Understanding the engagement of key decision support persons in patient decision making around breast cancer treatment

Healthcare provider assessments of caregiver communication behaviors during gynecologic Cancer treatment appointments

Objective

Caregivers often accompany patients to cancer-related medical appointments. Limited research exists on healthcare providers' (HCPs) evaluation of how caregiver communication influences interactions between healthcare providers and patients, particularly during gynecologic treatment visits. HCPs may perceive caregiver communication as helpful or challenging, and these triadic interactions may influence patient outcomes.

Methods

Interviews with ten cancer specialist HCPs (medical assistants/technicians, nurse practitioners/registered nurses, oncologists) addressed experiences interacting with patients and caregivers.

Results

Analyses revealed two themes concerning helpful communication: caregivers managing information and managing patient emotions. Three challenging themes include caregiver communication unsettling healthcare interactions, caregiver presence limiting patient communication, and caregiver engagement challenges.

Conclusion

HCPs evaluate caregiver communication as helpful and challenging. Findings suggest benefits of communication training for gynecologic cancer patients such as requesting privacy when interacting with HCPs, for caregivers to promote awareness of effects of their behavior, and for HCPs to help manage triadic interactions while supporting patient needs.

Innovation

HCP assessment of caregiver communication during gynecologic treatment visits offers unique insights regarding helpful and challenging behaviors contributing to implications for patient care and well-being. Applications may extend to other triadic interactions and cancer settings.

Assessing the association between quantity and quality of family caregiver participation in decision-making clinical encounters on patient activation in the metastatic breast cancer setting

OBJECTIVE

Caregivers support individuals undergoing cancer treatment by assisting with activities, managing care, navigating healthcare systems, and communicating with care teams. We explored the quality and quantity of caregiver participation during recorded decision-making clinical appointments in women with metastatic breast cancer.

METHODS

This was a convergent parallel mixed methods study that utilized qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis. Caregiver participation quality was operationalized using a summative thematic content analysis to identify and sum caregiver actions performed during appointments. Performance of a greater number of actions was considered greater quality of participation. Caregiver participation quantity was measured by calculating the proportion of speaking time. Participation quality and quantity were compared to patient activation, assessed using the Patient Activation Measure 1-month post decision-making appointment.

RESULTS

Fifty-three clinical encounters between patients with MBC, their caregivers, and oncologists were recorded. Identified caregiver actions included: General Support; Management of Treatment or Medication; Treatment History; Decision-Making; Insurance or Money; Pharmacy; Scheduling; Travel Concerns; General Cancer Understanding; Patient Specific Cancer Understanding; Caregiver-Initiated or Emphasis on Symptom Severity; and Caregiver Back-Up of Patient Symptom Description. Caregivers averaged 5 actions (SD 3): 48% of patient's caregivers had low quality (< 5 actions) and 52% had high quality (> 6 actions) participation. Regarding quantity, caregivers spoke on average for 4% of the encounter, with 60% of caregivers speaking less than 4% of the encounter (low quantity) and 40% of caregivers speaking more than 4% (high quantity). Greater quality and quantity of caregiver participation was associated with greater patient activation.

CONCLUSIONS

Caregivers perform a variety of actions during oncological decision-making visits aiding both patient and provider. Greater participation in terms of quantity and quality by the caregiver was associated with greater patient activism, indicating a need for better integration of the caregiver in clinical decision-making environments.

"Uninformed consent" in clinical trials with cancer patients: A qualitative analysis of patients' and support persons' communication experiences and needs

OBJECTIVE

Cancer patients are often overwhelmed when being informed about clinical trials. However, there is a lack of evidence-based strategies to improve physician-patient communication in this area. This study assessed the experiences and needs of cancer patients and their support persons (SPs) during the informed consent (IC) process prior to participation in clinical trials.

METHODS

17 semi-structured interviews with cancer patients and their SP were conducted and analysed using a framework analysis.

