The relative importance of treatment outcomes to surgeons' recommendations for low-risk thyroid cancer.

Abstract

The treatment of low-risk thyroid cancer is controversial. We evaluated the importance of treatment outcomes to surgeons' recommendations. A cross-sectional survey asked thyroid surgeons for their treatment recommendations for a healthy 45-year-old patient with a solitary, low-risk, 2-cm papillary thyroid cancer. The importance of the 10 treatment outcomes (survival, recurrence, etc.) to their recommendation was evaluated using constant sum scaling, a method where 100 points are allocated among the treatment outcomes; more points indicate higher importance. The distribution of points was compared between surgeons recommending total thyroidectomy and surgeons recommending lobectomy using Hottelling's T² test. Of 165 respondents (74.3% response rate), 35.8% (n = 59) recommended total thyroidectomy and 64.2% (n = 106) lobectomy. The importance of the 10 treatment outcomes was significantly different between groups (P < .05). Surgeons recommending total thyroidectomy were most influenced by the risk of recurrence (19.1 points; standard deviation 16.5) and rated this 1.6-times more important than those recommending lobectomy. Conversely, surgeons recommending lobectomy placed high emphasis on need for hormone replacement (14.3 points; standard deviation 15.4), rating this 3.1-times more important than those recommending total thyroidectomy. Surgeons who recommend total thyroidectomy and those who recommend lobectomy differently prioritize the importance of cancer recurrence and thyroid hormone replacement. Understanding how surgeons' beliefs influence their recommendations is important for ensuring patients receive treatment aligned with their values.