How Should We Enhance the Process and Purpose of Prognostic Communication in Oncology?

Sisk, Bryan A.; Mack, Jennifer W.

doi:10.1001/amajethics.2018.757

Cited by 18 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given the range of poten- (Gilligan et al, 2017). Further trials are needed to conclusively establish their efficacy, particularly with cancer care providers other than oncologists (Sisk & Mack, 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, variation in approaches to communication about issues such as life expectancy has been reported in different patient groups (Gysels et al, 2012). Life expectancy information should be provided in a manner that is responsive to the individual patients' preferences (Sisk & Mack, 2018), but this does not always occur. For instance, in an Australian study undertaken with 1,431 medical oncology outpatients from 12 treatment centres, 24% of patients reported receiving too little information about their life expectancy, while 4% received too much information (Zucca et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…High quality, coordinated cancer care and informed treatment decision making requires that patients, family members and cancer care providers have shared understanding of likely treatment outcomes, including life expectancy (Gramling, Fiscella, Xing, &, Fiscella, Xing&&, 2016;Sisk & Mack, 2018). Understanding the different sources of information about life expectancy that patients encounter, and patients' perceptions regarding the quality of this information can help identify areas where improvements need to be made (Sisk & Mack, 2018). Therefore, the aims of this study were to describe the (a) number and type of cancer care providers that radiation oncology outpatients report discussing life expectancy with, and (b) patients' perceptions of the acceptability and utility of life expectancy information.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Radiation oncology outpatients’ patterns of life expectancy discussions

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To describe the (a) number and type of cancer care providers that radiation oncology outpatients report discussing life expectancy with, and (b) perceptions of the acceptability and utility of life expectancy information. Methods A cross‐sectional survey of patients receiving radiotherapy was undertaken in four treatment centres. Patients indicated whether they had discussed life expectancy with a cancer doctor (i.e., medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, surgeon, haematologists) and/or other cancer care provider (i.e., general practitioner, radiation therapist, nurse); and acceptability and utility of information. Results Of 207 respondents, 133 (64%) had discussed life expectancy with at least one provider. General practitioners (GPs) were the most frequent source of information. Of those who had discussed life expectancy, half (n = 110/207) perceived cancer would not impact life expectancy. Information was easy to understand (91%), discussed sensitively (90%), helped plan for future (83%) and gave them certainty (86%). The information made 11% feel overloaded and 34% feel anxious. Conclusion Two‐thirds of respondents had discussed life expectancy with at least one cancer care provider. Providers from the range of disciplines involved in cancer care need to be skilled at communicating life expectancy information and recognising the adverse impact this may have on some patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Radiation oncology outpatients’ patterns of life expectancy discussions

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Communication between physicians and patients is an important topic in the field of oncology, most notably with regard to medical attention and the satisfaction of patients (Fischer et al, 2019; Gilligan et al, 2017). Communication in oncology can be challenging because of the possible existential threat of life and the distressing treatments (Sisk & Mack, 2018). Patients experience insecurity, lack of control, stigma and anxiety associated with a cancer diagnosis and the complexity of medical information (Huang et al, 2021; Niedzwiedz et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Com‐On Questionnaire: Development and validation of a questionnaire for evaluating communication skills of oncologists

Wuensch

Boden

Pärschke

et al. 2022

European J Cancer Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The present study aimed to develop and validate an instrument for assessing the communication skills of oncology physicians from a patient's point of view. Methods A first draft of the questionnaire was compiled based on skills reflecting good physician–patient communication identified in the literature. The questionnaire was critically revised by experts to ensure the validity of its contents. The revised questionnaire was completed by a sample of 153 cancer patients. The questionnaire was developed in German and later translated into English. Results After analysis using classical test theory and an exploratory factor analysis, four different factors could be extracted. These factors were labelled setting, patient‐centeredness, empathy and consulting competencies. Unsuitable items were eliminated within the analysis. All remaining items hold an appropriate degree of selectivity, item difficulty and reliability/consistency. Conclusion A novel questionnaire for evaluating communication skills of physicians was developed. It contains 36 items and is named ‘Com‐On Questionnaire: Questionnaire for the Evaluation of Physician's Communication Skills in Oncology’. Practice Implications The questionnaire is suitable for measuring both the strengths and deficits within the physician–patient communication in oncology from the patients' perspective.

show abstract

“…Providers may find it challenging to initiate GOC conversations because of (a) uncertainty about the child's prognosis, (b) obstacles to health care provider-to-provider communication, (c) lack of role clarity regarding who can initiate GOC discussions, and (d) discomfort with discussing the end of life and death 8,9 . Providers may feel unprepared or lacking in sufficient training to engage in GOC conversations, and these feelings can lead to provider avoidance of GOC conversations 10,11 . In many institutions, GOC conversations are typically reserved for physicians to initiate and lead with little nurse involvement, thus creating disjointed and inconsistent communication between physicians, parents of children with CHCs, and other members of the health care team 3,9 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Pediatric Goals of Care Communication

Grier¹,

Koch²,

Docherty³

2022

J Hosp Palliat Nurs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this article is to explore factors that influence pediatric patients and their parents during provider-led goals-of-care conversations. Our framework can help providers enhance holistic communication by approaching difficult topics (ie, quality of life, end of life) with an understanding of the multilayered external influences that affect patient/parent decision making. A 5-layer model is presented that describes facilitators to conversations about quality goals of care and advance directives. Each year, complex health conditions (a) affect approximately 500000 children in the United States, 8600 of whom meet current palliative care criteria, and (b) account for over 7 million child deaths globally. Nurses can use knowledge of the unique values and culture of families with children who have complex health conditions to support them by providing high quality, ongoing goals-of-care conversations, especially if their access to pediatric palliative care is limited.

show abstract

How Should We Enhance the Process and Purpose of Prognostic Communication in Oncology?

Cited by 18 publications

References 43 publications

Radiation oncology outpatients’ patterns of life expectancy discussions

Radiation oncology outpatients’ patterns of life expectancy discussions

Com‐On Questionnaire: Development and validation of a questionnaire for evaluating communication skills of oncologists

Pediatric Goals of Care Communication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About