RESULTS

Most respondents reported feeling well informed about the clinical trial. However, core aspects of the study were often not understood highlighting a dissonance between perceived and actual recall and understanding. Many participants trusted that the trial recommended was the best available care and only skimmed the consent form or did not read it at all.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first German study to analyse both cancer patients' and SPs' perspectives on IC processes. Although many feel well informed, our results suggest a significant gap in recall and understanding of core components of clinical trials which hinders IC.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Further interventional research is required to improve the consent processes prior to clinical trials in order to provide optimal, patient-centred care.

Psychosocial Experiences, Challenges, and Recommendations for Care Delivery among Partners of Breast Cancer Survivors: A Qualitative Study

For women diagnosed with breast cancer, partners are consistently identified as the primary support person. Despite growing consensus about the psychosocial experience and unmet needs of cancer caregivers, limited evidence exists about strategies to offer partner-centered care across the cancer continuum. This study describes challenges endured by partners of breast cancer survivors (BCS), strategies implemented to manage these experiences, and recommendations for healthcare providers to inform targeted psychosocial care. Using convenience sampling, 22 partners of female BCS were recruited and completed semi-structured interviews. Conventional content analysis was used to code and synthesize findings. Participants described undergoing five experiences in their role as romantic partners: (a) assuming the role of caregiver, (b) becoming healthcare advocates for BCS, (c) connecting emotionally with the partner, (d) managing their own painful emotions, and (e) connecting with others for support. Experience-specific coping strategies and recommendations were identified. Romantic partners face multiple transitions across the cancer care continuum, which warrant investigation to sustain their well-being and active participation in illness management. Psychosocial interventions for this group will benefit from flexible implementation and attention to care delivery, mental health, and supportive/social needs.

Caregiver-Reported Roles in Treatment Decision Making in Advanced Cancer and Associated Caregiving Burden and Psychological Distress: A Longitudinal Study

OBJECTIVE

To longitudinally examine caregiver-reported treatment decision-making roles and to investigate the associations of these roles with caregiver burden, caregiving esteem, caregiver anxiety, and depression.

METHODS

281 caregivers of patients with stage IV solid cancers were recruited from outpatient clinics in Singapore. Caregivers were eligible if they were aged ≥21 y, primary informal caregiver, and involved in treatment decision making. We used 3 y of longitudinal data. The decision-making roles were grouped into 4 categories: no family involvement, patient/physician-led, joint, and family-led/alone decision making. Mixed-effects linear regressions were used to assess associations between decision-making roles and caregiver outcomes.

RESULTS

On average, 72% of caregivers reported family involvement in decision making. Compared with baseline, a higher proportion of caregivers at the 36-mo follow-up reported no family involvement (from 23% to 34%, P = 0.05) and patient/physician-led decision making (from 22% to 34%, P = 0.02), while a lower proportion reported family-led/alone (from 19% to 7%, P = 0.01) decision making. Compared with family-led/alone decision making, caregivers reporting no family involvement reported lower impact on finances (-0.15 [-0.28, -0.01], P = 0.03) while caregivers who reported patient/physician-led decision making reported lower impact on schedule and health (-0.12 [-0.20, -0.03], P = 0.01), and finances (-0.15 [-0.28, -0.03], P = 0.02), and lower anxiety (-0.69 [-1.17, -0.22], P < 0.01), and depressive symptoms (-0.69 [-1.12, -0.26], P < 0.01). Caregivers who reported joint decision making reported higher caregiving esteem (0.07 [0.01, 0.14], P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher family involvement in decision making was associated with higher caregiver burden and psychological distress. Help should be given so that family caregivers can support patient decision-making in a meaningful way.

HIGHLIGHTS

Compared with baseline, a lower proportion of caregivers at the 36-mo follow-up reported family-led or family-alone decision making, and a higher proportion of caregivers reported patient-led or physician-led decision making.Higher levels of family involvement in decision making were associated with burdens on caregivers' daily life, health, and finances and increased caregiver anxiety and depression.Support must be given so that family members can contribute to making medical decisions in a rewarding manner.

Caregiving and Shared Decision Making in Breast and Prostate Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

A cancer diagnosis can impact patients' and caregivers' lives, posing different challenging situations. In particular, breast cancer and prostate cancer are two types of cancer involving families and especially spouses in challenges linked with the diagnosis and treatment process. Caregivers are usually involved in the treatment decision-making (TDM) process concerning patients' clinical pathway, cancer treatment, and ongoing therapies. To date, no contributions provide an exhaustive overview of the role of caregivers in cancer care and their involvement in the TDM process related to the therapies.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of caregiver and patients experiences and perceptions of caregiver involvement in cancer TDM. Articles were searched on Public/Publisher MEDLINE (PubMed), Excerpta Medica Database (Embase), Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (Medline), and American Psychological Association APA PsycINFO.

RESULTS

17 studies were included, 10 on prostate cancer and 7 on breast cancer. According to the reviewed studies, patients and caregivers experienced the cancer diagnosis with a sense of unity. Most patients preferred to have an active or collaborative role with caregivers in TDM, feeling it was important to consult or share the decision made with their caregivers. Caregivers preferred to collaborate with patients or let patients decide by themselves after considering their opinions. Caregiver involvement could have a positive influence on the patient's medical decisions, even if cancer diagnosis and treatments overwhelmed patients and caregivers.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings highlight the importance of using a perspective that focuses on the relationship between a patient and caregivers when they receive a cancer diagnosis and have to make a treatment decision. Targeting caregiver-patient dyads, rather than individuals, is important since a supported relationship could have a protective effect on psychological distress, quality of life (QOL), and relationship satisfaction. Moreover, dyads may benefit from interventions that focus on the needs of both the patient and caregiver.

A dyadic survey study of partner engagement in and patient receipt of guideline-recommended colorectal cancer surveillance

Background

We investigated whether partner (spouse or intimate partner) engagement in colorectal cancer (CRC) surveillance is associated with patient receipt of surveillance.

Methods

From 2019 to 2020 we surveyed Stage III CRC survivors diagnosed 2014–2018 at an academic cancer center, a community oncology practice and the Georgia SEER registry, and their partners. Partner engagement was measured across 3 domains: Informed about; Involved in; and Aware of patient preferences around surveillance. We evaluated bivariate associations between domains of partner engagement and independent partner variables. Analysis of variance and multivariable logistic regression were used to compare domains of engagement with patient-reported receipt of surveillance.

Results

501 patients responded (51% response rate); 428 had partners. 311 partners responded (73% response rate). Partners were engaged across all domains. Engagement varied by sociodemographics. Greater partner involvement was associated with decreased odds of receipt of composite surveillance (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.48–0.93) and trended towards significance for decreased odds of receipt of endoscopy (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.34–1.03) and CEA (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.55–1.04). Greater partner awareness was associated with increased odds of patients’ receipt of endoscopy (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.15–4.12) and trended towards significance for increased odds of receipt of composite surveillance (OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.91–2.04).

Conclusion

Partners are engaged (informed, involved, and aware) in CRC surveillance. Future research to develop dyadic interventions that capitalize on the positive aspects of partner engagement may help partners effectively engage in surveillance to improve patient care.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-10131-3.

Barriers of and strategies for shared decision-making implementation in the care of metastatic breast cancer: A qualitative study among patients and healthcare professionals in an Asian country

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making has been shown to improve the quality of life in metastatic breast cancer patients in high-literacy and high-resource settings. However, limited studies have examined the cultural preferences of metastatic breast cancer patients with shared decision-making implementation and the barriers encountered in an Asian setting where societal norms predominate and physician decision-making is at the forefront. This paper aims to identify (1) barriers to practising shared decision-making faced by healthcare professionals and patients and (2) strategies for implementing shared decision-making in the context of metastatic breast cancer management in Malaysia.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study involving 12 patients diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer, 16 healthcare professionals and 5 policymakers from surgical and oncology departments at public healthcare centres in Malaysia. Semi-structured in-depth interviews and focus group discussions were conducted. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the thematic approach. Nvivo software was used to manage and analyse the data.

RESULTS

Five main themes emerged from the study: healthcare provider-patient communication, workforce availability, cultural and belief systems, goals of care and paternalism versus autonomy. Other strategies proposed to overcome barriers to implementing shared decision-making were training of healthcare professionals and empowering nurses to manage patients' psychosocial issues.

