Disruption or innovation? A qualitative descriptive study on the use of electronic patient-physician communication in patients with advanced cancer

Effective communication in palliative care from the perspectives of patients and relatives: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

In palliative care, effective communication is essential to adequately meet the needs and preferences of patients and their relatives. Effective communication includes exchanging information, facilitates shared decision-making, and promotes an empathic care relationship. We explored the perspectives of patients with an advanced illness and their relatives on effective communication with health-care professionals.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted. We searched Embase, Medline, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane for original empirical studies published between January 1, 2015 and March 4, 2021.

RESULTS

In total, 56 articles on 53 unique studies were included. We found 7 themes that from the perspectives of patients and relatives contribute to effective communication: (1) open and honest information. However, this open and honest communication can also trigger anxiety, stress, and existential disruption. Patients and relatives also indicated that they preferred (2) health-care professionals aligning to the patient's and relative's process of uptake and coping with information; (3) empathy; (4) clear and understandable language; (5) leaving room for positive coping strategies, (6) committed health-care professionals taking responsibility; and (7) recognition of relatives in their role as caregiver. Most studies in this review concerned communication with physicians in a hospital setting.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Most patients and relatives appreciate health-care professionals to not only pay attention to strictly medical issues but also to who they are as a person and the process they are going through. More research is needed on effective communication by nurses, in nonhospital settings and on communication by health-care professionals specialized in palliative care.

Advantages and Challenges of Using Telehealth for Home-Based Palliative Care: Systematic Mixed Studies Review

BACKGROUND

Owing to the increasing number of people with palliative care needs and the current shortage of health care professionals (HCPs), providing quality palliative care has become challenging. Telehealth could enable patients to spend as much time as possible at home. However, no previous systematic mixed studies reviews have synthesized evidence on patients' experiences of the advantages and challenges of telehealth in home-based palliative care.

OBJECTIVE

In this systematic mixed studies review, we aimed to critically appraise and synthesize the findings from studies that investigated patients' use of telehealth in home-based palliative care, focusing on the advantages and challenges experienced by patients.

METHODS

This is a systematic mixed studies review with a convergent design. The review is reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. A systematic search was performed in the following databases: Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and Web of Science. The inclusion criteria were as follows: studies using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods; studies that investigated the experience of using telehealth with follow-up from HCPs of home-based patients aged ≥18; studies published between January 2010 and June 2022; and studies published in Norwegian, Danish, Swedish, English, Portuguese, or Spanish in peer-reviewed journals. Five pairs of authors independently assessed eligibility of the studies, appraised methodological quality, and extracted data. The data were synthesized using thematic synthesis.

RESULTS

This systematic mixed studies review included 41 reports from 40 studies. The following 4 analytical themes were synthesized: potential for a support system and self-governance at home; visibility supports interpersonal relationships and a joint understanding of care needs; optimized information flow facilitates tailoring of remote caring practices; and technology, relationships, and complexity as perpetual obstacles in telehealth.

CONCLUSIONS

The advantages of telehealth were that patients experience a potential support system that could enable them to remain at home, and the visual features of telehealth enable them to build interpersonal relationships with HCPs over time. Self-reporting provides HCPs with information about symptoms and circumstances that facilitates tailoring care to specific patients. Challenges with the use of telehealth were related to barriers to technology use and inflexible reporting of complex and fluctuating symptoms and circumstances using electronic questionnaires. Few studies have included the self-reporting of existential or spiritual concerns, emotions, and well-being. Some patients perceived telehealth as intrusive and a threat to their privacy at home. To optimize the advantages and minimize the challenges with the use of telehealth in home-based palliative care, future research should include users in the design and development process.

How technology can improve communication and health outcomes in patients with advanced cancer: an integrative review

OBJECTIVE

Patients facing an advanced cancer diagnosis require clear communication with their clinicians. Technology has been utilized in many different capacities to navigate communication in cancer care, but few authors examine the specific areas of communication from a theoretical perspective. The purpose of this literature review was to (1) identify articles focused on technology-based communication strategies to improve health outcomes in individuals with advanced cancer, and (2) using Epstein and Street's framework, identify areas in which technology-based communication has been used to improve health outcomes, and (3) identify gaps that exist in technology-based communication care in patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted which returned 446 articles. Using Epstein and Street's 2007 framework, the final sample was 39.

RESULTS

Nine clinical trials, 29 observational studies, and 1 case study were identified. The articles were categorized into one area within Epstein and Street's areas of communication. Many of the articles examined the patient's and provider's acceptability and feasibility of technology-based methods of communication, while other articles examined their efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

While research studies were identified in each of the areas of communication, the majority of technology-based communication strategies were focused on the exchange of information between patients and their providers. Further research and the development of technology-based communication interventions assessed through clinical trials are needed in the areas of healing relationships and making decisions in cancer care. Additionally, the communication strategies found effective at improving health outcomes in advanced cancer should begin implementation into clinical practice, therefore reaching more patients.

Improving secure messaging: A framework for support, partnership & information-giving communicating electronically (SPICE)

BACKGROUND

Patient-centered communication benefits patients and is widely endorsed. However, it is primarily associated with face-to-face contexts, although patients are increasingly using electronic platforms, such as secure messaging in patient portals, to communicate with providers.

PURPOSE

Given the popularity of secure messaging and its ability to impact the patient-provider relationship, this study aimed to determine which attributes of patient-centered communication are most desired by cancer patients using secure messaging.

METHODS

A 2⁶ balanced incomplete block design discrete choice experiment was conducted using the best-worst scaling technique. Respondents were asked to select their most and least preferred attributes of two simulated patient-provider exchanges within each of eight choice sets.

RESULTS

210 respondents indicated that either level of partnership (high and low) and either level of information-giving (high and low) were most preferred, while response times greater than 24 hours and low levels of support were least favored.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar to face-to-face communication, patients value aspects of patient-centered communication in the secure messaging setting and desire them to be included in provider replies.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Patient-centered communication is important to patients using secure messaging. Providers should incorporate SPICE (Support, Partnership, and Information-giving while Communicating Electronically).

Complexity and Simplicity in Doctor–Patient Email Consultations

NEW TECHNOLOGIES HAVE FACILITATED DOCTOR–PATIENT EMAIL CONSULTATIONS (E-CONSULTATIONS). GUIDELINES FOR E-CONSULTATION USE IN DENMARK STATE THAT THEY SHOULD BE USED FOR SIMPLE, CONCRETE AND NON-URGENT QUERIES; HOWEVER, A SMALL-SCALE DANISH STUDY SUGGESTED THAT DOCTORS ENCOUNTER E-CONSULTATIONS THAT DO NOT MATCH THE GUIDELINES. THE PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE IS TO EXPLORE WHETHER E-CONSULTATIONS IN DENMARK REFLECT RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THEY SHOULD BE SIMPLE, SHORT, CONCRETE AND WELL DEFINED, AND IF NOT, WHAT FORMS OF COMPLEXITY ARE EVIDENT. WE INDUCTIVELY ANALYSED 1,671 E-CONSULTATIONS FROM 38 PATIENTS AGED 21–91 YEARS COMMUNICATING WITH 28 DOCTORS, 6 NURSES, 1 MEDICAL STUDENT AND 8 SECRETARIES. RESULTS SHOWED BOTH QUANTITATIVE COMPLEXITY IN TERMS OF NUMBER OF INTERACTION TURNS, COMMUNICATIVE PARTICIPANTS, AND QUESTIONS ASKED, AND QUALITATIVE COMPLEXITY RELATING TO PATIENTS’ PSYCHOSOCIAL CONTEXTS AND GPS’ BIOMEDICAL DISEASE PERSPECTIVE. THUS, DESPITE EXISTING GUIDELINES AND THE LEANNESS ASSOCIATED WITH THE EMAIL MEDIUM, MULTIPLE FORMS OF COMPLEXITY WERE EVIDENT. THIS MISMATCH HIGHLIGHTS THE NEED FOR THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS THE VALUE OF RE-EXAMINING EXISTING POLICIES AND GUIDELINES REGARDING EXPECTATIONS FOR E-CONSULTATION USE.

A Clinical Communication Tool (Loop) for Team-Based Care in Pediatric and Adult Care Settings: Hybrid Mixed Methods Implementation Study

BACKGROUND

Communication within the circle of care is central to coordinated, safe, and effective care; yet patients, caregivers, and health care providers often experience poor communication and fragmented care. Through a sequential program of research, the Loop Research Collaborative developed a web-based, asynchronous clinical communication system for team-based care. Loop assembles the circle of care centered on a patient, in private networking spaces called Patient Loops. The patient, their caregiver, or both are part of the Patient Loop. The communication is threaded, it can be filtered and sorted in multiple ways, it is securely stored, and can be exported for upload to a medical record.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to implement and evaluate Loop. The study reporting adheres to the Standards for Reporting Implementation Research.

METHODS

The study was a hybrid type II mixed methods design to simultaneously evaluate Loop's clinical and implementation effectiveness, and implementation barriers and facilitators in 6 health care sites. Data included monthly user check-in interviews and bimonthly surveys to capture patient or caregiver experience of continuity of care, in-depth interviews to explore barriers and facilitators based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), and Loop usage extracted directly from the Loop system.

RESULTS

We recruited 25 initiating health care providers across 6 sites who then identified patients or caregivers for recruitment. Of 147 patient or caregiver participants who were assessed and met screening criteria, 57 consented and 52 were enrolled on Loop, creating 52 Patient Loops. Across all Patient Loops, 96 additional health care providers consented to join the Loop teams. Loop usage was followed for up to 8 months. The median number of messages exchanged per team was 1 (range 0-28). The monthly check-in and CFIR interviews showed that although participants acknowledged that Loop could potentially fill a gap, existing modes of communication, workflows, incentives, and the lack of integration with the hospital electronic medical records and patient portals were barriers to its adoption. While participants acknowledged Loop's potential value for engaging the patient and caregiver, and for improving communication within the patient's circle of care, Loop's relative advantage was not realized during the study and there was insufficient tension for change. Missing data limited the analysis of continuity of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Fundamental structural and implementation challenges persist toward realizing Loop's potential as a shared system of asynchronous communication. Barriers include health information system integration; system, organizational, and individual tension for change; and a fee structure for health care provider compensation for asynchronous communication.

How technology impacts communication between cancer patients and their health care providers: A systematic literature review

OBJECTIVE

To ensure the well-being of their patients, health care providers (HCPs) are putting more effort into the quality of the communication they provide in oncology clinics. With the emergence of Health Information Technology (HIT), the dynamics between doctors and patients in oncology settings have changed. The purpose of this literature review is to explore and demonstrate how various health information technologies impact doctor-patient communication in oncology settings.

METHOD

A systematic literature review was conducted in 4 databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore) to select publications that are in English, published between January 2009 and September 2020. This review reports outcomes related to the impacts of using health information technologies on doctor-patient communication according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines (PRISMA).

RESULTS

We identified 31 studies which satisfied the selection and eligibility criteria. The review revealed a diverse range of HIT used to support communication between cancer patients and their HCPs in oncology settings. Outcomes related to communication were examined to demonstrate how technology can improve access to care in clinical settings and online. When technology is used effectively to support patient knowledge and shared understanding, this increases the patient's satisfaction and ability to manage emotions, make decisions, and progress in their treatment, in addition to increasing social support and building a stronger therapeutic alliance based on shared knowledge and transparency between clinicians and patients.

CONCLUSION

Technology-based solutions can help strengthen the relationship and communication between patients and their doctors. They can empower the patient's well-being, help doctors make better decisions and enhance the therapeutic alliance between them. Thus, using technology to enhance communication in healthcare settings remains beneficial if its use is structured and target oriented. Future studies should focus on comparing in-depth the difference between outpatient and inpatient settings in terms of the efforts required and the extent of the impacts from both clinicians' and cancer patients' perspectives.

Information technologies in healthcare: Enhancing or dehumanising doctor-patient interaction?

Since the very emergence of the information technologies in healthcare, a major concern has been raised about the potential of remote services to undermine the intimacy, immediacy and humanity intrinsic to conventional, face-to-face medical practice. By contrast, notable literature reports the benefits of information technology-mediated services and their potential to improve efficiency and economic convenience of healthcare systems. This article aims to shed light on this ambivalence by retracing the evolution of doctor-patient interaction in relation to the main technological advancements in healthcare, and in particular, to services mediated by information technologies. Consequently, the reduction of cues and clues associated with the use of these services is framed into the reductionism of the biomedical paradigm, which provides a key to interpret the nature, scope and features of this process of technological innovation, along with its potential and limits.

The emerging role of digital health in monitoring and supporting people living with cancer and the consequences of its treatments

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As rising numbers of people are living with the long-term impact of cancer, digital health is playing an increasingly important role in the monitoring and support of survivors and their caregivers. This article reviews current evidence, practice and developments, and identifies emerging issues and opportunities.

RECENT FINDINGS

Digital health innovations, primarily using internet or smartphone-enabled applications, have been successfully developed, particularly in the areas of symptom management, decision-making, survivorship and follow-up care and palliative care. The research is characterized by much developmental activity, and evidence is accruing for efficacy and effectiveness. Opportunities afforded by digital health include timelier and patient-centred evidence-based care, offering improved clinical outcomes and independence. Barriers to implementation include lack of patient and professional engagement, perceived burden, depersonalization and missed care.

SUMMARY

There is much enthusiasm for the role of digital health in monitoring and providing support to cancer survivors, but further research is needed to establish clinical efficacy and understand the mechanisms for successful implementation in practice. The role of wearables, the internet of things and big data analytics is yet to be fully explored in supportive cancer care and may present new opportunities to enhance care and survivor experience.

Oncology Patient Interest in the Use of New Technologies to Manage Their Disease: Cross-Sectional Survey

Background

Information and communication technologies (ICTs) in oncology can revolutionize the medical care of cancer patients. ICTs can promote patients’ empowerment and real-time disease monitoring. There is limited information about the impact of ICTs in cancer patients or their level of interest in using these tools for greater management of their condition.

Objective

This study aimed to understand the ICT usage profile in hematology-oncology patients to identify their needs and determine their level of interest in these technologies as a means of managing their disease.

Methods

A 28-item questionnaire was drawn up by a multidisciplinary team including pharmacists and oncologists. The questions were organized into 3 blocks, which were as follows: block A—sociodemographic characteristics; block B—use of ICTs when searching for health-related information; and block C—usage preferences for health apps. Hematology-oncology patients receiving treatment between May and July 2017 were included. A paper copy of the questionnaire was handed over to patients in either the day hospital or the pharmaceutical care consultancy in pharmacy services.

Results

A total of 650 questionnaires were handed out, with a participation of 94.0% (611/650). Patient sociodemographic characteristics were as follows: mean age was 57.8 years (age range: 19-91). Of 611 participants, 40.7% (249/611) had a university education, and 45.1% (276/611) of participants reported their overall state of health to be good. Results from use of ICTs when searching for health-related information were as follows: 87.1% (532/611) of participants were interested in being informed about health-related matters. Of all participants, 75.5% (532/611) sought information from health professionals and 61.3% (375/611) on the internet. Before going to their doctor’s appointment, 21.8% (133/611) of patients looked up information about their disease or treatment on the internet. This access to the internet rose to 50.9% (311/611) after their first medical appointment with their oncologist. Usage preferences for health apps were as follows: 82.7% (505/611) had a smartphone, whereas 20.3% (124/611) had a health app installed. Overall, 81.5% (498/611) would use an app if their health professional recommended it to them, but 39.6% (242/611) were not willing to pay for it.

Conclusions

The hematology-oncology patients showed a great deal of interest in searching for health-related information by means of ICTs, especially using smartphones and apps. The issues that drew the most interest in terms of apps were appointment management, advice on disease management, and communication with health professionals. Free access to these features and the recommendation by a health professional are important factors when it comes to their use. Therefore, the health care provider is a key element in the recommendation of ICTs, providing their knowledge and experience concerning their correct usage.