br Peipins L A et al Radiographic
Peipins, L.A., et al., 2003. Radiographic abnormalities and exposure to asbestos-con-taminated vermiculite in the Anthranilic Acid of Libby, Montana, USA. Environ. Health Perspect. 111, 1753–1759. Price, B., 2008. Exposure to airborne amphibole structures and health risks: libby, Montana. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 52, S97–S109.
Spear, T.M., et al., 2012. The presence of asbestos-contaminated vermiculite attic in-sulation or other asbestos-containing materials in homes and the potential for living space contamination. J. Environ. Health 75, 24–29. Environmental Research 175 (2019) 449–456
Sullivan, P.A., 2007. Vermiculite, respiratory disease, and asbestos exposure in Libby, Montana: update of a cohort mortality study. Environ. Health Perspect. 115, 579–585.
Szeinuk, J., et al., 2017. Pulmonary abnormalities as a result of exposure to Libby am-phibole during childhood and adolescence-The Pre-Adult Latency Study (PALS). Am. J. Ind. Med. 60, 20–34. Tillett, T., 2012. The traveling libby legacy: Minnesota community exhibits nonoccupa-tional health impacts consistent with asbestos damage. Environ. Health Perspect. 120. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2014. Toxicological Review of Libby Amphibole Asbestos, vol. 2017 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. U.S. Geological Survey, 2018. Vermiculite Statistics and Information, vol. 2018 USGS. U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI) SEER Program, 2018. Fast Stats, vol. 2018 National Cancer Institute.
Vinikoor, L.C., et al., 2010. Exposure to asbestos-containing vermiculite ore and re-spiratory symptoms among individuals who were children while the mine was active in Libby, Montana. Environ. Health Perspect. 118 1033-28.
Whitehouse, A.C., 2004. Asbestos-related pleural disease due to tremolite associated with progressive loss of lung function: serial observations in 123 miners, family members, and residents of Libby, Montana. Am. J. Ind. Med. 46, 219–225.
Wong, O., Decoufle, P., 1982. Methodological issues involving the standardized mortality ratio and proportionate mortality ratio in occupational studies. J. Occup. Med. 24, 299–304.
Zonolite Attic Insulation Trust, 2014. Does Your Attic Contain Vermiculite Insulation?, vol. 2018.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Patient Education and Counseling
Cancer information-seeking preferences linked to distinct patient experiences and differential satisfaction with cancer care
a Department of Oncology and Ingram School of Nursing, McGill University, Canada
Cancer information-seeking preferences
Personalized cancer care
Patients as partners
Satisfaction with cancer care
Objective: True person-centered care (PCC) involves anticipating, responding to, and integrating patients’ needs and preferences as the illness experience unfolds. PCC success rests, in part, on quality provider-patient communication and tailored information exchange. These processes can have profound effects on the patient experience, self-management and health outcomes including survival. Cancer information-seeking preferences (CISP) by patients are increasingly found to modulate illness and care processes. However, research has yet to document the CISP types and prevalence as well as their associations with satisfaction with care.
Method: Individuals (N = 2142) treated for cancer in the last 6 months completed the Ambulatory Oncology Patient Satisfaction Survey (AOPSS) and a CISP measure.
Results: Whereas 60.3% (n = 1292) reported wanting to actively seek information about their cancer, a surprisingly high percentage (i.e., 39.7%; n = 850) did not. Men reported avoiding cancer information to a greater extent than women, χ2 (4, N = 2108) = 12.00, p = 0.02. CISP were also differentially associated with 6 key domains of satisfaction, with intense seekers consistently being less satisfied.
Conclusion and practice implications: These findings underscore how CISP can significantly affect patients’ cancer experience as well as their care satisfaction. © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Current approaches to treating cancer call for a better integration of person-centered care (PCC) – defined as a respectful, personalized approach that considers individuals as unique with specific needs and preferences – into main stream cancer care. In fact, more recent proposals push even the notion of patients as partners (PP) including them as integral health care team members [1,2]. Key aspects of these movements include information exchanges that meet the needs of patients and open health care provider-patient communication . Given the increasing number of individuals diagnosed with cancer (18.1 million new cases worldwide) as well as more cancer survivors (one million in Canada and 15.5 million in the US) [4–6], attention to their needs is crucial to optimizing health processes and outcomes as the illness experience unfolds. In line with PCC and PP, patients’ input into