Patient complaints about communication in cancer care settings: Hidden between the lines

Mechanisms of end-of-life communication contributing to optimal care at the end of life: a review of reviews

BACKGROUND

End-of-life communication is an essential component of high-quality care, but its potential mechanisms for improving care are not well understood.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the potential mechanisms by which end-of-life communication may contribute to enhanced end-of-life care in any setting.

DESIGN

An overview of systematic reviews, with a narrative synthesis of results. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Study quality was assessed using the AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Reviews) tool.

DATA SOURCES

CINAHL, MEDLINE, Cochrane, SSCI and PsycINFO databases, were searched from inception to January 2024. Manual searches were also conducted.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Systematic reviews (published in English) related to end-of-life communication, where the target population was adult patients in their last year of life, relatives, caregivers and/or healthcare professionals involved in communicating with dying patients.

RESULTS

We reviewed 35 eligible studies. The reviews suggest potential mechanisms of effective end-of-life communication including collaborative decision-making, tailoring communication to individuals, using effective communication strategies and incorporating communication skills into practice. The reviews also highlighted barriers related to patients, professionals and organisations.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights a nuanced understanding of potential mechanisms of end-of-life communication, emphasising the need for tailored training, policy enhancements and interprofessional collaboration. It calls on healthcare professionals to reflect on their practices, advocating for co-designing a person-centred communication model that addresses patient preferences at the end of life. Importantly, in culturally diverse contexts, there is a need for a communication paradigm that embraces diversity to provide truly empathetic and effective end-of-life care. This concise roadmap may foster compassionate, dignified and effective end-of-life communication.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Protocol registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022271433, 29 March 2022).

Effects of on-site Supportive Communication Training (On-site SCT) on doctor-patient communication in oncology: Study protocol of a randomized, controlled mixed-methods trial

BACKGROUND

The quality of communication in oncology significantly impacts patients' health outcomes, as poor communication increases the risk of unnecessary treatment, inadequate pain relief, higher anxiety levels, and acute hospitalizations. Additionally, ineffective communication skills training (CST) is associated with stress, low job satisfaction, and burnout among doctors working in oncology. While acknowledging the importance of effective communication, the specific features of successful CST remain uncertain. Role-play and recorded consultations with direct feedback appear promising for CST but may be time-consuming and face challenges in transferring acquired skills to clinical contexts. Our aim is to bridge this gap by proposing a novel approach: On-site Supportive Communication Training (On-site SCT). The concept integrates knowledge from previous studies but represents the first randomized controlled trial employing actual doctor-patient interactions during CST.

METHODS

This randomized multicenter trial is conducted at three departments of oncology in Denmark. Doctors are randomized 1:1 to the intervention and control groups. The intervention group involves participation in three full days of On-site SCT facilitated by a trained psychologist. On-site SCT focuses on imparting communication techniques, establishing a reflective learning environment, and offering emotional support with a compassionate mindset. The primary endpoint is the change in percentage of items rated "excellent" by the patients in the validated 15-item questionnaire Communication Assessment Tool. The secondary endpoints are changes in doctors' ratings of self-efficacy in health communication, burnout, and job satisfaction measured by validated questionnaires. Qualitative interviews will be conducted with the doctors after the intervention to evaluate its relevance, feasibility, and working mechanisms. Doctors have been actively recruited during summer/autumn 2023. Baseline questionnaires from patients have been collected. Recruitment of new patients for evaluation questionnaires is scheduled for Q1-Q2 2024.

DISCUSSION

This trial aims to quantify On-site SCT efficacy. If it significantly impacts patients/doctors, it can be a scalable CST concept for clinical practice. Additionally, qualitative interviews will reveal doctors' insight into the most comprehensible curriculum parts.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

April 2023 - ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05842083). April 2023 - The Research Ethics Committee at the University of Southern Denmark (23/19397).

Communication, understanding and engagement of patients with pancreatic cancer at time of diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Objectives: To investigate communication clarity and understanding at the time of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) diagnosis and whether they can influence patient engagement and compliance.

