Communication of prognosis in head and neck cancer patients; a descriptive qualitative analysis

What is in the toolkit (and what are the tools)? How to approach the study of doctor-patient communication

Doctor-patient communication is important, but is challenging to study, in part because it is multifaceted. Communication can be considered in terms of both the aspects of the communication itself, and its measurable effects. These effects are themselves varied: they can be proximal or distal, and can focus on subjective measures (how patients feel about communication), or objective measures (exploring more concrete health outcomes or behaviours). The wide range of methodologies available has resulted in a heterogeneous literature which can be difficult to compare and analyse. Here, we provide a conceptual approach to studying doctor-patient communication, examining both variables which can controlled and different outcomes which can be measured. We present methodologies which can be used (questionnaires, semistructured interviews, vignette studies, simulated patient studies and observations of real interactions), with particular emphasis on their respective logistical advantages/disadvantages and scientific merits/limitations. To study doctor-patient communication more effectively, two or more different study designs could be used in combination. We have provided a concise and practically relevant review of the methodologies available to study doctor-patient communication to give researchers an objective view of the toolkit available to them: both to understand current research, and to conduct robust and relevant studies in the future.

Impact of a prognostic model for overall survival on the decision-making process in a head and neck cancer multidisciplinary consultation meeting

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary decision-making in head and neck cancer care is complex and requires a tradeoff between prolonging survival and optimizing quality of life. To support prognostication and decision-making in head and neck cancer care, an individualized prognostic model for overall survival (OncologIQ) is available.

METHODS

By quantitative and qualitative research we have studied user value of OncologIQ and its impact on the decision-making process in a multidisciplinary consultation meeting.

RESULTS

Healthcare professionals experienced added value upon using prognostic estimates of survival from OncologIQ in half (47.5%) of the measurements. Significant impact on the decision making process was seen when OncologIQ was used for older patients, patients having a WHO performance score ≥ 2, or high tumor stage.

CONCLUSIONS

The prognostic model OncologIQ enables patient-centered decision-making in a multidisciplinary consultation meeting and was mostly valued in complex patients.

The unmet needs of patients with advanced incurable head and neck cancer and their carers: A systematic review and meta-ethnography of qualitative data

INTRODUCTION

Patients with advanced-stage head and neck cancers (HNC) endure a significant symptom burden and suffer greatly towards the end of their lives. Qualitative evidence can provide insight into how existing services meet their needs. We aimed to synthesise qualitative data from patients with advanced HNC and their carers to inform improvements to services and care.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE and EMBASE for studies containing qualitative data from patients with advanced HNC and their carers. An interpretive account was generated using the meta-ethnography methodology.

RESULTS

We identified 8 studies including 38 patients and 25 carers. Twenty-six themes were synthesised into five concepts: psychological impact and adjustment, physical limitations and deliverance of symptomatic care, communication and information needs from healthcare professionals, social support and dependence, and needs of the primary caregiver. We identified that patients had complex psychological needs, centred on uncertainty and fear of suffering. Patients desired full information and found poor communication highly distressing. There was a dearth of literature on the subjective impact of physical limitations. Patients became reliant on social networks, and those with lower quality relationships coped poorly. However, caregivers struggled to meet patients' complex needs, resulting in distress and isolation.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with advanced HNCs have complex needs that are not met in current systems. Further qualitative work focusing on the physical and psychological impact of advanced HNC would be of value.

Predicting survival in head and neck cancer: External validation and update of the prognostic model OncologIQ in 2189 patients

Background

Disclosing prognostic information is necessary to enable patients to make well‐informed treatment decisions. OncologIQ is a prognostic model that predicts the overall survival (OS) probability in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). We aimed to externally validate and update the model with new prognostic factors and translate it to a clinically useful tool.

Methods

A consecutive retrospective sample of 2189 patients eligible for curative treatment of a primary HNSCC were selected. Discriminative performance was determined using the C‐statistic.

