Development and feasibility of a web-based question prompt sheet to support information provision of health-related quality of life topics after oesophageal cancer surgery

Development and initial evaluation of the usefulness of a question prompt list to promote patients' level of information about work-related medical rehabilitation: a pilot study

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to develop a question prompt list (QPL) to support patients undergoing work-related medical rehabilitation in obtaining relevant information and to explore how patients and physicians rate the QPL regarding its usefulness, practicability, and perceived (additional) effort.

Methods

An initial item pool was assessed by rehabilitation patients (N = 3) in cognitive interviews, rated by physicians and other health professionals (N = 11), and then further modified. The final QPL version (16 items) was used by patients (N = 36) in medical admission interviews in an inpatient medical rehabilitation facility and then evaluated. Physicians evaluated the QPL after each interview with a study participant (N = 6; k = 39 interviews).

Results

The QPL was used by 50% of patients who rated its usefulness and comprehensibility positively. Neither the need for information nor satisfaction with the information received was correlated with QPL use. The physicians' assessment showed a positive evaluation regarding the provision of information and structuring of the conversation, but also a higher perceived time expenditure.

Discussion

While initial testing of the QPL in work-related medical rehabilitation as a tool to support patient-provider communication generally showed a favorable evaluation by patients using it and physicians, future research should address its validity and effectiveness.

Optimizing the design and implementation of question prompt lists to support person-centred care: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Question prompt lists (QPLs) are lists of questions that patients may want to discuss with clinicians. QPLs support person-centred care and have been associated with many beneficial outcomes including improved patient question-asking, and the amount and quality of the information provided by clinicians. The purpose of this study was to review published research on QPLs to explore how QPL design and implementation can be optimized.

METHODS

We performed a scoping review by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Joanna Briggs Database from inception to 8 May 2022, for English language studies of any design that evaluated QPLs. We used summary statistics and text to report study characteristics, and QPL design and implementation.

RESULTS

We included 57 studies published from 1988 to 2022 by authors in 12 countries on a range of clinical topics. Of those, 56% provided the QPL, but few described how QPLs were developed. The number of questions varied widely (range 9-191). Most QPLs were single-page handouts (44%) but others ranged from 2 to 33 pages. Most studies implemented a QPL alone with no other accompanying strategy; most often in a print format before consultations by mail (18%) or in the waiting room (66%). Both patients and clinicians identified numerous benefits to patients of QPLs (e.g., increased patient confidence to ask questions, and patient satisfaction with communication or care received; and reduced anxiety about health status or treatment). To support use, patients desired access to QPLs in advance of clinician visits, and clinicians desired information/training on how to use the QPL and answer questions. Most (88%) studies reported at least one beneficial impact of QPLs. This was true even for single-page QPLs with few questions unaccompanied by other implementation strategies. Despite favourable views of QPLs, few studies assessed outcomes amongst clinicians.

CONCLUSION

This review identified QPL characteristics and implementation strategies that may be associated with beneficial outcomes. Future research should confirm these findings via systematic review and explore the benefits of QPLs from the clinician's perspective.

PATIENT/PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Following this review, we used the findings to develop a QPL on hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and interviewed women and clinicians about QPL design including content, format, enablers and barriers of use, and potential outcomes including beneficial impacts and possible harms (will be published elsewhere).

Developing a question prompt list for the oncology setting: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to provide an overview of existing methods used to develop a Question Prompt List (QPL) for an oncology setting.

METHODS

We conducted a search of the literature published between 1999 and 2019 in five online databases followed by a hand search, and extracted data on the methods used to develop a QPL.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies were included. The review shows differences in the development of older QPLs (1999-2009) and current QPLs (2010-2019). However, most QPLs were developed using interviews or focus groups with patients and an expert session to review or adapt the QPL. Health professionals, patients, and researchers were included in nearly all the studies.

CONCLUSION

To develop a QPL, it is important to combine several information sources and at least to involve health professionals, patients, and researchers in the development process. Review or evaluation steps can improve the appropriateness and acceptance of a QPL.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Further research is needed to define the type of target population for new QPLs and to develop a framework for their development.

Question prompt lists to improve communication between cancer patients and healthcare professionals

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This literature review sets out to summarize knowledge on the impact of question prompt lists (QPLs) on patient-physician communication in oncology and to provide an account of current research on the development, adaptation, and implementation of this type of communication tool.

RECENT FINDINGS

Provided with a QPL, patients seem to ask more questions, in particular on sensitive issues like those around the end-of-life period and they recall the information provided better. There is a need to adapt QPLs, taking account of divergences in attitudes towards illness, participation in decision-making, and discussions about the illness prognosis across cultures. QPLs may also need to be tailored to specific concerns of patients at the different stages in the care trajectory and to the particularities of each cancer type. These adaptations contribute to the effectiveness of the tool because they make it possible to tailor it to the challenges and constraints experienced in clinical practice.

SUMMARY

QPLs are designed to enhance patients' communication with their physicians. Further research is required to develop QPLs suited to each cultural and clinical setting, involving health professionals so as to facilitate the implementation of these tools in routine practice.

Helping Patients Communicate With Oncologists When Cancer Treatment Resistance Occurs to Develop, Test, and Implement a Patient Communication Aid: Sequential Collaborative Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Most cancer-related deaths result from disseminated diseases that develop resistance to anticancer treatments. Inappropriate communication in this challenging situation may result in unmet patient information and support needs. Patient communication aids such as question prompt lists (QPLs) may help.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to develop and pilot-test a specific QPL in the following two contrasting clinical contexts in France after cancer resistance has developed: triple-negative and luminal B metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and metastatic uveal melanoma (MUM).

