Influence of patient coaching on analgesic treatment adjustment: secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial

Nontraditional and Home-Based Self-management Interventions in Cancer Patients With Pain: A Mixed-Method Systematic Review

One or 2 decades ago, oncologists focused on only cancer treatments or acute care related to cancer. Since cancer care is considered as long-term cares, cancer patients require self-management (SM) ability or skill to manage their symptoms and daily cares. This mixed-method review is to evaluate quantitative and qualitative studies, which were conducted using non-traditional SM interventions for cancer pain based. This review also explores the process of SM in the chronic care model (CCM). PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Wiley were used from 2011 to 2018. A total of 16 quantitative and 2 qualitative studies were included for this review. All interventions are divided into 3 types, which are educational and/or counseling programs, complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapy, and exercise. Ten of the included 16 studies were statistically significant on pain management: 3 CAM studies (100%), 1 exercise study (100%), and 6 of the 12 educational and/or counseling studies (50%). The CAM and exercise were statistically effective in improving cancer pain in the review. However, uncertainty remains regarding the strength of the evidence, due to the small number of studies included and lack of consistent methodologies. The application (5A) of SM support may help cancer patients to manage their pain.

A clinical approach to the management of cancer-related pain in emergency situations

PURPOSE

Most cancer patients experience many pain episodes depending on disruptive elements, leading them to the emergency room. The objective of the article is to describe common pitfalls that need to be avoided, as well as opportunities to be seized for repositioning patients back on their care pathway.

METHODS

Critical reflection based on literature analysis and clinical practice.

RESULTS

Most forms of cancer are now chronic, evolving diseases, and patients are treated with high-technology targeted therapies with iatrogenic effects. Moreover, the multimorphic nature of cancer-related pain requires dynamic, interdisciplinary assessments addressing its etiology, its pathophysiology, its dimensions (sensory-discriminatory, cognitive, emotional, and behavioral), and the patient's perception of it, in order to propose the most adapted therapies. However, for most patients, cancer pain remains underestimated, poorly assessed, and under-treated. In this context, the key steps in emergency cancer pain management are as follows: • Quick relief of uncontrolled cancer pain: after eliminating potential medical or surgical emergencies revealed by pain, a brief questioning will make the use of carefully titrated morphine in most situations possible. • Assessment and re-assessment of the pain and the patient, screening specific elements, to better understand the situation and its consequences. • Identification of disruptive elements leading to uncontrolled pain, with an interdisciplinary confrontation to find a mid to long-term approach, involving the appropriate pharmaceutical and/or non-pharmaceutical strategies, possibly including interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain emergencies should be part of the cancer care pathway and, through supportive care, provide an opportunity to help cancer patients both maintain their physical, psychological, and social balance and anticipate further painful episodes.

Strategies of complementary and integrative therapies in cancer-related pain-attaining exhaustive cancer pain management

PURPOSE

Complementary integrative therapies (CITs) correspond to growing demand in patients with cancer-related pain. This demand needs to be considered alongside pharmaceutical and/or interventional therapies. CITs can be used to cover certain specific pain-related characteristics. The objective of this review is to present the options for CITs that could be used within dynamic, multidisciplinary, and personalized management, leading to an integrative oncology approach.

METHODS

Critical reflection based on literature analysis and clinical practice.

RESULTS

Most CITs only showed trends in efficacy as cancer pain was mainly a secondary endpoint, or populations were restricted. Physical therapy has demonstrated efficacy in motion and pain, in some specific cancers (head and neck or breast cancers) or in treatments sequelae (lymphedema). In cancer survivors, higher levels of physical activity decrease pain intensity. Due to the multimorphism of cancer pain, certain mind-body therapies acting on anxiety, stress, depression, or mood disturbances (such as massage, acupuncture, healing touch, hypnosis, and music therapy) are efficient on cancer pain. Other mind-body therapies have shown trends in reducing the severity of cancer pain and improving other parameters, and they include education (with coping skills training), yoga, tai chi/qigong, guided imagery, virtual reality, and cognitive-behavioral therapy alone or combined. The outcome sustainability of most CITs is still questioned.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality clinical trials should be conducted with CITs, as their efficacy on pain is mainly based on efficacy trends in pain severity, professional judgment, and patient preferences. Finally, the implementation of CITs requires an interdisciplinary team approach to offer optimal, personalized, cancer pain management.