CONCLUSION

This study found that practising shared decision-making in the public health sector remains challenging when managing patients with metastatic breast cancer. The utilization of decision-making tools, patient empowerment and healthcare provider training may help address the system and healthcare provider-patient barriers identified in this study.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients were involved in the study design, recruitment and analysis.

Decision-making support among racial and ethnic minorities diagnosed with breast or prostate cancer: A systematic review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

To describe the types of decision-making support interventions offered to racial and ethnic minority adults diagnosed with breast or prostate cancer and to draw any associations between these interventions and patient-reported quality of life (QoL) outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted literature searches in five bibliographic databases. Studies were screened through independent review and assessed for quality. Results were analyzed using inductive qualitative methods to determine thematic commonalities and synthesized in narrative form.

RESULTS

Searches across five databases yielded 2496 records, which were screened by title/abstract and full-text to identify 10 studies meeting inclusion criteria. The use of decision aids (DAs), trained personnel, delivery models and frameworks, and educational materials were notable decision-making support interventions. Analysis revealed six thematic areas: 1) Personalized reports; 2) Effective communication; 3) Involvement in decision-making; 4) Health literacy; 5) Social support; and 6) Feasibility in clinical setting.

CONCLUSION

Evidence suggests decision-making support interventions are associated with positive outcomes of racial and ethnic minorities with patient-reported factors like improved patient engagement, less decisional regret, higher satisfaction, improved communication, awareness of health literacy and cultural competence.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Future decision-making interventions for racial and ethnic minority cancer patients should focus on social determinants of health, social support systems, and clinical outcomes like QoL and survival.

Understanding and Supporting Informal Cancer Caregivers

Informal caregivers invest a significant amount of time and effort to provide cancer patients with physical, psychological, information, and social support. These challenging tasks can harm their own health and well-being, while a series of social-ecological factors may also influence the outcomes of cancer caregiving. Several instruments have been developed to help clinicians and researchers understand the multi-dimensional needs and concerns of caregivers. A growing body of evidence indicates that supportive interventions including psychoeducation, skills training, and therapeutic counseling can help improve the burden, information needs, coping strategies, physical functioning, psychological well-being, and quality of life of caregivers. However, there is difficulty in translating research evidence into practice. For instance, some supportive interventions tested in clinical trial settings are regarded as inconsistent with the actual needs of caregivers. Other significant considerations are the lack of well-trained interdisciplinary teams for supportive care provision and insufficient funding. Future research should include indicators that can attract decision-makers and funders, such as improving the efficient utilization of health care services and satisfaction of caregivers. It is also important for researchers to work closely with key stakeholders, to facilitate evidence dissemination and implementation, to benefit caregivers and the patient.

Employment outcomes in family supporters of patients with early stage breast cancer and their association with patients' health-related quality of life and financial burden

BACKGROUND

Little is known about how cancer impacts the employment status of patients' family supporters, or about associations between patients' health-related quality of life, perceived financial burden, and supporters' employment trajectory.

METHODS

We surveyed patients with early stage breast cancer reported to the Georgia and Los Angeles SEER registries in 2014-15, and their spouse/partner or other family supporters. Patients and supporters were asked about employment impacts of the patient's cancer, and descriptive analyses of supporters' employment trajectories were generated. We measured patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using the PROMIS scale for global health. We measured patients' perceived financial burden attributed to cancer by asking them two questions regarding (i) their financial status since their breast cancer diagnosis and (ii) how much it was impacted by their breast cancer and treatment. Associations between patients' HRQoL, perceived financial burden, and supporters' employment status were assessed using linear mixed model regression analyses.

RESULTS

In total, 2502 patients (68% response rate) and 1203 supporters (70% response rate) responded; 1057 paired patient-supporter dyads were included. Similar proportions of spouse/partner and other family supporters reported missed work and lost employment due to patients' cancer. After adjustment, lower HRQoL and an increased odds of perceived financial burden among patients were associated with changes in other family supporters' employment (both p < 0.05), but not with changes in spouses'/partners' employment. Lower HRQoL was also associated with changes in patients' own employment among patients with both types of supporters (both p < 0.001). An increased odds of perceived financial burden among patients was associated with changes in patients' employment only in those supported by other family members (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both spouse/partner and other family supporters faced adverse employment outcomes due to patients' cancer. This contributes to worse HRQoL and greater perception of financial burden among patients, especially those whose supporter is not a spouse/partner.

