Dataset Information

Association of patient-provider communication domains with lung cancer treatment.

ABSTRACT: Patient-physician communication is critical for helping patients understand and complete the complex steps needed to diagnose stage and treat lung cancer. We assessed which domains of patient-physician communication about lung cancer and its treatment are associated with receipt of disease-directed, stage-appropriate treatment.Patients with recently diagnosed lung cancer were recruited from four medical centers in New York City from 2008 to 2011. Participants were surveyed about discussions with physicians regarding treatment, symptoms, and needs. Multiple regression analysis and structural equation modeling were used to assess which communication factors were associated with disease treatment.Of the 352 participants, 191 (54%) received disease-directed, stage-appropriate treatment. Unadjusted associations between communication items and treatment found that participants who felt that their physicians explained the risks and disadvantages of lung cancer treatment (p < 0.01), discussed their chances of cure (p = 0.02), discussed goals of treatment (p < 0.01), or who were warm and friendly (p = 0.04) were more likely to undergo treatment. Three communication domains were identified: treatment information, physician support, and patient symptoms/needs. After adjusting for known determinants of lung cancer treatment, increased treatment information was associated with higher probability of cancer-directed treatment (p = 0.003). Other communication domains (physician support or patient symptoms/needs) were not independent predictors of treatment (p > 0.05 for both comparisons).These data suggest that treatment information is particularly important for increasing the probability of cancer-directed therapy among lung cancer patients. Clinicians should ensure that they clearly discuss treatment goals and options with patients while maintaining empathy, supporting patient needs, and addressing symptoms.

SUBMITTER: Lin JJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4133738 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association of patient-provider communication domains with lung cancer treatment.

Lin Jenny J JJ Lake Jessica J Wall Melanie M MM Berman Andrew R AR Salazar-Schicchi John J Powell Charles C Keller Steven M SM Halm Ethan A EA Leventhal Howard H Wisnivesky Juan P JP

Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer 20140901 9

<h4>Background</h4>Patient-physician communication is critical for helping patients understand and complete the complex steps needed to diagnose stage and treat lung cancer. We assessed which domains of patient-physician communication about lung cancer and its treatment are associated with receipt of disease-directed, stage-appropriate treatment.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients with recently diagnosed lung cancer were recruited from four medical centers in New York City from 2008 to 2011. Participants w ...[more]

PMID: 25122421

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEfforts to reduce opioid overdose fatalities have resulted in tapering (i.e., reducing or discontinuing) opioid prescriptions despite a limited understanding of patients' experiences.ObjectiveTo explore patients' perspectives on opioid taper experiences to ultimately improve taper processes and outcomes.DesignQualitative study.ParticipantsPatients on long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain who had undergone a reduction of opioid daily prescribed dosage of ≥50% in the past 2 years in two distinct medical systems and regions.ApproachFrom 2019 to 2020, we conducted semi-structured interviews that were audio-recorded, transcribed, systematically coded, and analyzed to summarize the content and identify key themes regarding taper experiences overall and with particular attention to patient-provider relationships and provider communication during tapers.Key resultsParticipants (n=41) had lived with chronic pain for an average of 17.4 years (range, 3-36 years) and described generally adverse experiences with opioid tapers, the initiation of which was not always adequately justified or explained to them. Consequences of tapers ranged from minor to substantial and included withdrawal, mobility issues, emotional distress, exacerbated mental health symptoms, and feelings of social stigmatization for which adequate supports were typically unavailable. Narratives highlighted the consequential role of patient-provider relationships throughout taper experiences, with most participants describing significant interpersonal challenges including poor provider communication and limited patient engagement in decision making. A few participants identified qualities of providers, relationships, and communication that fostered more positive taper experiences and outcomes.ConclusionsFrom patients' perspectives, opioid tapers can produce significant physical, emotional, and social consequences, sometimes reducing trust and engagement in healthcare. Patient-provider relationships and communication influence patients' perceptions of the quality and outcomes of opioid tapers. To improve patients' experiences of opioid tapers, tapering plans should be based on individualized risk-benefit assessments and involve patient-centered approaches and improved provider communication.

