Search

Background: There is growing evidence that conversations between healthcare professionals and patients with serious illness can improve the quality of end-of-life cancer care. Yet, there is lack of insight into how different healthcare professions collaborate to deliver serious illness communication, as well as patients' and caregivers' perceptions of this collaboration between the nurse and physician. This study explores the interdisciplinary collaboration between nurses and physicians in serious illness conversations with patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma and their caregivers. Methods: Eleven dyadic interviews were conducted with 22 patients and caregivers, and two focus group interviews involving four nurses and the other with four physicians. Data analysis and reporting were conducted using reflexive thematic analysis within phenomenological epistemology. Results: The interdisciplinary collaboration was characterized by three main themes: (1) Importance of relationships, (2) Complementary perspectives, and (3) The common goal. Conclusion: This study highlights the importance of interdisciplinarity in serious illness conversations as it enhances the use of existential and descriptive language when addressing medical, holistic, and existential issues. The use of broader language also reflects that interdisciplinary interaction strengthens the expertise of each professional involved in patient care. Through interdisciplinary collaboration, the preferences, hopes, and values of the patient and caregiver can be integrated into the treatment plan, which is key in providing the delivery of optimal care. To promote cohesive and coordinated collaboration, organizational changes are recommended such as supporting continuity in patient–healthcare professional relationships, providing interdisciplinary training, and allocating time for pre-conversation preparation and post-conversation debriefing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Uncertainty has been associated with distress and poorer quality of life in patients with advanced cancer. Prior studies have focused on prognostic uncertainty; little is known about other types of uncertainty that patients and family members experience when discussing goals of care. Understanding the types of uncertainty expressed and differences between Black and White patients can inform the development of uncertainty management interventions. Methods: This study sought to characterize the types of uncertainty expressed by Black and White patients and family members within the context of information needs during inpatient goals-of-care discussions. We performed a secondary analysis of transcripts from 62 recorded goals-of-care discussions that occurred between 2012 and 2014 at an urban, academic medical center in the United States. We applied an adapted taxonomy of uncertainty to data coded as describing information needs and used an inductive qualitative analysis method to analyze the discussions. We report the types of uncertainty expressed in these discussions. Results: Fifty discussions included patient or family expressions of information needs. Of these, 40 discussions (n=16 Black and n=24 White) included statements of uncertainty. Black and White patients and families most frequently expressed uncertainty related to processes and structures of care (system-centered uncertainty) and to treatment (scientific uncertainty). Statements of prognostic uncertainty focused on quantitative information among Whites and on qualitative information and expectations for the future among Blacks. Conclusions: Black and White patients and families frequently expressed system-centered uncertainty, suggesting this may be an important target for intervention. Addressing other sources of uncertainty, such as prognostic uncertainty, may need more tailored approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite increasing numbers of cancer survivors and evidence that diet and physical activity improves the health of cancer survivors, most do not meet guidelines. Some social cognitive theory (SCT)-based interventions have increased physical activity behavior, however few have used objective physical activity measures. The Exercise and Nutrition Routine Improving Cancer Health (ENRICH) randomized controlled trial reported a significant intervention effect for the primary outcome of pedometer-assessed step counts at post-test (8-weeks) and follow-up (20-weeks). The aim of this study was to test whether the SCT constructs operationalized in the ENRICH intervention were mediators of physical activity behavior change. Methods: Randomized controlled trial with 174 cancer survivors and carers assessed at baseline, post-test (8-weeks), and follow-up (20-weeks). Participants were randomized to the ENRICH six session face-to-face healthy lifestyle program, or to a wait-list control. Hypothesized SCT mediators of physical activity behavior change (self-efficacy, behavioral goal, outcome expectations, impediments, and social expectations) were assessed using valid and reliable scales. Mediation was assessed using the Preacher and Hayes SPSS INDIRECT macro. Results: At eight weeks, there was a significant intervention effect on behavioral goal (A = 9.12, p = 0.031) and outcome expectations (A = 0.25, p = 0.042). At 20 weeks, the intervention