Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Public Health and BioMed Central.

Open Access Research article

Japanese cancer patient participation in and satisfaction with treatment-related decision-making: A qualitative study

Yoshiko Watanabe*, Miyako Takahashi and Ichiro Kai

Author Affiliations

Department of Social Gerontology, School of Public Health, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

For all author emails, please log on.

BMC Public Health 2008, 8:77  doi:10.1186/1471-2458-8-77

Published: 27 February 2008

Abstract

Background

Over the last decade, patient involvement in treatment-related decision-making has been widely advocated in Japan, where patient-physician encounters are still under the influence of the long-standing tradition of paternalism. Despite this profound change in clinical practice, studies investigating the actual preferences of Japanese people regarding involvement in treatment-related decision-making are limited. The main objectives of this study were to (1) reveal the actual level of involvement of Japanese cancer patients in the treatment-related decision-making and their overall satisfaction with the decision-making process, and (2) consider the practical implications of increased satisfaction in cancer patients with regard to the decision-making process.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 24 Japanese cancer patients who were recruited from a cancer self-help group in Tokyo. The interviews were qualitatively analysed using the approach described by Lofland and Lofland.

Results

The analyses of the patients' interviews focused on 2 aspects: (1) who made treatment-related decisions (the physician or the patient), and (2) the informants' overall satisfaction with the decision-making process. The analyses revealed the following 5 categories of decision-making: 'patient as the active decision maker', 'doctor selection', 'wilfully entrusting the physician', 'compelled decision-making', and 'surrendering decision-making'. While the informants under the first 3 categories were fairly satisfied with the decision-making process, those under the latter 2 were extremely dissatisfied. Informants' views regarding their preferred role in the decision-making process varied substantially from complete physician control to complete patient control; the key factor for their satisfaction was the relation between their preferred involvement in decision-making and their actual level of involvement, irrespective of who the decision maker was.

Conclusion

In order to increase patient satisfaction with regard to the treatment-related decision-making process, healthcare professionals in Japan must assess individual patient preferences and provide healthcare accordingly. Moreover, a better environment should be created in hospitals and in society to facilitate patients in expressing their preferences and appropriate resources need to be made available to facilitate their decision-making process.