Results

External validation showed systematic underestimation of OS in the new population, and reasonable discrimination (C‐statistic 0.67). Adding smoking, pack years, BMI, weight loss, WHO performance, socioeconomic status, and p16 positivity to the recalibrated multivariable model, improved the internally validated C‐statistic to 0.71. The model showed minor optimism and was translated in an online tool (www.oncologiq.nl).

Conclusions

The updated model enables personalized patient counseling during treatment decision consultations.

A Qualitative Study Exploring Patient, Family Carer and Healthcare Professionals' Direct Experiences and Barriers to Providing and Integrating Palliative Care for Advanced Head and Neck Cancer

OBJECTIVES

To report on direct experiences from advanced head and neck cancer patients, family carers and healthcare professionals, and the barriers to integrating specialist palliative care.

METHODS

Using a naturalistic, interpretative approach, within Northwest England, a purposive sample of adult head and neck cancer patients was selected. Their family carers were invited to participate. Healthcare professionals (representing head and neck surgery and specialist nursing; oncology; specialist palliative care; general practice and community nursing) were recruited. All participants underwent face-to-face or telephone interviews. A thematic approach, using a modified version of Colazzi's framework, was used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Seventeen interviews were conducted (9 patients, 4 joint with family carers and 8 healthcare professionals). Two main barriers were identified by healthcare professionals: "lack of consensus about timing of Specialist Palliative Care engagement" and "high stake decisions with uncertainty about treatment outcome." The main barrier identified by patients and family carers was "lack of preparedness when transitioning from curable to incurable disease." There were 2 overlapping themes from both groups: "uncertainty about meeting psychological needs" and "misconceptions of palliative care."

CONCLUSIONS

Head and neck cancer has a less predictable disease trajectory, where complex decisions are made and treatment outcomes are less certain. Specific focus is needed to define the optimal way to initiate Specialist Palliative Care referrals which may differ from those used for the wider cancer population. Clearer ways to effectively communicate goals of care are required potentially involving collaboration between Specialist Palliative Care and the wider head and neck cancer team.

Communicating prognostic information and hope to families of dying patients in intensive care units: A descriptive qualitative study

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To understand how prognostic information is communicated by Jordanian doctors and nurses to the families of dying patients in intensive care units, with an emphasis on exploring how hope and truth telling about patients' poor prognosis are managed.

BACKGROUND

Improving end-of-life care requires a focus on adequate family-professionals prognostic communication, while maintaining a realistic level of hope and family support.

DESIGN

A descriptive qualitative approach was applied.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 nurses and 15 resident doctors caring for dying patients. Bardin's procedure of categorical content analysis was applied. The COREQ checklist for reporting qualitative studies was followed.

RESULTS

Two main categories emerged from the data of this study: 'perspectives on optimistic hope' and 'approaches to prognostic communication'. Health professionals experience extreme difficulty, and therefore, frequently avoid openly disclosing information about patients' poor prognosis to the families. Consequently, the health professionals adopted various methods to balance truth telling against sustaining hope among the patients' families. Providing false assurance was perceived as permissible and understandable, in order to nurture the families' hope.

CONCLUSIONS

Improving end-of-life care in intensive care units in Jordan requires a focus on family-professional communication. Jordanian intensive care doctors and nurses perceived honest family-professional communication regarding dying patients to be extremely challenging. Healthcare professionals should develop their competency of meeting the informational and emotional needs of patients in ICUs and their families, while also honouring their cultural values, during prognostic communication.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Effective training of healthcare professionals is vital on ways to enhance communication of prognostic information and to foster realistic hope among families of dying patients in intensive care units. There is a need to also explore the families' perspectives on prognostic communication in order to understand the similarities and differences between the professionals' and families' perspectives.

The palliative care needs and experiences of people with advanced head and neck cancer: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The palliative care needs of people with advanced head and neck cancer pose unique complexities due to the impact the illness has on eating, speaking, appearance and breathing. Examining these needs would help provide guidance about developing relevant models of care and identify gaps in research knowledge.