Patient-mediated interventions to improve professional practice: A summary of a Cochrane systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of patient-mediated interventions on healthcare professionals' performance.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic Cochrane review according to established guidelines. We searched predefined databases in 2016 and 2017. Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, performed meta-analyses, and assessed the certainty of the evidence (GRADE).

RESULTS

We included 25 randomised studies with a total of 12 268 patients. We found that patient-reported health information interventions and patient education interventions probably improve healthcare professionals' adherence to recommended clinical practice (moderate certainty evidence). We also found that patient information interventions may improve healthcare professionals' adherence to recommended clinical practice (low certainty evidence). Patient decision aids may make little or no difference to the number of healthcare professionals' adhering to recommended clinical practice (low-certainty evidence).

CONCLUSION

Our findings strengthen the belief that patient-mediated interventions have the potential to improve professional practice, especially patient-reported health information interventions and patient education interventions.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Our findings show that patient-reported health information interventions and patient education interventions are relevant approaches to improve professional practice. Thus, it seems reasonable to conclude that these types of patient-mediated interventions can contribute to improving the quality of healthcare services.

Patient-mediated interventions to improve professional practice

BACKGROUND

Healthcare professionals are important contributors to healthcare quality and patient safety, but their performance does not always follow recommended clinical practice. There are many approaches to influencing practice among healthcare professionals. These approaches include audit and feedback, reminders, educational materials, educational outreach visits, educational meetings or conferences, use of local opinion leaders, financial incentives, and organisational interventions. In this review, we evaluated the effectiveness of patient-mediated interventions. These interventions are aimed at changing the performance of healthcare professionals through interactions with patients, or through information provided by or to patients. Examples of patient-mediated interventions include 1) patient-reported health information, 2) patient information, 3) patient education, 4) patient feedback about clinical practice, 5) patient decision aids, 6) patients, or patient representatives, being members of a committee or board, and 7) patient-led training or education of healthcare professionals.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of patient-mediated interventions on healthcare professionals' performance (adherence to clinical practice guidelines or recommendations for clinical practice).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Ovid in March 2018, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in March 2017, and ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry (ICTRP) in September 2017, and OpenGrey, the Grey Literature Report and Google Scholar in October 2017. We also screened the reference lists of included studies and conducted cited reference searches for all included studies in October 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised studies comparing patient-mediated interventions to either usual care or other interventions to improve professional practice.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes using Mantel-Haenszel statistics and the random-effects model. For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) using inverse variance statistics. Two review authors independently assessed the certainty of the evidence (GRADE).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 studies with a total of 12,268 patients. The number of healthcare professionals included in the studies ranged from 12 to 167 where this was reported. The included studies evaluated four types of patient-mediated interventions: 1) patient-reported health information interventions (for instance information obtained from patients about patients' own health, concerns or needs before a clinical encounter), 2) patient information interventions (for instance, where patients are informed about, or reminded to attend recommended care), 3) patient education interventions (intended to increase patients' knowledge about their condition and options of care, for instance), and 4) patient decision aids (where the patient is provided with information about treatment options including risks and benefits). For each type of patient-mediated intervention a separate meta-analysis was produced.Patient-reported health information interventions probably improve healthcare professionals' adherence to recommended clinical practice (moderate-certainty evidence). We found that for every 100 patients consulted or treated, 26 (95% CI 23 to 30) are in accordance with recommended clinical practice compared to 17 per 100 in the comparison group (no intervention or usual care). We are uncertain about the effect of patient-reported health information interventions on desirable patient health outcomes and patient satisfaction (very low-certainty evidence). Undesirable patient health outcomes and adverse events were not reported in the included studies and resource use was poorly reported.Patient information interventions may improve healthcare professionals' adherence to recommended clinical practice (low-certainty evidence). We found that for every 100 patients consulted or treated, 32 (95% CI 24 to 42) are in accordance with recommended clinical practice compared to 20 per 100 in the comparison group (no intervention or usual care). Patient information interventions may have little or no effect on desirable patient health outcomes and patient satisfaction (low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of patient information interventions on undesirable patient health outcomes because the certainty of the evidence is very low. Adverse events and resource use were not reported in the included studies.Patient education interventions probably improve healthcare professionals' adherence to recommended clinical practice (moderate-certainty evidence). We found that for every 100 patients consulted or treated, 46 (95% CI 39 to 54) are in accordance with recommended clinical practice compared to 35 per 100 in the comparison group (no intervention or usual care). Patient education interventions may slightly increase the number of patients with desirable health outcomes (low-certainty evidence). Undesirable patient health outcomes, patient satisfaction, adverse events and resource use were not reported in the included studies.Patient decision aid interventions may have little or no effect on healthcare professionals' adherence to recommended clinical practice (low-certainty evidence). We found that for every 100 patients consulted or treated, 32 (95% CI 24 to 43) are in accordance with recommended clinical practice compared to 37 per 100 in the comparison group (usual care). Patient health outcomes, patient satisfaction, adverse events and resource use were not reported in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found that two types of patient-mediated interventions, patient-reported health information and patient education, probably improve professional practice by increasing healthcare professionals' adherence to recommended clinical practice (moderate-certainty evidence). We consider the effect to be small to moderate. Other patient-mediated interventions, such as patient information may also improve professional practice (low-certainty evidence). Patient decision aids may make little or no difference to the number of healthcare professionals' adhering to recommended clinical practice (low-certainty evidence).The impact of these interventions on patient health and satisfaction, adverse events and resource use, is more uncertain mostly due to very low certainty evidence or lack of evidence.