METHODS

Consecutive PDAC patients were enrolled at the time of diagnosis after obtaining informed consent in a single-center study. The patients completed a validated scale (PHE-s®), and the understanding rate was assessed using standardized tools. Patient compliance was evaluated, and the correlation between the PHE-s®, understanding, and compliance was calculated.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were enrolled (15 female) with a mean age 64.4, 13 were metastatic. The mean visit time was 31 min, being longer if visiting doctor was an oncologist (p = 0.002). The engagement level was high in 70% of the patients, and all but one were compliant. The analysis of doctor-patient interactions showed a median of 121 conversational turns for doctors, 75 for patients, and 20 for caregivers (p < 0.0001), and the median percentage of speaking time was 77% for doctors, 13% for patients, and 2% for caregivers (p < 0.0001). Female caregivers spent more time speaking than did male caregivers (median 11.6% vs. 1.3%; p = 0.06). There were 290 instances of problematic understanding, most of which occurred during the taking of patients' personal medical history for doctors, while for patients and caregivers, these occurred mainly during the discussion of diagnosis/treatment (p < 0.0001). In a multivariable analysis, only origin from central or southern Italy was associated with high engagement (p = 0.0087).

CONCLUSION

In this first attempt to measure clarity of communication and engagement in patients with PDAC, typical features of conversation and problematic understanding emerged, which deserves further investigation.

[New Therapies, New Challenges - Old Needs]

Im Februar fand der 36. Deutsche Krebskongress statt, der unter dem Kongressmotto „Fortschritt gemeinsam gestalten“ stand. Der Kongress stellte mit 12.500 Teilnehmenden einen neuen Besucher*innenrekord auf und setzte dem Kongressmotto entsprechend einen Schwerpunkt in den Bereichen personalisierte Medizin und neue Therapieansätze 1. Gerade in den letzten 20 Jahren hat sich die Krebsmedizin extrem weiterentwickelt und es sind zu den bereits bestehenden Therapieoptionen viele neue Entwicklungen im Bereich molekularer und personalisierter Therapien hinzugekommen, durch die deutlich bessere Therapieergebnisse erzielt und Überlebenszeiten verbessert werden können 2. Durch große Forschungsinitiativen wie die Nationale Dekade gegen Krebs 3 und auch die Weiterentwicklungen im Bereich künstlicher Intelligenz ist zu erwarten, dass sich das Entwicklungstempo weiter beschleunigen wird und es besteht berechtigte Hoffnung, dass der medizinische Fortschritt weitere Erfolge für die Krebstherapie bringen wird.

Assessment of Patient Matters in Healthcare Facilities

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Ensuring the sustainability of healthcare facilities requires the evaluation of patient matters with appropriate methods and tools. The objective of this research is to develop a new tool for assessing patient matters as a component of social responsibility requirements that contribute to the sustainability of healthcare facilities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We carried out an analytical observational study in which, starting from the domains of the reference framework for the sustainability of health facilities (economic, environmental, social, provision of sustainable medical care services and management processes), we designed indicators that describe patient matters. To achieve this, we extracted from the scientific literature the most recent data and aspects related to patient matters that have been reported by representative hospitals from all over the world. These were organized into the four sequences of the quality cycle. We designed the method of evaluating the indicators based on the information couple achievement degree-importance of the indicator. In the experimental part of the study, we validated the indicators for the evaluation of patient matters and the evaluation method at an emergency hospital with an orthopedic profile.

RESULTS

We developed the patient matters indicator matrix, the content of the 8 indicators that make it up, questions for the evaluation of the indicators, and the evaluation grids of the indicators. They describe five levels for each variable of the achievement degree-importance couple. The practical testing of the indicators at the emergency hospital allowed the calculation of sustainability indicators and the development of a prioritization matrix for improvement measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Indicators designed in this research cover social responsibility requirements that describe patient matters. They are compatible and can be used by health facilities along with other implemented national and international requirements. Their added value consists in promoting social responsibility and sustainable development of healthcare facilities.