Communicating good care: a qualitative study of what people with urological cancer value in interactions with health care providers

PURPOSE

Communication with health care providers is important to help meet cancer patients' information and support needs. It can significantly affect the extent to which patients feel cared for, respected and involved, and it can influence a range of cancer care processes and outcomes. This paper presents findings from a study which explored urological cancer patients' experiences of care, focussing on insights into what they appeared to value in their interactions with health care providers and why.

METHOD

In-depth interviews were undertaken with 20 men and 6 women with different types of urological cancer at a range of times since diagnosis. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed using an established interpretive approach.

RESULTS

Patients valued being treated as someone who mattered and was worthy of care; being recognised and responded to as an individual; and experiencing support for autonomy/agency. Reasons for their valuations related to the implications of communicative interactions for the ways patients thought health professionals related to them 'as persons'. Our findings highlight the value of relational aspects of communication for: indicating to patients what clinicians think of their worth; facilitating individualised care; and enabling patients to contribute to their own care.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to improve health care provider-patient communication should attend not only to the transfer of information about the condition and its management but to the range of features of interactions that can signal to people how health care providers relate to them as persons.

Developing a placebo-controlled trial in surgery: issues of design, acceptability and feasibility

Background

Surgical placebos are controversial. This in-depth study explored the design, acceptability, and feasibility issues relevant to designing a surgical placebo-controlled trial for the evaluation of the clinical and cost effectiveness of arthroscopic lavage for the management of people with osteoarthritis of the knee in the UK.

Methods

Two surgeon focus groups at a UK national meeting for orthopaedic surgeons and one regional surgeon focus group (41 surgeons); plenary discussion at a UK national meeting for orthopaedic anaesthetists (130 anaesthetists); three focus groups with anaesthetists (one national, two regional; 58 anaesthetists); two focus groups with members of the patient organisation Arthritis Care (7 participants); telephone interviews with people on consultant waiting lists from two UK regional centres (15 participants); interviews with Chairs of UK ethics committees (6 individuals); postal surveys of members of the British Association of Surgeons of the Knee (382 surgeons) and members of the British Society of Orthopaedic Anaesthetists (398 anaesthetists); two centre pilot (49 patients assessed).

Results

There was widespread acceptance that evaluation of arthroscopic lavage had to be conducted with a placebo control if scientific rigour was not to be compromised. The choice of placebo surgical procedure (three small incisions) proved easier than the method of anaesthesia (general anaesthesia). General anaesthesia, while an excellent mimic, was more intrusive and raised concerns among some stakeholders and caused extensive discussion with local decision-makers when seeking formal approval for the pilot.

Patients were willing to participate in a pilot with a placebo arm; although some patients when allocated to surgery became apprehensive about the possibility of receiving placebo, and withdrew. Placebo surgery was undertaken successfully.

Conclusions

Our study illustrated the opposing and often strongly held opinions about surgical placebos, the ethical issues underpinning this controversy, and the challenges that exist even when ethics committee approval has been granted. It showed that a placebo-controlled trial could be conducted in principle, albeit with difficulty. It also highlighted that not only does a placebo-controlled trial in surgery have to be ethically and scientifically acceptable but that it also must be a feasible course of action. The place of placebo-controlled surgical trials more generally is likely to be limited and require specific circumstances to be met. Suggested criteria are presented.

Trial registration number

The trial was assigned ISRCTN02328576 through http://controlled-trials.com/ in June 2006. The first patient was randomised to the pilot in July 2007.

Public opinion on systems for feeding back views to the National Health Service

OBJECTIVES

To explore public opinions about different systems for feeding back views about health services to the National Health Service.

DESIGN

Questionnaire survey.

SETTING

NHS Grampian, Scotland, UK.

PARTICIPANTS

A random sample of 10 000 adults registered with a general practitioner in Grampian was invited to opt in to the study; 2449 were sent questionnaires.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Opinions about different feedback mechanisms and their likely effectiveness in three scenarios; reasons for preferring particular mechanisms.

RESULTS

Of 1951 respondents, over 80% thought patient representatives would be a good way for people to pass on their ideas about the NHS and would help to improve it. Patient representatives were the most widely preferred course of action for two out of three scenarios. People explained their preferences for particular feedback systems mainly in terms of their ease of use, the perception that they would be listened to, and the likelihood of anything being done about what they said. However, people varied in their judgements about the likely effectiveness of different feedback systems. Preferences for particular systems varied according to the types of situation considered. Some people are reluctant to approach clinical staff with concerns about healthcare quality. A substantial minority have no confidence that their concerns would be listened to or acted upon, however they were expressed.

CONCLUSION

The "patient representative" function has substantial popular support and could facilitate local learning and action to improve the quality of health services from users' perspectives. Feedback systems must demonstrate their effectiveness if they are to gain and retain public confidence.