METHODS

A sequential study design with a mixed methods collaborative approach will be applied. The first step aims to build a specific QPL. Step 1a will explore oncologist-patient communication issues from oncology professionals' interviews (n=20 approximately). Step 1b will appraise information and support needs experienced by patients with MBC or MUM both quantitatively (n=80) and qualitatively (n=40 approximately). These data will be used to develop and pilot-test a QPL specific to patients with cancer experiencing initial or acquired resistance to treatment. We expect to obtain a core QPL that comprises questions and concerns commonly expressed by patients with resistant cancer and is complemented by specific issues for either MBC or MUM cancer sites. In step 1c, 2 focus groups of patients with any type of metastatic cancer (n=4) and health care professionals (n=4) will be conducted to revise the content of a preliminary QPL and elaborate an acceptable and feasible clinical implementation. In step 1d, the content of the QPL version 1 and implementation guidance will be validated using a Delphi process. Step 2 will pilot-test the QPL version 1 in real practice with patients with MBC or MUM (n=80). Clinical utility will be assessed by comparing responses to questionnaires administered in step 1b (QPL-naive historical control group) and step 2 (QPL intervention group).

RESULTS

This study received grants in March and December 2019 and was approved by the French national ethics committee in July 2019. As of October 2021, interviews with oncology professionals have been conducted and analyzed (N=26 to reach saturation), and 39 and 27 patients with MBC and MUM, respectively, have been recruited.

CONCLUSIONS

A clinically and culturally tailored QPL is expected to facilitate patients' participation in consultations, improve oncologists' responses to patients' information and support needs, and thus foster patients' psychological adjustment to the diagnosis and follow-up of cancer resistance to treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04118062; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04118062.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/26414.

Beyond Oncology: Question Prompt Lists in Healthcare-A Scoping Review Protocol

Question prompt lists (QPL) are an instrument to promote patient participation in medical encounters by providing a set of questions patients can use during consultations. QPL have predominantly been examined in oncology. Less is known about their use in other contexts. Therefore, we plan to conduct a scoping review to provide an overview of the fields of healthcare in which QPL have been developed and evaluated. MEDLINE/PUBMED, PSYCINFO, PSYNDEX, WEB OF SCIENCE, and CINAHL will be systematically searched. Primary studies from different healthcare contexts that address the following participants/target groups will be included: persons with an acute, chronic, or recurring health condition other than cancer; healthy persons in non-oncological primary preventive measures. There will be no restrictions in terms of study design, sample size, or outcomes. However, only published studies will be included. Studies that were published in English and German between 1990 and 2019 will be examined. Two independent reviewers will apply defined inclusion/exclusion criteria and determine study eligibility in the review process guided by the PRISMA statement.

Quality of life in patients with upper GI malignancies managed by a strategy of chemoradiotherapy alone versus surgery

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) induces a pathological complete response (pCR) in 25-85% of oesophago-gastric cancer. As surgery entails morbidity and mortality risks and quality of life (QL) impairment, its avoidance in patients without residual disease is desirable. This study aimed to compare quality of life of patients with a cCR who chose surveillance with those who chose surgery.

METHODS

Four groups of patients were studied. Group 1(n = 31) were controls; Group 2 (n = 26) had chemoradiotherapy only; Group 3 (n = 31) had oesophagectomy after nCRT; Group 4 (n = 26) had gastrectomy alone. A 33-point novel questionnaire was administered at two 3 month time points. Participants were also interviewed with a validated questionnaire.

RESULTS

Mean(±sd) quality of life scores in cCR patients offered surveillance (28.9 ± 4.5) were superior to patients undergoing oesophagectomy (32.3 ± 58. p=0.042) or gastrectomy (33.19 ± 5.9, p=0.004). This result was replicated in the validated questionnaire (p=0.017). There was a trend towards increased reflux-related respiratory symptoms in the oesophagectomy group (7.3 ± 2.2 vs 6.5 ± 1.9; p=0.396) and towards early dumping (8.2 ± 1.4 vs 7.1 ± 1.; p=0.239) and vagotomy-related symptoms (1.82 ± 0.9 vs 1.4 ± 0.6; p=0.438) in the gastrectomy group.

CONCLUSIONS

Avoidance of surgery in cCR patients is rewarded with a superior quality of life to those undergoing surgery.

Psychological adjustment in patients post-curative treatment for oesophageal cancer: a longitudinal interview study

Objective: Oesophageal cancer is an increasingly prevalent disease with a demanding post-curative treatment recovery period and sustained longer-term effects. Although post-curative treatment is a key transitionary period, the process of psychological adjustment for the individual is under-researched which limits the evidence base to inform supportive care. The aim of this study was to understand the process of adjustment for oesophageal cancer patients post-curative treatment, in particular the beliefs participants hold regarding their condition and how these are appraised against their experience. Design: Serial interviews were undertaken with six oesophageal cancer patients who have recently completed curative treatment, at baseline and at 6-month follow-up using interpretative phenomenological analysis. Results: The findings demonstrate an effortful process of adjustment, including recognising and accepting a changed self, fostering control beliefs over the course of the illness and physical sequelae, searching for meaning, developing illness coherence and moving away from self-blame. Conclusions: This study is the first to utilise a longitudinal qualitative design in oesophageal cancer, and provides an understanding of post-treatment adjustment over time for this clinical population through which to inform clinical practice and service development.