Nonpharmacologic Pain Interventions: A Review of Evidence-Based Practices for Reducing Chronic Cancer Pain

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common issue for patients with cancer and can be challenging to manage effectively. Healthcare professionals need to be knowledgeable about evidence-based nonpharmacologic interventions.
.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review critically appraises the strength and quality of the empirical evidence for nonpharmacologic interventions in reducing chronic cancer pain.
.

METHODS

Intervention studies were critically appraised and summarized by an Oncology Nursing Society Putting Evidence Into Practice team of RNs, advanced practice nurses, and nurse scientists. A level of evidence and a practice recommendation was assigned to each intervention.
.

FINDINGS

Based on evidence, recommended interventions to reduce chronic cancer pain are celiac plexus block for pain related to pancreatic and abdominal cancers and radiation therapy for bone pain. Although psychoeducational interventions are considered likely to be effective, the effective components of these interventions and their dose and duration need to be determined through additional research.

Self-management education interventions for patients with cancer: a systematic review

PURPOSE

This systematic review was intended to identify the effectiveness and inclusion of essential components of self-management education interventions to support patients with cancer in developing the skills needed for effective self-management of their disease and the acute or immediate, long-term, and late harmful effects of treatments.

METHODS

Self-management education interventions were included if they were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) containing at least one of the eight core elements outlined by the research team. A systematic search was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE (2005 through April 2015), Embase (2005 to 2015, week 15), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Issue 4, April 2015), CINAHL (2005 to 2015) and PsychINFO (2005 to 2015). Keywords searched include 'self-management patient education' or 'patient education'.

RESULTS

Forty-two RCTs examining self-management education interventions for patients with cancer were identified. Heterogeneity of interventions precluded meta-analysis, but narrative qualitative synthesis suggested that self-management education interventions improve symptoms of fatigue, pain, depression, anxiety, emotional distress and quality of life. Results for specific combinations of core elements were inconclusive. Very few studies used the same combinations of core elements, and among those that did, results were conflicting. Thus, conclusions as to the components or elements of self-management education interventions associated with the strength of the effects could not be assessed by this review.

CONCLUSION

Defining the core components of cancer self-management education and the fundamental elements for inclusion in supporting effective self-management will be critical to ensure consistent and effective provision of self-management support in the cancer system.

