, most displayed a willingness to learn these guidelines through some form of formal education. Future directions should consider the incorporation of education in cancer diagnosis delivery for gastroenterologists and gastroenterology fellows.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

References

  1. Arnold M, Abnet CC, Neale RE, et al. Global burden of 5 major types of gastrointestinal cancer. Gastroenterology. 2020;159(1):335–349 e15. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2020.02.068.

  2. Key Statistics for Colorectal Cancer. Accessed 30 Oct 2021. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/colon-rectal-cancer/about/key-statistics.html.

  3. von Blanckenburg P, Hofmann M, Rief W, Seifart U, Seifart C. Assessing patients preferences for breaking bad news according to the SPIKES-Protocol: the MABBAN scale. Patient Educ Couns. 2020;103(8):1623–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2020.02.036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Oken D. What to tell cancer patients. A study of medical attitudes JAMA. 1961;175:1120–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1961.03040130004002.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Friedman HJ. Physician management of dying patients: an exploration. Psychiatry Med. 1970;1(4):295–305. https://doi.org/10.2190/qhye-h6gw-ym2j-tpc6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Adler DD, Riba MB, Eggly S. Breaking bad news in the breast imaging setting. Acad Radiol. 2009;16(2):130–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2008.08.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Baile WF, Lenzi R, Parker PA, Buckman R, Cohen L. Oncologists’ attitudes toward and practices in giving bad news: an exploratory study. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(8):2189–96. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2002.08.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Baile WF, Buckman R, Lenzi R, Glober G, Beale EA, Kudelka AP. SPIKES-A six-step protocol for delivering bad news: application to the patient with cancer. Oncologist. 2000;5(4):302–11. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.5-4-302.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Keum N, Giovannucci E. Global burden of colorectal cancer: emerging trends, risk factors and prevention strategies. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;16(12):713–32. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41575-019-0189-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gebhardt C, Gorba C, Oechsle K, Vehling S, Koch U, Mehnert A. [Breaking bad news to cancer patients: content, communication preferences and psychological distress]. Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol. 2017;67(7):312–321. Die Kommunikation schlechter Nachrichten bei Krebspatienten: Inhalte, Kommunikationspraferenzen und psychische Belastungen. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-113628.

  11. Alves CGB, Treister NS, Ribeiro ACP, et al. Strategies for communicating oral and oropharyngeal cancer diagnosis: why talk about it? Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2020;129(4):347–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2019.11.014.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Porensky EK, Carpenter BD. Breaking bad news: effects of forecasting diagnosis and framing prognosis. Patient Educ Couns. 2016;99(1):68–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2015.07.022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Street RL Jr, Makoul G, Arora NK, Epstein RM. How does communication heal? Pathways linking clinician-patient communication to health outcomes. Patient Educ Couns. 2009;74(3):295–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2008.11.015.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Langbecker D, Caffery LJ, Gillespie N, Smith AC. Using survey methods in telehealth research: a practical guide. J Telemed Telecare. 2017;23(9):770–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X17721814.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kelley K, Clark B, Brown V, Sitzia J. Good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research. Int J Qual Health Care. 2003;15(3):261–6. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzg031.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Eysenbach G. Improving the quality of web surveys: the checklist for reporting results of Internet e-surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res. 2004;6(3):e34. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34.

  17. Al-Mohaimeed AA, Sharaf FK. Breaking bad news issues: a survey among physicians. Oman Med J. 2013;28(1):20–5. https://doi.org/10.5001/omj.2013.05.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Fulmer T, Escobedo M, Berman A, Koren MJ, Hernandez S, Hult A. Physicians’ views on advance care planning and end-of-life care conversations. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018;66(6):1201–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.15374.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kumar M, Goyal S, Singh K, et al. Breaking bad news issues: a survey among radiation oncologists. Indian J Palliat Care. 2009;15(1):61–6. https://doi.org/10.4103/0973-1075.53533.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Eid A, Petty M, Hutchins L, Thompson R. “Breaking bad news”: standardized patient intervention improves communication skills for hematology-oncology fellows and advanced practice nurses. J Cancer Educ. 2009;24(2):154–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/08858190902854848.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Musa A, Baron DA, Anavim A, et al. Notions of Preprocedural Patient Anxiety in the Realm of IR. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2020;31(2):336–340 e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2019.04.007.

Download references

Funding

Guarantor: Dr. Tobias Zuchelli.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 251 E Huron St., Chicago, IL, 60611, USA

    Abdelwahab Ahmed

  2. Department of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Shannon Lohman

  3. Northwestern University School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA

    Ji-Cheng Hsieh

  4. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA

    Kevin Harris, Salman Faisal, Eva Alsheik & Tobias Zuchelli

  5. Department of Medicine, ProMedica Monroe Regional Hospital, Monroe, MI, 48162, United States

    Arif Musa

  6. Sanford Center for Digestive Health, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, United States

    Mouhanna Ghanimeh

Authors
  1. Abdelwahab Ahmed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arif Musa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shannon Lohman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ji-Cheng Hsieh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kevin Harris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Salman Faisal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Mouhanna Ghanimeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Eva Alsheik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Tobias Zuchelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Abdelwahab Ahmed: this author served as corresponding author, completed data analysis, and contributed to the creation of the manuscript. Arif Musa: this author performed data analysis and contributed to the creation of the final manuscript. Shannon Lohman: this author contributed to the creation of the final manuscript. Ji-Cheng Hsieh: this author contributed to the creation of the final manuscript. Keving Harris: this author contributed to the creation of the final manuscript. Salman Faisal: this author contributed to the creation of the final manuscript. Mouhanna Ghanimeh: this author contributed to the creation of the final manuscript. Eva Alsheik: this author contributed to the creation of the final manuscript. Tobias Zuchelli: this author contributed to the creation of the final manuscript and serves as the principal investigator.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abdelwahab Ahmed.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 14 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ahmed, A., Musa, A., Lohman, S. et al. Attitudes of Gastroenterologists Regarding Delivery of Cancer Diagnoses: a Cross-Sectional Study. J Gastrointest Canc 54, 1286–1291 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12029-023-00921-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12029-023-00921-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation