Search

Purpose To build on results of a cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a combined patient-oncologist intervention to improve communication in advanced cancer, we conducted a post hoc analysis of the patient intervention component, a previsit patient coaching session that used a question prompt list (QPL). We hypothesized that intervention-group participants would bring up more QPL-related topics, particularly prognosis-related topics, during the subsequent oncologist visit. Patients and Methods This cluster RCT with 170 patients who had advanced nonhematologic cancer (and their caregivers) recruited from practices of 24 participating oncologists in western New York. Intervention-group oncologists (n = 12) received individualized communication training; up to 10 of their patients (n = 84) received a previsit individualized communication coaching session that incorporated a QPL. Control-group oncologists (n = 12) and patients (n = 86) received no interventions. Topics of interest identified by patients during the coaching session were summarized from coaching notes; one office visit after the coaching session was audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by using linear regression modeling for group differences. Results Compared with controls, more than twice as many intervention-group participants brought up QPL-related topics during their office visits (70.2% v 32.6%; P < .001). Patients in the intervention group were nearly three times more likely to ask about prognosis (16.7% v 5.8%; P =.03). Of 262 topics of interest identified during coaching, 158 (60.3%) were QPL related; 20 (12.7%) addressed prognosis. Overall, patients in the intervention group brought up 82.4% of topics of interest during the office visit. Conclusion A combined coaching and QPL intervention was effective to help patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers identify and bring up topics of concern, including prognosis, during their subsequent oncologist visits. Considering that most patients are misinformed about prognosis, more intensive steps are needed to better promote such discussions.

Objective: To identify and synthesise evidence for interventions targeting end-of-life communication., Methods: Database, reference list and author searches were conducted to identify evaluations of end-of-life communication-focussed interventions. Data were extracted, synthesised and QUALSYST quality analyses were performed., Results: Forty-five studies met inclusion criteria. Interventions targeted patients (n=6), caregivers (n=3), healthcare professionals (HCPs n=24) and multiple stakeholders (n=12). Interventions took various forms including communication skills training, education, advance care planning and structured practice changes. Substantial heterogeneity in study designs, outcomes, settings and measures was apparent and study quality was variable., Conclusion: A substantial number of end-of-life communication interventions have been evaluated. Interventions have particularly targeted HCPs in cancer settings, though patient, caregiver and multi-focal interventions have also been evaluated. While some interventions were efficacious in well-designed RCTs, most evidence was from less robust studies. While additional interventions targeting patients and caregivers are needed, multi-focal interventions may more effectively remove barriers to end-of-life communication., Practice Implications: Despite the limitations evident in the existing literature, healthcare professionals may still derive useful insights into effective approaches to end-of-life communication if appropriate caution is exercised. However, additional RCTs, implementation studies and cost-benefit analyses are required to bolster arguments for implementing and resourcing communication interventions., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Discussing end-of-life (EOL) care is challenging when death is not imminent, contributing to poor decision-making and EOL quality-of-life. A communication support program (CSP) targeting these issues may facilitate discussions. We aimed to qualitatively explore responses to a nurse-led CSP, incorporating a question prompt list (QPL-booklet of questions patients/caregivers can ask clinicians), promoting life expectancy and EOL-care discussions., Methods: Participants met a nurse-facilitator to explore an EOL-focussed QPL. Prognosis and advance care planning (ACP) QPL content was highlighted. Thirty-one transcribed meetings were analysed using thematic text analysis before reaching data saturation., Results: Thirty-one advanced cancer patients (life expectancy <12 months) and 11 family caregivers were recruited from six medical oncology clinics in Sydney, Australia. Intent to use the QPL related to information needs, involvement in care and readiness to discuss EOL issues. Many participants did not want life expectancy estimates, citing unreliable estimates, unknown treatment outcomes, or coping by not looking ahead. Most displayed interest in ACP, often motivated by a loved one's EOL experiences, clear treatment preferences, concerns about caregivers or recognition that ACP is valuable regardless of life expectancy. Timing emerged as a reason not to discuss EOL issues; many maintaining it was too early., Conclusion: Patients and caregivers appear ambivalent about acknowledging approaching death by discussing life expectancy but value ACP. Given heterogeneity in responses, individualised approaches are required to guide EOL discussion conduct and content. Further exploration of the role of prognostic discussion in ACP is warranted., (Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Objective: The objective of this study was to provide insight into how advanced cancer patients and their caregivers use a Question Prompt List (QPL) during a consultation and for preparation for future consultations., Methods: Audiotaped consultations and follow-up phone calls of 28 advanced cancer patients were coded and content analyzed. Questions asked and concerns expressed in consultations were coded for initiator, content, inclusion in the QPL and exact wording. Patients' reported and future use of the QPL were coded from the phone calls., Results: The majority of patients reported that they used the QPL. Questions asked by patients and caregivers predominately coincided with questions from the prognosis section of the QPL. Questions were rarely asked literally from the QPL, instead questions were tailored to patients' own circumstances., Conclusion: QPLs are useful to stimulate discussion on prognosis among advanced cancer patients and caregivers. Patients tailored questions from the QPL to their own circumstances which may suggest high involvement and engagement. The development of more specific tailored communication interventions for advanced cancer patients is warranted., Practice Implications: Implementation of QPLs in the advanced cancer setting may be beneficial for patients, caregivers and healthcare providers to facilitate discussion of topics such as prognosis., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Timely communication about life expectancy and end-of-life care is crucial for ensuring good patient quality-of-life at the end of life and a good quality of death. This article describes the protocol for a multisite randomised controlled trial of a nurse-led communication support programme to facilitate patients' and caregivers' efforts to communicate about these issues with their healthcare team., Methods and Analysis: This NHMRC-sponsored trial is being conducted at medical oncology clinics located at/affiliated with major teaching hospitals in Sydney, Australia. Patients with advanced, incurable cancer and life expectancy of less than 12 months will participate together with their primary informal caregiver where possible. Guided by the self-determination theory of health-behaviour change, the communication support programme pairs a purpose-designed Question Prompt List (QPL-an evidence-based list of questions patients/caregivers can ask clinicians) with nurse-led exploration of QPL content, communication challenges, patient values and concerns and the value of early discussion of end-of-life issues. Oncologists are also cued to endorse patient and caregiver question asking and use of the QPL. Behavioural and self-report data will be collected from patients/caregivers approximately quarterly for up to 2.5 years or until patient death, after which patient medical records will be examined. Analyses will examine the impact of the intervention on patients' and caregivers' participation in medical consultations, their self-efficacy in medical encounters, quality-of-life, end-of-life care receipt and quality-of-death indicators., Ethics and Dissemination: Approvals have been granted by the human ethics review committee of Royal Prince Alfred Hospital and governance officers at each participating site. Results will be reported in peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations., Trial Registration Number: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12610000724077., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Background: Communication about prognosis and treatment choices is essential for informed decision making in advanced cancer. This article describes an investigation designed to facilitate communication and decision making among oncologists, patients with advanced cancer, and their caregivers., Methods/design: The Values and Options in Cancer Care (VOICE) Study is a National Cancer Institute sponsored randomized controlled trial conducted in the Rochester/Buffalo, NY and Sacramento, CA regions. A total of 40 oncologists, approximately 400 patients with advanced cancer, and their family/friend caregivers (one per patient, when available) are expected to enroll in the study. Drawing upon ecological theory, the intervention uses a two-pronged approach: oncologists complete a multifaceted tailored educational intervention involving standardized patient instructors (SPIs), and patients and caregivers complete a coaching intervention to facilitate prioritizing and discussing questions and concerns. Follow-up data will be collected approximately quarterly for up to three years., Discussion: The intervention is hypothesized to enhance patient-centered communication, quality of care, and patient outcomes. Analyses will examine the effects of the intervention on key elements of physician-patient-caregiver communication (primary outcomes), the physician-patient relationship, shared understanding of prognosis, patient well-being, and health service utilization (secondary outcomes)., Trial Registration: Clinical Trials Identifier: NCT01485627.

Objective: To explore patients' perspectives across two cultures (Australia and USA) regarding communication about prognosis and end-of-life care issues and to consider the ways in which these discussions can be optimised., Methods: Fifteen Australian and 11 US patients completed individual semi-structured qualitative interviews. A further 8 US patients participated in a focus group. Interviews and focus group recordings were transcribed verbatim and interpreted using thematic text analysis with an inductive, data-driven approach., Results: Global themes identified included readiness for and outcomes of discussions of prognosis and end-of-life issues. Contributing to readiness were sub themes including patients' adjustment to and acceptance of their condition (together with seven factors promoting this), doctor and patient communication skills, mutual understandings and therapeutic relationship elements. Outcomes included sub themes of achievement of control and ability to move on. A model of the relationships between these factors, emergent cross cultural differences, and how factors may help to optimise these discussions are presented., Conclusion: Identified optimising factors illustrate Australian and US patients' perspectives regarding how prognosis and end-of-life issues can be discussed with minimised negative impact., Practice Implications: Recognition of factors promoting adjustment, acceptance and readiness and use of the communication skills and therapeutic relationship elements identified may assist in optimising discussions and help patients plan care, achieve more control of their situation and enjoy an optimal quality-of-life., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives To i) identify and synthesise evidence published since 2007 regarding the impact of parental cancer on adolescent and young adult offspring, ii) identify methodological and evidence gaps addressed during this period and iii) highlight those requiring further attention. Design A systematic review and thematic synthesis of peer reviewed literature regarding the impact of parental cancer upon AYA offspring. Data sources Online searches of CINAHL, Embase, Medline, PsychInfo and Scopus databases were conducted. Reference lists of included articles were screened and additional searches by prominent authors were performed. Review methods Study selection, data extraction and quality analysis was undertaken by three independent researchers. Extracted study data was iteratively reviewed and discussed to achieve consensus regarding thematic synthesis of included studies. Results Database and hand-searching yielded 1730 articles, 54 of which were included in the final synthesis. Included studies are discussed with respect to the following themes: i) study design and quality; ii) measurement and sampling; iii) positive and negative aspects of parental cancer; iv) needs; v) communication and information; vi) coping strategies; vii) interventions; and viii) family functioning and other predictors. Twenty-nine studies reported negative impacts related to parental cancer, while eight identified positive outcomes related to post-traumatic growth. Five returned null or mixed findings. Unmet needs were frequently explored and a new validated measure developed. Communication and information were particularly important for offspring, though these needs were often unmet and parents wanted guidance regarding discussions with their children. Offspring may adopt a variety of coping strategies, some of which appear maladaptive, and may cycle between different approaches. Few evaluations of interventions were identified, and further work in this area is needed. Further evidence has emerged that poorer family functioning and other family and illness-related factors predict worse psychosocial outcomes for offspring, however evidence for other predictors such as age and gender remain mixed. Conclusions Additional evidence for the negative psychosocial impact of parental cancer on adolescent and young adult offspring, their needs, and factors predicting psychosocial outcomes has emerged in the last decade. However, substantial gaps and methodological issues remain and evidence for the development, efficacy or implementation of interventions for this population is very limited. There is also a clear need for greater focus on bereaved and young adult offspring and those from non-western cultural groups, who remain under-represented in research conducted to date. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Patients are often not given the information needed to understand their prognosis and make informed treatment choices, with many consequently experiencing less than optimal care and quality-of-life at end-of-life. Objectives To evaluate the efficacy of a nurse-facilitated communication support program for patients with advanced, incurable cancer to assist them in discussing prognosis and end-of-life care. Design A parallel-group randomised controlled trial design was used. Settings This trial was conducted at six cancer treatment centres affiliated with major hospitals in Sydney, Australia. Participants 110 patients with advanced, incurable cancer participated. Methods The communication support program included guided exploration of a question prompt list, communication challenges, patient values and concerns and the value of discussing end-of-life care early, with oncologists cued to endorse question-asking and question prompt list use. Patients were randomised after baseline measure completion, a regular oncology consultation was audio-recorded and a follow-up questionnaire was completed one month later. Communication, health-related quality-of-life and satisfaction measures and a manualised consultation-coding scheme were used. Descriptive, Mixed Modelling and Generalised Linear Mixed Modelling analyses were conducted using SPSS version 22. Results Communication support program recipients gave significantly more cues for discussion of prognosis, end-of-life care, future care options and general issues not targeted by the intervention during recorded consultations, but did not ask more questions about these issues or overall. Oncologists’ question prompt list and question asking endorsement was inconsistent. Communication support program recipients’ self-efficacy in knowing what questions to ask their doctor significantly improved at follow-up while control arm patients’ self-efficacy declined. The communication support program did not impact patients’ health-related quality-of-life or the likelihood that their health information or shared decision-making preferences would be met. Satisfaction with the communication support program was high. Conclusions Given the importance of clarifying prognostic expectations and end-of-life care wishes in the advanced cancer context, the communication support program appears to be an effective and well-received solution to encourage early information seeking related to these issues though, its long-term impact remains unclear. The manualised nature of the intervention, designed with existing clinical staff in mind, may make it suited for implementation in a clinical setting, though additional work is needed to identify why question asking was unaffected and establish its impact later in the illness trajectory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the challenges involved in prognosis and end-of-life care. It states that misunderstanding one's prognosis add to bad decision making. An expert panel used a question prompt list to study this. Patients with advanced cancer and health professionals participated. Analysis identified themes including reinforcement of known benefits of question prompt list, appraisal of content and suggestions for further development, and contrast feedbacks in Australian and U. S. patients.