Romantic partner involvement during oncology consultations: A narrative review of qualitative and quantitative studies

Speaking out of turn: Implications of partner contributions for patient autonomy during prostate cancer consultations

“…These sequences are indicative of the patient and partner acting as the 'cancer couple' as previously conceptualised [24,58]. Furthermore, these actions speak to the expressed preferences of couples for partner involvement in oncology settings [23,26]. In the context of prostate cancer, and several other genitourinary cancers, this is unsurprising as the experience of these cancers, and the impact of treating them is rarely confined to the patient.…”

“…This is noteworthy as research has shown that patients regularly attend their medical encounters with a companion [20][21][22]. In the context of oncology, and in particular prostate cancer, patients tend to be accompanied by a partner, distinct from friends, carers, and relatives such as their spouse [23]. When considering the impact that prostate cancer can have on couples, this is not unexpected.…”

“…In the context of prostate cancer, little research has examined partner involvement during clinical consultations, with most studies reliant upon retrospective accounts [23]. Research has yet to examine the communicative practices as they unfold within a prostate cancer consultation comprising a clinician, a patient, and their partner.…”

Shared decision-making during prostate cancer consultations: Implications of clinician misalignment with patient and partner preferences

“…Treatment-related side-effects such as incontinence, impotence, fertility issues, and fear of cancer progression can all lead to the cancer couple experiencing physical and psychological morbidities that inevitably impact upon their relationship (Bullen and Tod, 2013;Wootten et al, 2014). Accordingly, patients largely expect their partners to be involved throughout the cancer experience (Beisecker et al, 1996;Davison et al, 2002;Stewart et al, 2021;Zeliadt et al, 2011). Finally, unlike other contexts such as primary care where there is an institutionalised expectation of an explicit treatment recommendation (Stivers et al, 2018), in these consultations, clinicians are expected to adhere to the principles of SDM where clinicians outline available treatment options, the benefits and risks of each option, while acknowledging and respecting expressed orientations and preferences.…”

Social ecological influences on treatment decision‐making in men diagnosed with low risk, localised prostate cancer

“…Emerging evidence suggests partners also experience anxiety related to their partners PCa and potential outcomes and tend to favour definitive treatments over AS (Couper et al, 2006 ; Srirangam et al, 2003 ). However, prior qualitative research has often interviewed couples together (which may preclude participants from sharing information), and therefore, their individual experiences, treatment preferences, and needs require further research (Stewart et al, 2021 ). There is also emerging evidence that patients may be influenced by opinions beyond their partner's when making treatment decisions (Berry et al, 2003 ).…”