had a significant effect on self-efficacy (A = 0.31, p = 0.049) and behavioral goal (A= 13.15, p = 0.011). Only changes in social support were significantly associated with changes in step counts at eight weeks (B = 633.81, p = 0.023). Behavioral goal was the only SCT construct that had a significant mediating effect on step counts, and explained 22 % of the intervention effect at 20 weeks (AB = 397.9, 95 % CI 81.5-1025.5). Conclusions: SCT constructs had limited impact on objectively-assessed step counts in a multiple health behavior change intervention for cancer survivors and their carers. Behavioral goal measured post-intervention was a significant mediator of pedometer-assessed step counts at 3-months after intervention completion, and explained 22 % of the intervention effect. Future research should examine the separate impact of goals and planning, as well as examining mediators of behavior maintenance in physical activity interventions targeting cancer survivors. Trial registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials registry ANZCTRN1260901086257. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The treatment of patients with malignant brain tumors remains a major oncological problem. The median survival of patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), the most malignant type, is only 15 months after initial diagnosis and even less after tumor recurrence. Improvements of standard treatment including surgery and radio-chemotherapy have not lead to major improvements. Therefore, alternative therapeutics such as oncolytic viruses that specifically target and destroy cancer cells are under investigation. Preclinical data of oncolytic parvovirus H-1 (H-1PV) infection of glioma cells demonstrated strong cytotoxic and oncosuppressing effects, leading to a phase I/IIa trial of H-1PV in patients with recurrent GBM (ParvOryx01). ParvOryx01 is the first trial with a replication competent oncolytic virus in Germany. Methods: ParvOryx01 is an open, non-controlled, two groups, intra-group dose escalation, single center, phase I/IIa trial. 18 patients with recurrent GBM will be treated in 2 groups of 9 patients each. Treatment group 1 will first receive H-1PV by intratumoral injection and second by administration into the walls of the tumor cavity during tumor resection. In treatment group 2 the virus will initially be injected intravenously and afterwards, identical to group 1, into the surrounding brain tissue during tumor removal. Main eligibility criteria are: age of 18 years, unifocal recurrent GBM, amenable to complete or subtotal resection. Dose escalation will be based on the Continual Reassessment Method. The primary objective of the trial is local and systemic safety and tolerability and to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Secondary objectives are proof of concept (PoC) and Progression-free Survival (PFS) up to 6 months. Discussion: This is the first trial with H-1PV in patients with recurrent GBM. The risks for the participants appear well predictable and justified. Furthermore, ParvOryx01 will be the first assessment of combined intratumoral and intravenous application of an oncolytic virus. Due to its study design the trial will not only generate data on the local effect of H-1PV but it will also investigate the penetration of H-1PV into the tumor after systemic delivery and obtain safety data from systemic delivery possibly supporting clinical trials with H-1PV in other, non-CNS malignancies. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01301430 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In this study, we aimed to develop and validate an instrument that could be used by patients with cancer to evaluate their quality of palliative care. Methods: Development of the questionnaire followed the four-phase process: item generation and reduction, construction, pilot testing, and field testing. Based on the literature, we constructed a list of items for the quality of palliative care from 104 quality care issues divided into 14 subscales. We constructed scales of 43 items that only the cancer patients were asked to answer. Using relevance and feasibility criteria and pilot testing, we developed a 44-item questionnaire. To assess the sensitivity and validity of the questionnaire, we recruited 220 patients over 18 years of age from three Korean hospitals. Results: Factor analysis of the data and fit statistics process resulted in the 4-factor, 32-item Quality Care Questionnaire-Palliative Care (QCQ-PC), which covers appropriate communication with health care professionals (ten items), discussing value of life and goals of care (nine items), support and counseling for needs of holistic care (seven items), and accessibility and sustainability of care (six items). All subscales and total scores showed a high internal consistency (Cronbach alpha range, 0.89 to 0.97). Multi-trait scaling analysis showed good convergent (0.568–0.995) and discriminant (0.472–0.869) validity. The correlation between the total and subscale scores of QCQ-PC and those of EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL, MQOL, SAT-SF, and DCS was obtained. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that the QCQ-PC can be adopted to assess the quality of care in patients with cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]