Repeated measures analyses of dermatitis symptom evolution in breast cancer patients receiving radiotherapy in a phase 3 randomized trial of mometasone furoate vs placebo (N06C4 [alliance])

PURPOSE

Radiotherapy-related dermatological toxicities over time have not been well quantified. We examined during and immediately following radiation therapy skin toxicities over time in a randomized study of mometasone furoate vs placebo during breast radiotherapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients with breast cancer undergoing radiotherapy to the breast or chest wall were randomized. Symptoms related to skin toxicity were addressed weekly using provider-reported Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v3.0) and 4 patient-reported outcomes (PRO) surveys. We applied repeated measures and risk analysis methodologies.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-six patients were enrolled. By CTCAE, significant differences favoring mometasone were detected over time in all toxicities except skin striae, atrophy, and infection. Statistically significant differences between arms at baseline but not over time occurred for all Linear Analog Self-Assessment. Statistically significant differences occurred for all symptoms in the temporal profile of symptoms as measured by PRO surveys (all P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of longitudinal methods enhanced the ability of PRO tools to detect differences between study arms. Our results strengthened the conclusions of the original report that mometasone reduced acute skin toxicities. PRO surveys can accurately assess patients' experiences of symptom type and intensity over time and should be included in future clinical trials. For radiotherapy-related dermatological toxicity, we hypothesized that clinically significant differences over time, if any, can be found by repeated measures. We examined the acute skin toxicities in a randomized study of mometasone vs placebo during breast radiotherapy. For secondary end points, we showed that longitudinal methods enhanced the detection of differences between study arms and strengthened the conclusions from the original report. Frequent patient-reported outcome surveys over time should be included in future clinical trials.

A pathway linking patient participation in cancer consultations to pain control

OBJECTIVE

To test a pathway through which a tailored, pain management education-coaching intervention could contribute to better cancer pain control through the effects of patients' communication about pain on physician prescribing of pain medication.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial that tested the effects of a tailored education-coaching intervention on pain control for patients with advanced cancer. The current analysis focused on a subset of the patients (n = 135) who agreed to have their consultations audio-recorded. Patients' active communication about pain (e.g., expressing questions, concerns, and preferences about pain-related issues) was coded from audio-recordings. Change in pain medication was measured by patient self-report. Improvement in pain control was scored as the difference between baseline pain score and pain reported at 6 weeks.

RESULTS

Patients' pain-related communication was a significant predictor of patient-reported changes in physician prescribing of pain medication (p < .0001) and mediated the effect of baseline pain on medication change. Other predictors of change in pain medication were age (younger) and having participated in the intervention (as opposed to usual care). Of the patients reporting adjustment in pain medications, 49% experienced better pain control compared with only 27% of patients reporting no change in pain management (p < .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer patients who ask questions, express concerns, and state preferences about pain-related matters can prompt physicians to change their pain management regimen, which in turn may lead to better pain control. Future research should model pathways through which clinician-patient communication can lead to better cancer outcomes.

How clinician-patient communication contributes to health improvement: modeling pathways from talk to outcome

OBJECTIVE

Although researchers have long investigated relationships between clinician-patient communication and health outcomes, much of the research has produced null, inconsistent, or contradictory findings. This essay examines challenges in the study of how clinician-patient communication contributes to a patient's health and offers recommendations for future research.

DISCUSSION

Communication may directly impact outcomes, but more often it will have an indirect effect through its influence on intervening variables (e.g., patient understanding, clinician-patient agreement on treatment, adherence to treatment). For example, a patient communication skills intervention may not directly improve pain control for cancer patients. However, it may do so indirectly by activating patients to talk about cancer pain, which prompts the physician to change pain medication, which leads to better pain control. Additionally, communication measurement is complicated because relationships among communication behavior, meaning, and evaluation are complex.

CONCLUSION

Researchers must do more to model pathways linking clinician-patient communication to the outcomes of interest, particularly pathways in which the communication effects are indirect or mediated through other variables. To better explicate how communication contributes to health outcomes, researchers must critically reflect on the assumptions they are making about communication process and choose measures consistent with those assumptions.