Toward a Conceptual Model of Affective Predictions in Palliative Care

Helping Practitioners Stop, Drop, and Roll: Suggestions to Help Improve Responses to Intense Clinical Events

Community practitioners inconsistently implement evidence-based interventions. Implementation science emphasizes the importance of some practitioner characteristics, such as motivation, but factors such as practitioners' emotion regulation and cognitive processing receive less attention. Practitioners often operate in stressful environments that differ from those in which they received training. They may underestimate the impact of their emotional state on their ability to deliver evidence-based interventions. This "hot-cold state empathy gap" is not well studied in mental health care. In this Open Forum, the authors describe scenarios where this gap is affecting practitioners' ability to implement evidence-based practices. The authors provide suggestions to help practitioners plan for stressful situations.

Anxiety and Depression in Metastatic Cancer: A Critical Review of Negative Impacts on Advance Care Planning and End-of-Life Decision Making With Practical Recommendations

PURPOSE

Providers treating adults with advanced cancer increasingly seek to engage patients and surrogates in advance care planning (ACP) and end-of-life (EOL) decision making; however, anxiety and depression may interfere with engagement. The intersection of these two key phenomena is examined among patients with metastatic cancer and their surrogates: the need to prepare for and engage in ACP and EOL decision making and the high prevalence of anxiety and depression.

METHODS

Using a critical review framework, we examine the specific ways that anxiety and depression are likely to affect both ACP and EOL decision making.

RESULTS

The review indicates that depression is associated with reduced compliance with treatment recommendations, and high anxiety may result in avoidance of difficult discussions involved in ACP and EOL decision making. Depression and anxiety are associated with increased decisional regret in the context of cancer treatment decision making, as well as a preference for passive (not active) decision making in an intensive care unit setting. Anxiety about death in patients with advanced cancer is associated with lower rates of completion of an advance directive or discussion of EOL wishes with the oncologist. Patients with advanced cancer and elevated anxiety report higher discordance between wanted versus received life-sustaining treatments, less trust in their physicians, and less comprehension of the information communicated by their physicians.

CONCLUSION

Anxiety and depression are commonly elevated among adults with advanced cancer and health care surrogates, and can result in less engagement and satisfaction with ACP, cancer treatment, and EOL decisions. We offer practical strategies and sample scripts for oncology care providers to use to reduce the effects of anxiety and depression in these contexts.

The TRIBE model: How socioemotional processes fuel end-of-life treatment in the United States

Prior interventions have repeatedly failed to decrease the prescription and receipt of treatments and procedures that confer more harm than benefit at the End-of-Life (EoL); new approaches to intervention are needed. Ideally, future interventions would be informed by a social-ecological conceptual model that explains EoL healthcare utilization patterns, but current models ignore two facts: (1) healthcare is an inherently social activity, involving clinical teams and patients' social networks, and (2) emotions influence social activity. To address these omissions, we scaffolded Terror Management Theory and Socioemotional Selectivity Theory to create the Transtheoretical Model of Irrational Biomedical Exuberance (TRIBE). Based on Terror Management Theory, TRIBE suggests that the prospect of patient death motivates healthcare teams to conform to a biomedical norm of care, even when clinicians believe that biomedical interventions will likely be unhelpful. Based on Socioemotional Selectivity Theory, TRIBE suggests that the prospect of dwindling time motivates families to prioritize emotional goals, and leads patients to consent to disease-directed treatments they know will likely be unhelpful, as moral emotions motivate deference to the perceived emotional needs of their loved ones. TRIBE is unique among models of healthcare utilization in its acknowledgement that moral emotions and processes (e.g., shame, compassion, regret-avoidance) influence healthcare delivery, patients' interactions with family members, and patients' outcomes. TRIBE is especially relevant to potentially harmful EoL care in the United States, and it also offers insights into the epidemics of overtreatment in healthcare settings worldwide. By outlining the role of socioemotional processes in the care of persons with serious conditions, TRIBE underscores the critical need for psychological innovation in interventions, health policy and research on healthcare utilization.

