An Evaluation of the Information Sources of Cancer Patients' Relatives. A Prospective Survey

Clinician-patient communication about cancer treatment misinformation: The Misinformation Response Model

Objective

Cancer treatment misinformation (CTM) is pervasive and impacts patient health outcomes. Cancer clinicians play an essential role in addressing CTM. We previously identified four self-reported responses that characterize the communication process clinicians engage in to address CTM. Clinicians 1) work to understand the misinformation; 2) correct the misinformation through education; 3) advise about future online searches; and 4) preserve the clinician-patient relationship. We sought to confirm and expand on the model we developed by observing cancer clinicians' communication while addressing CTM with a standardized patient (SP).

Methods

17 cancer clinicians were audio recorded in a SP encounter, in which a breast cancer SP asked three questions based on CTM. We thematically analyzed transcriptions of the recordings.

Results

Clinicians used four responses with associated strategies and skills to address CTM in a standardized clinical encounter, confirming the previously developed model. The four responses were: (1) work to understand the misinformation; (2) correct the misinformation through education; (3) advise about future online searches; and (4) preserve the clinician-patient relationship. This observational approach allowed us to refine strategies within each response and identify communication skills clinicians enact to address CTM.

Conclusion

These findings provide a strong foundation for the Misinformation Response Model for cancer clinicians. Future research should examine which components of the model are most effective in improving patient outcomes.

Innovation

This is the first study observing clinicians' communication through simulated practice with SPs about CTM.

Understanding parents uncertainty sources and management strategies while caring for a child diagnosed with a hematologic cancer

Rationale

Parents of a child or adolescent (CA) or young adult (YA) diagnosed with a hematologic cancer often face uncertainty. Managing uncertainty is critical to reduce the psychosocial burden of illness-related stressors.

Objective

This study sought to identify: 1) sources of uncertainty among parents of a child diagnosed with a hematologic cancer, 2) strategies used by parents to manage uncertainty, and 3) clinicians' responses to parents' online information-seeking approach to managing uncertainty.

Methods

Parents of CAs/YAs diagnosed with a hematologic cancer within the past 1-18 months and living in the U.S. participated in an in-depth, semi-structured phone interview (n = 20). Data were analyzed thematically.

Results

Parents reported uncertainty about treatment (options, efficacy, and side effects or risks) and uncertainty about the future (recurrence, whether worry would subside, and how to approach the child's future). Parents managed uncertainty by seeking information online, talking to clinicians, and joining support groups. Clinicians' responses to online information-seeking were described as supportive and unsupportive.

Conclusion

Parents described struggling with uncertainty across the cancer continuum (from primary treatment to survivorship). Parents' psychosocial health may benefit from individual and systems level interventions that help address and manage uncertainty, especially interventions focusing on parent caregiver-clinician communication.

What Is Most Important to Family Caregivers When Helping Patients Make Treatment-Related Decisions: Findings from a National Survey

Prioritizing patient values-who/what matters most-is central to palliative care and critical to treatment decision making. Yet which factors are most important to family caregivers in these decisions remains understudied. Using data from a U.S. national survey of cancer caregivers (N = 1661), we examined differences in factors considered very important by caregivers when partnering with patients in cancer treatment decision making by cancer stage and caregiver sociodemographics. Fifteen factors were rated on a 4-point Likert-scale from 'very unimportant' to 'very important.' Descriptive statistics were used to characterize caregiver factors and tabulate proportions of importance for each. Generalized linear mixed effect modeling was used to examine the importance of factors by cancer stage, and chi-square analyses were performed to determine associations between caregiver sociodemographics and the five most commonly endorsed factors: quality of life (69%), physical well-being (68%), length of life (66%), emotional well-being (63%), and opinions/feelings of oncology team (59%). Significant associations (all p's < 0.05) of small magnitude were found between the most endorsed factors and caregiver age, race, gender, and ethnicity, most especially 'opinions/feelings of the oncology team'. Future work is needed to determine the best timing and approach for eliciting and effectively incorporating caregiver values and preferences into shared treatment decision making.

Identifying Cancer Treatment Misinformation and Strategies to Mitigate Its Effects With Improved Radiation Oncologist-Patient Communication

Accurate information about cancer treatment is critical for individuals to make informed decisions about their health. Unfortunately, the rise of the Internet and social media combined with patients' desire for autonomy as well as the increased availability and marketing of unproven or disproven therapies has made it easy for misinformation about cancer to spread. This can have grave consequences for patients, as individuals who rely on misinformation may make decisions that put their health at risk, including choosing to forego effective treatment in favor of unproven or disproven therapies. To address these serious issues, it is important to understand what constitutes cancer treatment misinformation and the available mitigation strategies. This knowledge can inform efforts to counteract the spread of cancer treatment misinformation and promote accurate information about cancer.

One Website to Gather them All: Usability Testing of the New German SKin Cancer INFOrmation (SKINFO) Website-A Mixed-methods Approach

Skin cancer patients increasingly search the internet to acquire disease-related information. However, information on the internet may be misleading. Recently, SKINFO has been launched, a website exclusively created for German-speaking skin cancer patients providing information as well as additional resources of verified quality. Here, we describe the results of the first usability test of SKINFO using a mixed-methods approach. Ten adult patients with skin cancer were recruited for usability testing in the skin cancer units of the University Hospitals of Erlangen and Dresden, Germany. Testing consisted of three different scenarios where patients were asked to find specific information on the SKINFO website guided by the think-aloud method. Descriptive analysis and content analyses were performed. All patients would recommend SKINFO and appreciated its content, design, and structure. Think-aloud analysis identified the topics layout, navigation, and content and structure which would benefit from refinement. Major criticism included the navigation through the website, and the desire for more specific information addressing patients' relatives and the latest, up-to-date information. Overall, usability testing showed that the unique web-based information platform has the potential to support patients coping with skin cancer and thus strengthen informed decision-making.

Does Use of Information Sources Outside the Treating Oncologist Influence Patient Decision-Making in Patients Receiving Non-Curative Intent Therapy for Advanced Cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients' decision-making and perceptions of outcomes may be impacted by information sources. We investigated use of information by patients and tested the association with patients' perception of treatment outcomes.

METHODS

We prospectively surveyed patients with advanced solid cancers and their oncologists regarding benefits/risks of non-curative cancer therapies. We previously reported misperception comparing patients' perceptions of treatment outcomes to those of their oncologist. We report external information use as proportions with binomial confidence intervals (CI) and examined correlations with misperception levels using Spearman's correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

Of 125 participants, 70% (95% CI: 61-78) stated that they wanted as much information as possible from their oncologist, and nearly all (95%, 95% CI: 90-98) felt the amount of information provided by their clinician was "just right." Over half (60%, 95% CI: 51-69) wanted at least "a moderate amount" of information from sources outside their oncologist, and 58% (95% CI: 49-67) reported obtaining information from sources outside their oncologist. Over two-thirds (69%, 95% CI: 57-79) of participants felt the information from external sources influenced their decisions "a small amount" or less. There was no correlation between information use and misperception regarding tumor response (r: -.04; P = .60) or treatment toxicity (r: .05; P = .60).

CONCLUSION

Many patients sought information from sources outside their oncologist; few felt it substantially influenced treatment choices. External information use was not associated with greater misperception of treatment outcomes. These data suggest sources of information outside the treating oncologists did not substantially influence patient's decision making.

[Support for and involvement of family caregivers in Comprehensive Cancer Center - an Assessment of the Palliative Care Working Group within the network of Comprehensive Cancer Center funded by the German Cancer Aid]

BACKGROUND

According to current oncological guidelines, early integration of specialist palliative care (SPC) represents standard cancer care supporting not only the patients, but also their family caregivers. Data on the actual implementation in daily oncology practice in Germany are lacking.

METHODS

The Palliative Care Working Group of the network of Comprehensive Cancer Centers certified by the German Cancer Aid (CCC) assessed the implementation of measures for family caregiver support and involvement within the CCC/within SPC in the CCC/local outside the CCC in all 17 CCC locations.

RESULTS

In the CCC/in SPC psycho-oncological (100 %/94 %), social (94 %/100 %) and spiritual counselling of family caregivers (94 % each) as well as support for children with parental cancer (88 %/100 %) and information materials for family caregivers (88 % each) are well established. Training on nursing skills (77 %/94 %) and family conferences (59 %/88 %) are established more frequently within SPC than in the rest of the CCC. SOPs are rather rare (23 %/18 %) as well as screenings for family caregiver needs (0/24 %). Bereavement or self-help groups are with 82 % each more frequent locally outside the CCC. Psycho-oncological and social counselling as well as support for children with parental cancer were scored as most important (94 % each). For SPC, training on nursing skills and information materials were rated equally (94 % each). SOPs were rated as very/extremely important in 47 %/41 % and routine screening for family caregiver in 53 %/65 %.

CONCLUSION

In correspondence to their importance, psychosocial and spiritual counselling and support for children with parental cancer are well implemented in CCC. In SPC, training on nursing skills and family conferences are also well implemented. SOPs for family caregiver support and involvement as well as routine screenings for family caregiver needs have to be implemented urgently in the CCC.

An objective analysis of quality and readability of online information on COVID-19

High quality, readable health information is vital to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to assess the quality and readability of online COVID-19 information using 6 validated tools. This is a cross-sectional study. "COVID-19" was searched across the three most popular English language search engines. Quality was evaluated using the DISCERN score, Journal of the American Medical Association benchmark criteria and Health On the Net Foundation Code of Conduct. Readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease Score, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level and Gunning-Fog Index. 41 websites were suitable for analysis. 9.8% fulfilled all JAMA criteria. Only one website was HONCode certified. Mean DISCERN score was 47.8/80 ("fair"). This was highest in websites published by a professional society/medical journal/healthcare provider. Readability varied from an 8th to 12th grade level. The overall quality of online COVID-19 information was "fair". Much of this information was above the recommended 5th to 6th grade level, impeding access for many.

Exploring the perspectives of healthcare professionals in delivering optimal oncology medication education

Background

To optimize patient education, it is important to understand what healthcare professionals perceive to be ideal oncology medication education for patients to receive, and what they feel is their role and the role of others in its delivery. Education provided to patients is an important component of chemotherapy as it has been shown to benefit and positively impact patients who receive it. Educational interventions are often provided by multidisciplinary teams with the goal of improving patient care. However, few studies have explored the roles of healthcare professionals in delivering oncology medication education.

Objective

To explore the perspectives of healthcare professionals working in medical, gynaecological or hematological oncology to identify what they perceive to be optimal oncology medication education for patients.

Methods

Healthcare professionals (physicians, nurses and pharmacists) working in medical, gynaecological or hematological oncology at the Nova Scotia Health Authority, Central Zone were invited to participate in one-on-one, semi-structured interviews which were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis.

Findings

Fifteen interviews, including five physicians, four nurses and six pharmacists were conducted from February to April 2018. Four major themes were identified: Delivery of oncology medication education, Facilitating the patient learning process, Multidisciplinary Approach and Understanding barriers to the healthcare professional in providing education.

Conclusion

The identified themes uncovered novel ideas about how healthcare professionals felt oncology medication education could ideally be delivered to patients, and supported findings in the literature. Although participants discussed barriers to their ability to deliver optimal education, they also identified ways in which they can facilitate patient learning, for example, through the reinforcement of education. Participants recognized the importance of increasing collaboration and communication with the multidisciplinary team. This research will inform the design of any new models for oncology medication education at the Nova Scotia Health Authority, Central Zone and potentially other sites.