Surgery is the treatment of choice in most head and neck cancers. Very often, the surgery is radical with high impact on the psychosocial, functional and aesthetic fields. The aim of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of the patient's, clinician's and key informant's point of view when surgery is proposed, to improve the quality of pathways in terms of patients’ practical, psychological and relational needs. We followed a Grounded Theory approach with semi‐structured interviews. Seventeen participants (six patients, nine healthcare professionals and two volunteers) were interviewed immediately before surgery. The study generated a process of “persuading the patient of an obligation” as the core category. The other principal categories that emerged highlighted the patients’ doubts and fears regarding the surgery consequences and, in parallel, strategies employed by the healthcare professionals to rebut hindering issues impeding surgery. In particular, healthcare professionals involved patients in an affiliation process through simplified communication to sustain the choice of surgery; the family plays a supportive role in this process. The interplay between the organisational process and patients’ experience results in “I will let you convince me” at the end of the decision‐making process, where the main aim was to save and be saved.

Undergoing head and neck cancer surgery: A grounded theory

Ghirotto, Luca;
2019-01-01

Abstract

Surgery is the treatment of choice in most head and neck cancers. Very often, the surgery is radical with high impact on the psychosocial, functional and aesthetic fields. The aim of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of the patient's, clinician's and key informant's point of view when surgery is proposed, to improve the quality of pathways in terms of patients’ practical, psychological and relational needs. We followed a Grounded Theory approach with semi‐structured interviews. Seventeen participants (six patients, nine healthcare professionals and two volunteers) were interviewed immediately before surgery. The study generated a process of “persuading the patient of an obligation” as the core category. The other principal categories that emerged highlighted the patients’ doubts and fears regarding the surgery consequences and, in parallel, strategies employed by the healthcare professionals to rebut hindering issues impeding surgery. In particular, healthcare professionals involved patients in an affiliation process through simplified communication to sustain the choice of surgery; the family plays a supportive role in this process. The interplay between the organisational process and patients’ experience results in “I will let you convince me” at the end of the decision‐making process, where the main aim was to save and be saved.
2019
decision‐making; grounded theory; head and neck cancer; patient participation; preoperative care; surgery
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Losi_et_al-2019-European_Journal_of_Cancer_Care.pdf

solo utenti autorizzati

Tipologia: Versione dell'editore
Licenza: Accesso ristretto
Dimensione 517.12 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
517.12 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11562/994591
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 8
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 5
social impact