AIM

To identify and map out the palliative care needs and experiences for people with advanced head and neck cancer.

DESIGN

A scoping literature review following the methods described by the Joanna Briggs Institute.

DATA SOURCES

An electronic search of the literature was undertaken in MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE and CINAHL covering the years January 1996 to January 2019.

RESULTS

People with advanced head and neck cancer often had palliative care needs but there was variability in the timing and access to relevant services. A high prevalence of interventions, for example hospital admissions were needed even during the last month of life. This was not necessarily negated with early engagement of palliative care. Dissonance between patients and family carers about information needs and decision-making was an additional complexity. Studies tended to be descriptive in nature, and often involved a single centre.

CONCLUSION

This scoping review demonstrates the complexity of care for people with advanced head and neck cancer and the issues related to the current healthcare systems. Focus on appropriate referral criteria, increased integration and coordination of care and robust evaluation of specific care components seems key. Linkage between research and service design delivery across teams, disciplines and care settings seems pertinent.

Physicians' clinical prediction of survival in head and neck cancer patients in the palliative phase

BACKGROUND

The prognosis of patients with incurable head and neck cancer (HNC) is a relevant topic. The mean survival of these patients is 5 months but may vary from weeks to more than 3 years. Discussing the prognosis early in the disease trajectory enables patients to make well-considered end-of-life choices, and contributes to a better quality of life and death. However, physicians often are reluctant to discuss prognosis, partly because of the concern to be inaccurate. This study investigated the accuracy of physicians' clinical prediction of survival of palliative HNC patients.

METHODS

This study was part of a prospective cohort study in a tertiary cancer center. Patients with incurable HNC diagnosed between 2008 and 2011 (n = 191), and their treating physician were included. Analyses were conducted between July 2018 and February 2019. Patients' survival was clinically predicted by their physician ≤3 weeks after disclosure of the palliative diagnosis. The clinical prediction of survival in weeks (CPS) was based on physicians' clinical assessment of the patient during the outpatient visits. More than 25% difference between the actual survival (AS) and the CPS was regarded as a prediction error. In addition, when the difference between the AS and CPS was 2 weeks or less, this was always considered as correct.

RESULTS

In 59% (n = 112) of cases survival was overestimated. These patients lived shorter than predicted by their physician (median AS 6 weeks, median CPS 20 weeks). In 18% (n = 35) of the cases survival was correctly predicted. The remaining 23% was underestimated (median AS 35 weeks, median CPS 20 weeks). Besides the differences in AS and CPS, no other significant differences were found between the three groups. There was worse accuracy when predicting survival closer to death: out of the 66 patients who survived 6 weeks or shorter, survival was correctly predicted in only eight (12%).

CONCLUSION

Physicians tend to overestimate the survival of palliative HNC patients. This optimism can result in suboptimal use of palliative and end-of-life care. The future development of a prognostic model that provides more accurate estimates, could help physicians with personalized prognostic counseling.

Barriers and facilitators to discussing HPV with head and neck cancer patients: A qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework

OBJECTIVE

The incidence of human papillomavirus-associated head and neck cancers (HPV-HNC) is increasing worldwide. Research in other clinical contexts has shown that healthcare professionals (HCPs) can find discussing HPV with patients challenging. However, limited research has been conducted in HNC. This study aimed to investigate barriers and facilitators to, discussing HPV among HCPs caring for patients with HNC in Ireland.

METHODS

Semi-structured telephone/face-to-face interviews were conducted with HCPs. Barriers and facilitators to discussing HPV with patients were identified using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF).

