Questions and emotional expressions from patients and companions while participating in multidisciplinary tumor conferences in breast and gynecological cancer centers

Integrated Electronic Health Record of Multidisciplinary Professionals Throughout the Cancer Care Pathway: A Pilot Study Exploring Patient-Centered Information in Breast Cancer Patients

Purpose

The aim of this pilot study was to first aggregate and then integrate the medical records of various healthcare professionals involved with breast cancer patients to reveal if and how patient-centered information is documented in multidisciplinary cancer care.

Patients and Methods

We aggregated 20 types of medical records from various healthcare professionals such as physicians, nurses and allied healthcare professionals (AHPs) throughout three breast cancer patients' care pathways in a department of breast surgery at a university hospital. Purposeful sampling was used, and three cases were examined. The number of integrated type of records was 14, 14, 17 in case 1, 2 and 3, respectively. We manually annotated and analyzed them exploratively using a thematic analysis. The tags were produced using both a deductive template approach and a data-driven inductive approach. All records were then given tags. We defined patient-centered information related tags and biomedical information related tags and then analyzed for if and how patient-centered information was documented.

Results

The number of patient-centered information related tags accounted for 30%, 30% and 20% of the total in case 1, 2 and 3, respectively. In all cases, patient-centered information was distributed across various medical records. The Progress Note written by doctors provided much of the patient-centered information, while other records contained information not described elsewhere in the Progress Notes. The records of nurses and AHPs included more patient-centered information than the doctors' notes. Each piece of patient-centered information was documented in fragments providing from each of the healthcare professionals' viewpoints.

Conclusion

The documented information throughout the breast cancer care pathway in the cases examined was dominated by biomedical information. However, our findings suggest that integrating fragmented patient-centered information from various healthcare professionals' medical records produces holistic patient-centered information from multiple perspectives and thus may facilitate an enhanced multidisciplinary patient-centered care.

The content of patients' emotional expressions during follow-up consultations for chronic diseases

OBJECTIVES

In this article, we seek to extract the themes that patients share when they express negative emotions in the context of follow-up consultation of chronic illness. We are mainly interested in patients with chronic illnesses, as these pathologies have a significant emotional overload leading to a significant deterioration of the patient's quality of life.

METHODS

Our corpus included audio recordings of 12 chronic disease follow-up consultations conducted by physicians practicing in neurology, nutrition, internal medicine and infectiology. The 12 patients participating suffer from various chronic diseases: Parkinson's, HIV, diabetes, etc. We performed thematic content analyses on the emotional sequences in order to extract the themes underlying these emotional expressions.

RESULTS

The 10 themes we have extracted are related to physical aspects, psychological aspects, the healthcare system and/or the healthcare provider, prognostic elements, social life, family life, aspects of professional life, issues of daily life, treatments and finally, aspects related to objectives and disease progress.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

Our results show that follow-up consultations for chronic illnesses are consultations during which patients express emotions for different purposes. These emotional expressions concern particular themes that are not found in other forms of medical consultations. We will compare these results in the discussion part of this article.

Shared-Decision-Making Experiences in Breast Cancer Care with and without Patient Participation in Multidisciplinary Tumor Conferences: A Mixed-Methods-Study

Purpose

This study aimed (1) to analyze patients' perceived shared decision-making (SDM) experiences over 4 weeks between patients participating or not in multidisciplinary tumor conferences (MTCs) and (2) to analyze the association of patients' active participation in and organizational variables of MTCs with patients' perceived SDM experience directly after MTC.

Patients and Methods

From the N=317 patients, this observational study included patient surveys, observations, and audio transcripts from MTCs with (N=82) and without (N=145) patient participation in six breast and gynecologic cancer centers. We performed t tests for within- and between-group comparisons and linear regression with "patients' perceived SDM experiences in MTC" as the dependent variable.

Results

Patients' perceived SDM experiences increased at 4 weeks after MTC (p<0.001) with lower perceived SDM experiences for participating versus nonparticipating patients (p<0.001). Linear regression showed that the organizational variable "round table seating arrangement" was significantly associated with higher perceived SDM experiences compared with a theater or U-shape arrangement (beta=-0.38, p=0.043; beta=-0.69, p=0.010) directly after MTC.

Conclusion

Results provide first insights into patients' perceived SDM experiences in MTCs. SDM in MTCs is associated with organizational variables of MTCs. A round table seating arrangement in MTCs with patient participation seems important for patients' perceived SDM experiences. The relatively low perceived SDM experiences of participating patients directly after MTC indicates room for improvement, eg concerning patient-centered communication.

How do patients make decisions in the context of a multidisciplinary team: an ethnographic study of four head and neck cancer centres in the north of England

OBJECTIVES

To describe how patients are engaged with cancer decisions in the context of multidisciplinary team (MDT) and how MDT recommendations are operationalised in the context of a shared decision.

DESIGN

Ethnographic qualitative study.

SETTING

Four head and neck cancer centres in the north of England.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with a diagnosis of new or recurrent head and neck cancer; non-participant observation of 35 MDT meetings and 37 MDT clinics, informal interviews, and formal, semistructured interviews with 20 patients and 9 MDT staff members.

METHODS

Ethnographic methods including non-participant observation of MDT meetings and clinic appointments, informal interviews, field notes and formal semistructured interviews with patients and MDT members.

RESULTS

MDT discussions often conclude with a firm recommendation for treatment. When delivered to a patient in clinic, this recommendation is often accepted by the patient, but this response may result from the disempowered position in which they find themselves. While patient behaviour may thus appear to endorse clinicians' views that a paternalistic approach is desired by patients (creating a 'cycle of paternalism'), the rigidity of the MDT treatment recommendation can act as a barrier to discussion of options and the exploration of patient values.

CONCLUSIONS

The current model of MDT decision-making does not support shared decision-making and may actively undermine it. A model should be developed whereby the individual patient perspective has more input into MDT discussions, and where decisions are made on potential treatment options rather than providing a single recommendation for discussion with the patient. Deeper consideration should be given to how the MDT incorporates the patient perspective and/or delivers its discussion of options to the patient. In order to achieve these objectives, a new model of MDT working is required.

Patient participation in multidisciplinary tumor conferences in breast and gynecological cancer care: How patient-centered is the communication?

OBJECTIVE

Patients' participation is part of patient-centeredness, but it is so far unclear whether providers in multidisciplinary tumor conferences (MTCs) with patient participation communicate in a patient-centered way. Our aim is to explore (a) to what extent providers ask questions to breast and gynecological cancer patients during case discussion in MTCs, (b) how providers respond to patients' expressions of emotions during case discussions, and (c) which patient- and context-related characteristics and responses are associated with patients' trust in the treatment team after the case discussion.

METHODS

This observational study included survey data and audio recordings of MTCs with patient participation at three breast and gynecological cancer centers. Providers' questions to patients and responses to patients' emotional expressions were coded using the Verona Coding Definitions of Emotional Sequences. The response can be explicitly or non-explicitly related to the emotion and space-reducing or space-providing. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to determine associations between providers' responses, patient- and context-related characteristics, and patients' trust in the treatment team after the case discussion.

RESULTS

We analyzed 82 case discussions (77 breast, 5 breast and gynecological cancer patients). Providers asked a total of 646 questions, of which 86% were polar (yes/no). Providers gave 303 responses to a total of 230 emotional expressions by patients. Non-explicit responses were associated with more trust when they were space-providing, but with less trust when space-reducing.

CONCLUSIONS

The frequency of providers' closed questions and space-reducing responses to emotions shows that patient-centered communication rarely takes place in MTCs with patient participation.