"It Depends on the Situation": Variability in How Surgical Oncologists Elicit and Integrate Patient Values

Understanding what matters most to patients is central to person-centered care, particularly in surgical oncology, where decisions often involve significant tradeoffs. We explored how surgeons elicit, integrate, document, and support patient values in cancer-related decision-making.

This qualitative descriptive study involved semi-structured interviews with surgical oncologists (June-September 2025). Participants were purposively sampled from a prior international survey to ensure variation in demographics. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Participant characteristics were summarized descriptively.

Fourteen surgeons participated. Most were male (71%), White (86%), and early-career (43%), practicing primarily in gastrointestinal or hepatobiliary surgery (each 43%) at academic centers (57%) in the U.S. South or Midwest (each 36%). Surgeons described various approaches to eliciting values, including inferring values from contextual clues and clarifying tradeoffs between survival and quality-of-life. Values elicitation was largely situational, occurring in high-risk or preference-sensitive contexts. When values conflicted with recommendations, surgeons adapted plans within oncologic safety. Documentation varied and was shaped by relevance, medicolegal concerns, and workflow. Barriers included time limitations, emotional distress, family dynamics, and limited training.

Values elicitation was inconsistent and situational rather than routine. More structured, earlier approaches and system-level support may better align surgical decisions with patient values.