Preferences in a Group of Patients with Cancer: A Grounded Theory

• Published in: Patient preference and adherence Vol. 15; pp. 2313 - 2326
• Main Authors: Higuita-Gutiérrez, Luis Felipe, Estrada-Mesa, Diego Alejandro, Cardona-Arias, Jaiberth Antonio
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New Zealand Dove Medical Press Limited 01.01.2021; Taylor & Francis Ltd; Dove; Dove Medical Press
• Subjects: Access to information; Analysis; Bioethics; Cancer; Cancer patients; Cancer therapies; Care and treatment; Clinical medicine; Decision making; Grounded theory; Health aspects; Medical equipment; Medical ethics; Medical prognosis; Original Research; Patient satisfaction; Patients; Personal preferences (Social sciences); Physicians; Preferences; Qualitative research; Quality of life; social studies of medicine; Surveys; Colombia; preferences; cancer; social studies of medicine; bioethics; grounded theory
• ISSN: 1177-889X; 1177-889X
• DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S328971

This study was conducted to understand the preferences of patients with cancer in Medellin, Colombia. A qualitative approach based on the theoretical and methodological resources of the grounded theory was conducted. Between June 2020 and March 2021, patients over 18 years old with a confirmed diagnosis of cancer within the past 2 years treated in Medellin, Colombia, were selected. Theoretical saturation sampling was performed. Each participant was interviewed between 2 and 3 times in accordance with the open, axial, and selective coding of the grounded theory. A common preference set emerged in all patients related to the attributes of healthcare professionals and is a category that unites their scientific and humanistic aspects. On the other hand, very heterogeneous preferences were presented that were associated with the doctor-patient relationship and the therapeutic objectives. In the doctor-patient relationship, there are those who adhere to a paternalistic model and those who opt for an informative model. In therapeutic objectives, two subcategories emerged: those who are inclined to preserve life and those who accord more value to the quality of life. The categories that emerged illustrate the complexity and challenges of the preferences of patients with cancer in theoretical and experiential terms for social studies of medicine, philosophy, and bioethics. From medical social studies, it's emphasized that the experiences of dehumanization are constant, which generates shared preferences in the patients related to the ideal of the medical professional. From the philosophical perspective, the care received by patients coincides with what was called medicine for slaves in ancient Greece, insofar as patients are not assumed to be free subjects. With respect to bioethics, some ideas are raised contrary to the support of individual autonomy; relational autonomy and the respect for the person above the autonomy itself are advocated.