Quality of breaking bad news to patients diagnosed with neoplasia of the uterine cervix

Abstract

ObjectiveLittle is known about the quality of receiving bad news (BN) for women diagnosed with cervical neoplasia. We evaluated adherence to the SPIKES protocol in three cohorts of women with different stages of the disease and treatment modalities.Patients and methodsWe included women with cervical cancer who underwent radical vaginal trachelectomy (RVT group, n = 110), radical hysterectomy or chemo-radiation (HE/RCT group, n = 101), and women with CIN 3 treated by loop excision (CIN group, n = 108). We asked the participants about how they received the bad news delivery in reality and how they would envision an ideal communication process based on the main items of the SPIKES protocol. The participants filled out a questionnaire with 38 items of the Marburg Breaking Bad News (MABBAN) Scale representing the six SPIKES subscales.ResultsOnly 72% of all patients reported being satisfied with their BBN experience. The following factors were considered important by 90% of the patients: an undisturbed atmosphere, taking enough time, coherent explanation of the disease, and the possibility to ask questions. However, the reality of their experiences fell significantly short of their expectations. Asking about the patient’s knowledge of the disease, addressing their concerns, allowing them to show emotions, providing clarity about the change in quality of life, informing them about alternative therapies, and involving them in further planning were also significantly lacking in the actual BBN encounters compared to the patients’ preferences. The experience of RVT patients was more negative compared to the HE/RCT patients (p = 0.036). The CIN patients had an overall satisfactory impression (p < 0.0001).ConclusionThe process of breaking bad news in German women diagnosed with cervical neoplasia requires substantial improvement. The SPIKES protocol can be used as a guideline for enhancement but should be supplemented by incorporating a second consultation as the norm rather than the exception. Continuous monitoring and improvement of the quality of BBN is recommended for all oncologic institutions, utilizing the MABBAN questionnaire as a valuable tool.