Partners' engagement in surveillance among survivors of colorectal cancer: A qualitative study

Objectives

Following treatment of Stage III colorectal cancer, guidelines recommend 3–5 years of surveillance for recurrence. However, over half of the 1.2 million U.S. survivors of colorectal cancer fail to receive guideline‐concordant surveillance. In light of growing recognition that members of couples are interdependent and influence each other's health behaviors, we sought to describe, in their own words, the perspectives of spouses/partners on their engagement in patients’ surveillance.

Methods

We conducted in‐person, semi‐structured interviews with 10 survivors of stage III colorectal cancer and their partners, together and separately. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, iteratively coded, and analyzed to identify emergent themes pertaining to partner engagement. Findings were validated through triangulation between study team members and triangulation between dyadic and individual interviews, and through an extensive search of transcripts for disconfirming evidence.

Results

We identified three overarching domains of partner engagement in surveillance. First, psychosocial engagement included promoting patient participation in surveillance, showing care and concern, and attending to partner self‐care. Second, information‐seeking and dyadic communication focused on gathering information, staying informed about test results, and communicating about surveillance. Third, instrumental engagement referred to any explicit, objective activities such as scheduling appointments, attending appointments, and managing responsibilities at home. Participants shared strategies, examples, and in some cases unmet needs.

Conclusions

This study generated new, clinically meaningful knowledge about the ways in which partners engage in patients’ surveillance. Opportunities to leverage partners as informal resources in surveillance include development of dyadic interventions to help partners engage most effectively.

A population-based study of invitation to and participation in clinical trials among women with early-stage breast cancer

PURPOSE

Although many studies clearly demonstrate disparities in cancer clinical trial enrollment, there is a lack of consensus on potential causes. Furthermore, virtually nothing is known about associations between patients' decision-making style and their participation in clinical trials.

METHODS

Women with newly diagnosed, stage 0-II breast cancer reported to the Georgia and Los Angeles County Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries in 2013-2014 were surveyed approximately seven months after diagnosis. We investigated two primary outcome variables: (1) invitation to participate in a clinical trial, (2) participation in a clinical trial. We evaluated bivariate associations using Chi-squared tests and used multivariable logistic regression models to investigate associations between patient variables, including decision-making style, and the primary outcomes.

RESULTS

2578 patients responded (71% response rate); 30% were > age 65, 18% were black, 18% were Latina, 29% had ≤ high school education. 10% of patients reported invitation to participate in a clinical trial; 5% reported participation in a clinical trial. After adjustment younger age, receipt of chemotherapy or radiation, disease stage, and a more rational (versus more intuitive) decision-making style were associated with a higher odds of invitation to participate. Being married was associated with a higher odds of participation; having an annual family income ≥ $40,000 was associated with a lower odds of participation.

CONCLUSIONS

10% of patients reported invitation to participate in a clinical trial, and half of these reported participation. Invitation to participate varied by age and decision-making style, and participation varied by marital status and income.

Empowering patients in decision-making in radiation oncology - can we do better?

The decision as to whether or not a patient should receive radiation therapy as part of their cancer treatment is based on evidence‐based practice and on recommended international consensus treatment guidelines. However, the merit of involving the patients' individual preferences and values in the treatment decision is frequently overlooked. Here, we review the current literature pertaining to shared decision‐making (SDM) in the field of radiation oncology, including discussion of the patient's perception of radiation therapy as a treatment option and patient involvement in clinical trials. The merit of decision aids during the SDM process in radiation oncology is considered, as are patient preferences for active or passive involvement in decisions about their treatment. Clarity of terminology, a better understanding of effective strategies and increased resources will be needed to ensure SDM in radiation oncology becomes a reality.