RESULTS

20 HCPs (8 clinicians, 3 nurses, 9 allied healthcare professionals) were interviewed. Barriers to discussing HPV included professionals' lack of HPV knowledge, difficulties in talking about sexual issues with patients and lack of privacy to discuss HPV in busy clinic settings. Facilitators included increasing public and patient awareness of the link between HPV and HNC and professional education and skills development.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first theoretically informed study to identify barriers and facilitators to discussing HPV with HNC patients. HCPs consider HPV discussions to be an essential part of HNC patient care.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Understanding the issues associated with patient-provider HPV communication will help develop effective interventions to support HCPs in their HPV discussions.

Head and neck cancer patients' preferences for individualized prognostic information: a focus group study

Background

Head and Neck cancer (HNC) is characterized by significant mortality and morbidity. Treatment is often invasive and interferes with vital functions, resulting in a delicate balance between survival benefit and deterioration in quality of life (QoL). Therefore, including prognostic information during patient counseling can be of great importance. The first aim of this study was to explore HNC patients’ preferences for receiving prognostic information: both qualitative (general terms like “curable cancer”), and quantitative information (numbers, percentages). The second aim of this study was to explore patients’ views on “OncologIQ”, a prognostic model developed to estimate overall survival in newly diagnosed HNC patients.

Methods

We conducted a single center qualitative study by organizing five focus groups with HNC patients (n = 21) and their caregivers (n = 19), categorized in: 1) small laryngeal carcinomas treated with radiotherapy or laser, 2) extensive oral cavity procedures, 3) total laryngectomy, 4) chemoradiation, 5) other treatments. The patients’ perspective was the main focus. The interview guide consisted of two main topics: life-expectancy and the prognostic model OncologIQ. All focus groups were recorded, transcribed and coded. Themes were derived using content analysis.

Results

While all patients considered it somewhat to very important to receive information about their life-expectancy, only some of them wanted to receive quantitative information. Disclosing qualitative prognostic information like “the cancer is curable” would give enough reassurance for most patients. Overall, patients thought life-expectancy should not be discussed shortly after cancer diagnosis disclosure, as a certain time is needed to process the first shock. They had a stronger preference for receiving prognostic information in case of a poor prognosis. Prognostic information should also include information on the expected QoL. The pie chart was the most preferred chart for discussing survival rates.

Conclusions

The participants found it important to receive information on their life-expectancy. While most patients were enough reassured by qualitative prognostic information, some wanted to receive quantitative information like OncologIQs’ estimates. A tailor-made approach is necessary to provide customized prognostic information. A clinical practice guideline was developed to support professionals in sharing prognostic information, aiming to improve shared decision making and patient-centered care.

Disease trajectories, place and mode of death in people with head and neck cancer: Findings from the 'Head and Neck 5000' population-based prospective clinical cohort study

BACKGROUND

Few large studies describe initial disease trajectories and subsequent mortality in people with head and neck cancer. This is a necessary first step to identify the need for palliative care and associated services.

AIM

To analyse data from the Head and Neck 5000 study to present mortality, place and mode of death within 12 months of diagnosis.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

In total, 5402 people with a new diagnosis of head and neck cancer were recruited from 76 cancer centres in the United Kingdom between April 2011 and December 2014.

RESULTS

Initially, 161/5402 (3%) and 5241/5402 (97%) of participants were treated with 'non-curative' and 'curative' intent, respectively. Within 12 months, 109/161 (68%) in the 'non-curative' group died compared with 482/5241 (9%) in the 'curative' group. Catastrophic bleed was the terminal event for 10.4% and 9.8% of people in 'non-curative' and 'curative' groups, respectively; terminal airway obstruction was recorded for 7.5% and 6.3% of people in the same corresponding groups. Similar proportions of people in both groups died in a hospice (22.9% 'non-curative'; 23.5% 'curative') and 45.7% of the 'curative' group died in hospital.

CONCLUSION

In addition to those with incurable head and neck cancer, there is a small but significant 'curative' subgroup of people who may have palliative needs shortly following diagnosis. Given the high mortality, risk of acute catastrophic event and frequent hospital death, clarifying the level and timing of palliative care services engagement would help provide assurance as to whether palliative care needs are being met.