Search

Objective: Patient-clinician communication difficulties are a major barrier to effective symptom management during chemotherapy especially among non-English-speaking and minority patients. This study sought to examine how information is exchanged between patients and clinicians during chemotherapy treatment regarding pain, depression, fatigue, and nausea experienced among the most prevalent non-English-speaking group in the USA, Hispanic breast cancer survivors.Methods: Hispanic breast cancer patients and clinicians participated in focus groups to examine Hispanic breast cancer survivors' experience and patient-physician communication of symptoms during chemotherapy. Three separate focus groups (English language with patients, Spanish language with patients, and English language with clinicians) were conducted. All participants completed a demographic questionnaire.Results: Six breast cancer survivors participated in the English-language focus group, ten breast cancer survivors participated in the Spanish-language focus group, and five clinicians participated. Presence and communication of depressive symptoms between the English- and Spanish-language groups differed, with the majority of the English-language group sharing their experiences of depressive symptoms while those in the Spanish-language group did not report depressive symptoms. Results also indicated that most patients were unhappy with the response of clinicians regarding their reported symptoms. Several barriers to effective patient-clinician communication, including limited physician time, lack of patient knowledge, timidity, and language, were identified.Conclusion: The findings of this study underscore the need to improve patient-physician communication during chemotherapy to reduce the symptom burden among Hispanic breast cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patient navigation (PN) may reduce cancer health disparities. Few studies have investigated the effects of PN on patient-reported satisfaction with care or assessed patients' satisfaction with navigators. The objectives of this study are to test the effects of PN on patient satisfaction with cancer care, assess patients' satisfaction with navigators, and examine the impact of barriers to care on satisfaction for persons with abnormal cancer-related screening tests or symptoms. Study participants included women and men with abnormal breast, cervical, or colorectal cancer screening tests and/or symptoms receiving care at 18 clinics. Navigated (n=416) and non-navigated (n=292) patients completed baseline and end-of-study measures. There was no significant difference between navigated and non-navigated patients in change in patient satisfaction with cancer care from baseline to exit. African-American (p<0.001), single (p=0.03), low income (p<0.01), and uninsured patients (p<0.001) were significantly less likely to report high patient satisfaction at baseline. A significant effect was found for change in satisfaction over time by employment status (p=0.04), with full-time employment showing the most improvement. The interaction between satisfaction with navigators and satisfaction with care over time was marginally significant (p=0.08). Baseline satisfaction was lower for patients who reported a barrier to care (p=0.02). Patients reporting other-focused barriers (p=0.03), including transportation (p=0.02), had significantly lower increases in satisfaction over time. Overall, results suggested that assessing barriers to cancer care and tailoring navigation to barrier type could enhance patients' experiences with health care. PN may have positive effects for healthcare organizations struggling to enhance quality of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is serious, yet a minority of US adults receive within-guideline screening exams. Methods. A random selection of patients attending clinics in 3 different settings completed a survey on CRC-related barriers, knowledge, and beliefs. Results. Participants with fewer barriers, better knowledge, and more positive beliefs toward screening were significantly more likely to be within screening guidelines. A physician's screening recommendation was significantly related to screening in patients < 65 years, but was not significant for older patients. Conclusions. Large-scale studies are needed. Results can be used to develop multifaceted, tailored education programs to improve CRC screening in primary care. J Cancer Educ. 2008; 23:241-247. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]