Responsive social support serves important functions in clinical communication: Translating perspectives from relationship science to improve cancer clinical interactions

Patient-clinician interactions are critical to patient-centered care, including in cancer care contexts which are often defined by multiple patient-clinician interactions over an extended period. Research on these dyadic interactions has been guided by perspectives in clinical communication science, but the study of clinical communication has not been fully integrated with perspectives on interpersonal interactions from relationship science research. An overlapping concept in both fields is the concept of responsive socialsupport. In this article, we discuss responsiveness as a concept that offers opportunities for connections between these two disciplines. Next, we focus on how relationship science can be applied to research in clinical settings. We discuss how three areas of relationship science define responsiveness and have potential for extension to clinical communication: (1) (in)visibility of social support, (2) attachment orientations, and (3) shared meaning systems. We also discuss how social biases can impede responsiveness and suggest research avenues to develop ideas and understand potential challenges in connecting these two fields. Many opportunities exist for interdisciplinary theory development that can generate momentum in understanding interpersonal processes in cancer care.

Application of Terror Management Theory to End-Of-Life Care Decision-Making: A Narrative Literature Review

Patients with serious illnesses often do not engage in discussions about end-of-life care decision-making, or do so reluctantly. These discussions can be useful in facilitating advance care planning and connecting patients to services such as palliative care that improve quality of life. Terror Management Theory, a social psychology theory stating that humans are motivated to resolve the discomfort surrounding their inevitable death, has been discussed in the psychology literature as an underlying basis of human decision-making and behavior. This paper explores how Terror Management Theory could be extended to seriously ill populations and applied to their healthcare decision-making processes and quality of care received.

Ethical Considerations in Caring for Patients with Advanced Malignancy

Patients with advanced malignancy have decisions to make about next steps that are multifactorial and highly ramified. At each step, they, their loved ones, and their health care providers will attempt to make right decisions and avoid wrong ones. Beyond bare ethical principles, these patients face tensions between what they hope for, what is possible, and what those around them expect and advise. This article uses a case-based approach to explore the balance between prognostication and directive counsel; affective forecasting and decisional regret; hope and the therapeutic misconception; and issues of patient ownership and abandonment at the end of life.

Bridging Behavioral Science with Cancer Prevention and Control: Contributions of an NCI Working Group (2009-2019)

Human behavior plays a central role in cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Much behavior is, in turn, attributable to several core biological, cognitive, emotional, motivational, and interpersonal processes. Understanding the systematic and interactive impact of these processes can inform efforts to address cancer-relevant outcomes such as tobacco use, reliance on cancer misinformation, engagement in genetic testing, adherence to treatment, and acceptance of palliative care. Here, we review efforts of the NCI-supported Cognitive, Affective, and Social Processes in Health Research working group. Since 2009, this group has endeavored to advance the integration of basic behavioral science with cancer prevention and control by addressing topics such as the degree to which behavioral interventions alter cognitions underlying behavior, how technological innovations might facilitate behavioral measurement and intervention in areas such as smoking cessation, whether decision science principles might be applied to genetic testing decisions, how the cognitive effects of chemotherapy impair self-regulation, and the extent to which emotional factors drive palliative care decisions. The group has initiated numerous activities to build capacity for research in these areas including state-of-the-science meetings, written syntheses, conference symposia, and training workshops. We conclude with reflections about future needs as well as how to sustain such integrative efforts.

Moving beyond categorization to understand affective influences on real world health decisions

This paper provides an overview of affect and health decision-making research, with a focus on identifying gaps, opportunities, and challenges to guide future research. We begin by defining common categorical distinctions of affective processes that influence health decisions: integral (i.e., related to the decision) and incidental (i.e., normatively unrelated to the decision) influences, and current (experienced in the moment) and anticipated ("cognitive representations" of future affect) affect. We then summarize key discoveries within the most common categories of affective influences on health decision making: current integral affect, current incidental affect, and anticipated integral affect. Finally, we highlight research gaps, challenges, and opportunities for future directions for research aimed at translating affective and decision science theory to improve our understanding of, and ability to intervene upon, health decision making.