Recordings or summaries of consultations for people with cancer

BACKGROUND

Many people find it difficult to remember information provided during medical consultations. One way of improving this may be to provide a record of the conversation.

OBJECTIVES

This review examined the effects of providing recordings or summaries of their consultations to people with cancer and their families.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the following sources: The Cochrane Library (issue 4 2002); MEDLINE (1966 to January week 1 2003); CINAHL (1982 to December week 4 2002); Dissertation Abstracts (1861 to week 2 2003); EMBASE (1985 to week 2 2003); PsycINFO (1967 to January week 2 2003); AMED (1985 to December 2002); and Sociological Abstracts (1998 to week 2 2003). For the initial (1999) publication of this review we also searched the following databases: Sociofile; Cancerlit; IAC Health & Wellness; JICST; Pascal; ERIC; ASSIA; Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts; Mental Health Abstracts; CAB Health; DHSS-Data; MANTIS.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and non-randomised controlled trials that evaluate the effects of providing recordings (e.g. audiotapes) or summaries (e.g. letter with reminders of key points) of consultations to people with cancer or their families. Two reviewers assessed studies for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by another reviewer. The quality of studies was assessed on six criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve studies satisfied the selection criteria. All involved adult participants. The studies did not all measure similar outcomes. In seven studies, between 83% and 96% of participants found recordings or summaries of their consultations valuable. Five out of nine studies reported better recall of information for those receiving recordings or summaries. Four out of seven studies found that participants provided with a recording or summary were more satisfied with the information received. No studies (out of seven) found any statistically significant effect on anxiety or depression. One study evaluated the effects on quality of life, but found no main effects. No study evaluated the effects on survival.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The provision of recordings or summaries of key consultations may benefit most adults with cancer. Although more research is needed to improve our understanding of these interventions, most patients find them very useful. Practitioners should consider offering people tape recordings or written summaries of their consultations

Giving tape recordings or written summaries of consultations to people with cancer: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effects of providing recordings or summaries of consultations to people with cancer and their families.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cancerlit, EMBASE and other electronic bibliographic databases. Bibliographies of relevant papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized and non-randomized controlled trials of the provision of taped recordings or written summaries of consultations to people with cancer and/or their families.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight randomized controlled trials were found, all involving adult participants. No non-randomized controlled trials were found. The quality of the studies was generally poor. Between 83% and 96% of people who received recordings or summaries found them useful to remind them of what was said and/or to inform family members and friends about their illness and treatment. Of seven studies that assessed recall of information given during the consultation, four reported better recall among the groups that received recordings or summaries than among control groups. Receiving a recording or summary had no significant effect on anxiety or depression between the groups. None of the included studies assessed survival or health outcomes other than psychological outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Wider use of consultation tapes and summary letters could benefit many adults with cancer, without causing additional anxiety or depression, but consideration should be given to individuals' circumstances and preferences.

Decisions about treatment: interpretations of two measures of control by women having a hysterectomy

A number of authors have developed sets of role descriptions that have been used to classify patients' roles in decisions about their health care as either active, collaborative or passive. We explored the validity of two such measures. Twenty women who had recently had a hysterectomy described their experiences of treatment decision-making in their own words and picked role descriptions from the Control Preferences Scale (Degner, Sloan, J. Clin. Epidemiol. 45 (1992) 941) and Patient Preferences for Control measure (Bradley et al.. Fam. Med. 28 (1996) 496), both phrased in the past tense to assess roles played. The women explained why they had picked particular role descriptions. We compared the women's selections from the two measures and considered the relationship between their narrative descriptions and the role descriptors they picked. Several women found it hard to find an appropriate role description among those they were offered. Some picked apparently conflicting statements from the two measures. The role classifications that would be made on the basis of the women's chosen role descriptions did not always seem appropriate when compared with their narrative descriptions of how treatment decisions were reached. Women gave a range of explanations for choosing the role descriptors that they did, and some women who picked different role descriptions gave similar explanations for doing so. These findings suggest that there are problems with the validity of some currently used measures of patients' participation in health care decision-making. Researchers need to pay more attention to the key features of participation in decision-making and develop measures that can distinguish between these.

The case of Norplant as an example of media coverage over the life of a new health technology

BACKGROUND

The contraceptive implant Norplant (levonorgestrel) had a fairly short life in the UK. This made it a convenient subject for a case study of how media coverage alters over time. We set out to produce a critical description of national newspaper coverage of Norplant over the course of its use in the UK.

METHODS

We searched newspaper databases and press-clippings files for articles about Norplant printed between 1992 and 1996. For those that met our inclusion criteria, we extracted bibliographical data, made a standardised judgment about the "slant" of the article towards Norplant, and used qualitative techniques to analyse the content of the articles.

FINDINGS

101 national newspaper articles were included in the study. Norplant attracted media coverage over the course of its career, but the slant of articles shifted dramatically over time from a favourable to a negative presentation. This reflected the use of different story types over the course of time. Early reports presented Norplant very positively as either a clear improvement on existing contraceptive methods or a valuable addition to the range. Any disadvantages were down-played. The positive image of Norplant was reinforced immediately after its official launch by reports that it was in great demand but women might be denied access to it. Less than a year later, however, newspaper reports about Norplant were dominated by the stories of individual women who had had bad experiences with the product.

INTERPRETATION

Three main reporting themes were seen. At first, Norplant was presented as a positive new development, and one that might be denied to people. In later coverage it became a flawed and damaging product. These themes recur in media reporting of health technologies, and the fact that they occur at different stages in a product's career means that a balanced assessment of the technology is not usually feasible from media reporting at any one time. An appreciation of the forms and implications of these reporting frameworks could help health-care providers and users to appraise media reports more critically.

Disseminating information about healthcare effectiveness: a survey of consumer health information services

BACKGROUND

In 1997 a research based information leaflet designed for men considering being screened for prostate cancer was distributed to general practitioners (GPs) and consumer health information services.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate consumer health information service staff opinions of the leaflet and the use they made of it. To find out whether such staff would find similar leaflets on other topics useful.

DESIGN

A postal questionnaire survey sent to United Kingdom consumer health information services.

RESULTS

Consumer health information service staff were enthusiastic about the content and presentation of the leaflet and gave it to many enquirers, including some who had not been given information by their GPs. Respondents were keen to be supplied with similar leaflets about different topics. Some respondents were reluctant to give the leaflet to people enquiring about screening for prostate cancer, for example, because they thought that the leaflet would cause anxiety, or because prostate cancer screening was not freely available locally.

CONCLUSION

Consumer health information services can complement information provided by health professionals and make good use of research based information for consumers. However, they may withhold information from some people who might benefit from it and are not well placed to advise people about healthcare options. Strategic thinking is needed to encourage a more integrated approach to giving information and support for patients in making decisions.

Evidence-informed patient choice. Practical issues of involving patients in decisions about health care technologies

Evidence-informed patient choice involves providing people with research-based information about the effectiveness of health care options and promoting their involvement in decisions about their treatment. Although the concept seems desirable, the processes and outcomes of evidence-informed patient choice are poorly understood, and it should be carefully evaluated.

Evaluating interventions to promote patient involvement in decision-making: by what criteria should effectiveness be judged?

Interventions to inform patients about health care options and to involve them in decisions about their care are now widely advocated. The question of which criteria should be used to judge the effectiveness of such interventions has, however, received little attention. The provision of research-based information about health care effectiveness to patients and the promotion of greater patient involvement in health care decision-making are likely to have a complex range of effects on: the information provided to patients; patients' acquisition of skills; patients' knowledge and emotions; how decisions are made; the quality of decisions; professional-patient relationships; the use of health care; the health of patients; satisfaction; and the organisation and cost of health services. Opinions about which effects are most important and how they should be measured and valued will be influenced by a variety of factors, including: the rationales and motives underlying interest in patient involvement in decision-making; the forms of patient involvement envisaged; and the types of interventions being considered. In the context of health care systems which aim primarily to improve health status and well-being, health outcomes should take priority over process variables such as decision-making behaviours and patients' knowledge.

Developing information materials to present the findings of technology assessments to consumers. The experience of the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination

We discuss some of the issues that have arisen during the development and introduction into practice of information materials for health professionals and patients that aim to promote clinical effectiveness and informed patient participation in clinical decision making.

Supporting consumer involvement in decision making: what constitutes quality in consumer health information?

The promotion of consumer involvement in decisions about individual health care is now high on many health policy agendas, but the structures to support it are not all in place. While it is generally accepted that information to support consumer involvement should be of good quality, the question of what constitutes quality in such information packages is far from settled. Debate around this issue should consider the various theoretical perspectives which relate to the nature and purpose of consumer involvement in health care decision making, and the contexts in which information is used. If we are to judge the quality of information within a consequentialist framework, we need empirical research evidence about the effects of information provision. Until such evidence becomes available, we can only hypothesize about what makes for quality. In this paper we discuss some dimensions of quality which are suggested by a consequentialist perspective.

Media coverage of the Child B case

The case of a girl with leukaemia, known as Child B, hit the headlines in March 1995 when her father refused to accept the advice of doctors who counselled against further treatment and took Cambridge and Huntingdon Health Authority to court for refusing to fund chemotherapy and a second bone transplant for her in the private sector. British national newspapers varied greatly in the way they covered the case. Some paid little attention to clinical considerations and presented the case as an example of rationing based on financial considerations. Their selective presentations meant that anyone reading just one newspaper would have received only limited and partial information. If members of the public are to participate in debates about treatment decisions and health care rationing, means other than the media will need to be found to inform and involve them.