Project description:BackgroundThe growth of electronic medical records and use of patient portals have allowed for patients and health care providers to communicate via email and direct messaging between health care visits. Email patient-provider communication (PPC) may enhance traditional face-to-face PPC by allowing patients to ask questions, receive clear explanations, engage in shared decision-making, and confirm their understanding between in-person visits. Despite increasing trends in the use of email PPC since the early 2000s, few studies have evaluated associations between email PPC and the uptake of preventive services.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to determine associations between the use of email PPC and the likelihood of undergoing breast, cervical, and colon cancer screenings among adults who have received health care in the past 12 months.MethodsSecondary, cross-sectional data from the 2011-2015 National Health Interview Survey were combined and analyzed. For each cancer screening, inclusion criteria were based on the age of screening recommendations and prior history of cancer diagnosis (n=35,912 for breast, n=48,512 for cervical, and n=45,884 for colon). The independent variable was whether adults used email PPC in the past 12 months (yes or no). The dependent variables were whether (1) women (aged ≥40 years) received a mammogram in the past 12 months; (2) women (aged 21-65 years) received a Pap test in the past 12 months; and (3) individuals (aged ≥50 years) received a colon cancer screening in the past 12 months. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted.ResultsAdults who reported receiving all three cancer screenings in the past 12 months were more likely to be non-Hispanic White; be married or living with a partner; have a bachelor's degree or higher education level; have health insurance coverage; and perceive their health as excellent, very good, or good (all P<.001). Men were more likely to receive colon cancer screenings than women (P<.001). Multivariable logistic regression models showed women who used email to communicate with their health care providers had greater odds of receiving breast (odds ratio [OR] 1.32, 95% CI 1.20-1.44) and cervical (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.20) cancer screenings than women who did not use email PPC. Adults who used email to communicate with their health care providers had 1.55 times greater odds (95% CI 1.42-1.69) of receiving a colon cancer screening than those who did not use email PPC.ConclusionsOur results demonstrate that email PPC is a marker of increased likelihood of adults completing age-appropriate cancer screenings, particularly breast, cervical, and colon cancer screenings. More research is needed to examine other factors related to the reasons for and quality of email PPC between patients and health care providers and determine avenues for health education and intervention to further explore this association.

Project description:The objective of this study was to understand how pain patients and health care providers (HCPs) are engaging on Twitter and what insights this engagement might provide. By identifying how information is spread by and between these audiences, organizations such as patient advocacy groups may be better poised to develop and share materials that facilitate online communication between HCPs and pain patients, with an end goal of improving a shared decision-making process around pain management. We analyzed the Twitter audiences most engaged on pain topics by conducting a Social Network Analysis (SNA) of a large network of connected users on Twitter. The analysis segmented users based on the sources they cited and measured their influence based on who follows them. As a point of comparison, we also conducted an SNA of Twitter audiences most engaged on oncology topics. Oncology was chosen as a comparison due to what was perceived to be a highly developed online network of both patients and physicians. The populations included in this research included 12,086 accounts that were highly engaged on pain-related topics, and 12,617 accounts that were highly engaged on oncology-related topics. Network statistics were generated for variables including: word use, sources cited, retweets, and mentions. We also statistically analyzed the Twitter follow relationships among select HCPs and patient groups within each SNA. The creation of separate pain and oncology SNAs allowed the team to compare relationships and engagement related to these topics. We found that on Twitter, pain patients and providers appear to interact less than oncology patients and providers. Pain patients do not appear to follow medical professionals or share medical or health-related information on Twitter to the same extent as oncology patients. In addition, we found that pain patients do not communicate on Twitter in the same language as HCPs. Our results are important because they underscore that challenges in communication are not just problematic in face-to-face interactions, but also in digital social network (Twitter) interactions, serving as an additional roadblock to what can be shared decision-making opportunities around pain management. Contributing to this roadblock is access to quality information and a potential need for an online, evidence-based resource hub that could benefit the pain patient community in the same way that cancer.gov serves as a source of aggregated materials for oncology patients and HCPs. This study is an illustration of how social media networks like Twitter can be used to better understand the relationships, language gaps, and shared resources between pain patients and providers and offers a template for using digital social network (Twitter) interactions to research other difficult-to-treat or rare disease states.

Dataset Information

Association of patient-provider communication domains with lung cancer treatment.

Publications

Association of patient-provider communication domains with lung cancer treatment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets