Dataset Information

Patient participation in multidisciplinary tumour conferences in breast cancer care (PINTU): a mixed-methods study protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

A central instrument of multidisciplinary care is the multidisciplinary tumour conference (MTC). In MTCs, diagnosis and treatment of cancer patients are discussed, and therapy recommendations are worked out. As we found previously, patients participate in MTCs in some breast cancer centres in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. However, studies on risks and benefits of patient participation have not provided substantiated findings. Therefore, the study's objective is to analyse differences between MTCs with and without patient participation.

Methods and analysis

This is an exploratory mixed-methods study. MTCs in six breast and gynaecological cancer centres in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany, are examined. MTCs will be conducted with and without patient participation. First, interviews with providers concentrating on the feasibility of patient participation and quality of decision-making will be carried out, transcribed and analysed by means of content analysis. Second, videotaped or audiotaped participatory observations in MTCs will be executed. Video data or transcribed audio data from video and audio recordings will be coded using the established "Observational Assessment Rating Scale" for MTCs and analysed by comparing centres with and without patient participation. Third, all patients will fill out a questionnaire before and after MTC, including questions on psychosocial situation, decision-making and expectations before and experiences after MTC. The questionnaire data will be analysed by means of descriptive and multivariate statistics and pre-post-differences within and between groups.

Ethics and dissemination

Consultation and a positive vote from the ethics committee of the Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne have been obtained. For all collected data, relevant data protection regulations will be adhered to. All personal identifiers from patients and providers will be pseudonymised, except video recordings. Dissemination strategies include a discussion with patients and providers in workshops about topics such as feasibility, risks and benefits of patient participation in MTCs.

Trial registration number

DRKS00012552.

SUBMITTER: Heuser C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6500308 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient participation in multidisciplinary tumour conferences in breast cancer care (PINTU): a mixed-methods study protocol.

Heuser Christian C Diekmann Annika A Ernstmann Nicole N Ansmann Lena L

BMJ open 20190408 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>A central instrument of multidisciplinary care is the multidisciplinary tumour conference (MTC). In MTCs, diagnosis and treatment of cancer patients are discussed, and therapy recommendations are worked out. As we found previously, patients participate in MTCs in some breast cancer centres in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. However, studies on risks and benefits of patient participation have not provided substantiated findings. Therefore, the study's objective ...[more]

PMID: 30962228

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo determine the association between participation of patients with breast cancer and patients with gynaecological cancer in their own multidisciplinary tumour conference (MTC) and their information needs with regard to their disease and treatment options.MethodsThis is a prospective observational study that took place at six breast cancer and gynaecological cancer centres in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. Patient inclusion criteria included a minimum age of 18 years and at least one diagnosis of breast cancer or gynaecological cancer. Three surveys were administered. T0 (shortly before MTC), T1 (directly after MTC) and T2 (4 weeks after MTC). Patient information needs were measured using two three-item subscales of the Cancer Patients Information Needs scale. Analysis of change was done by one-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). To control for sampling bias, a further one-way repeated measures analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) included a propensity score as a covariate.ResultsData from 81 patients in the participation group and 120 patients in the non-participation group were analysed. The patient groups did not differ in their levels of information needs at T0 or T2. From T0 to T2, information needs increased statistically significantly in both groups with regard to both disease-related information (η²=0.354) and treatment-related information (η²=0.250). The increase in both types of information needs lost its statistical significance when the propensity score was included as a covariate. Neither ANOVA nor ANCOVA revealed a statistically significant association between patients' participation in the MTC and their self-reported information needs.Conclusion and clinical implicationsAs concerns patients' information needs, findings do not support a general recommendation for or against the participation of patients in their MTCs. Future research should focus on the different ways of patients' participation in their MTCs facilitated at different cancer centres. Further research should also aim to establish which patient and disease characteristics predispose patients to benefit from participating in their MTCs.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE) predicts risk of progression to kidney failure and is used to guide clinical decisions for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS:The KFRE was implemented to guide access to multidisciplinary care for CKD patients in Alberta, Canada, based on their 2-year risk of kidney failure. We used a mixed methods approach to investigate patients' and providers' perspectives and experiences 1 year following KFRE implementation. We conducted post-implementation interviews with multidisciplinary clinic providers and with low-risk patients who transitioned from multidisciplinary to general nephrology care. We also administered pre- and post-implementation patient care experience surveys, targeting both low-risk patients discharged to general nephrology and high-risk patients who remained in the multidisciplinary clinic, and provider job satisfaction surveys. RESULTS:Twenty-seven interviews were conducted (9 patients, 1 family member, 17 providers). Five categories were identified among patients and providers: targeted care; access to resources outside the multidisciplinary clinics; self-efficacy; patient reassurance and reduced stress; and transition process for low-risk patients Two additional categories were identified among providers only: anticipated concerns and job satisfaction. Patients and providers reported that the risk-based approach allowed the clinic to target care to those most likely to experience kidney failure and most likely to benefit from multidisciplinary care. While some participants indicated the risk-based model enhanced the sustainability of the clinics, others expressed concern that care for low-risk patients discharged from multidisciplinary care, or those now considered ineligible, may be inadequate. Overall, 413 patients completed the care experience survey and 73 providers completed the workplace satisfaction survey. The majority of patients were satisfied with their care in both periods with no overall differences. When considering the responses "Always" and "Often" together versus not, there were statistically significant improvements in domains of access to care, caring staff, and safety of care. There were no differences in healthcare providers' job satisfaction following KFRE implementation. CONCLUSIONS:Patients and healthcare providers reported that the risk-based approach improved the focus of the multidisciplinary CKD clinics by targeting patients at highest risk, with survey results suggesting no difference in patient care experience or healthcare provider job satisfaction.

Project description:BackgroundNurse-led monitoring of patients for signs and symptoms associated with documented 'undesirable effects' of medicines has potential to prevent avoidable harm, and optimise prescribing.InterventionThe Adverse Drug Reaction Profile for polypharmacy (ADRe-p) identifies and documents putative adverse effects of medicines commonly prescribed in primary care. Nurses address some problems, before passing ADRe-p to pharmacists and prescribers for review, in conjunction with prescriptions.ObjectivesWe investigated changes in: the number and nature of residents' problems as recorded on ADRe-p; prescription regimens; medicines optimisation: and healthcare costs. We explored aetiologies of problems identified and stakeholders' perspectives.Setting and participantsIn three UK care homes, 19 residents completed the study, December 2018 to May 2019. Two service users, three pharmacists, six nurses gave interviews.MethodsThis mixed-method process evaluation integrated data from residents' ADRe-ps and medicines charts, at the study's start and 5-10 weeks later.ResultsWe recruited three of 27 homes approached and 26 of 45 eligible residents; 19 completed ADRe-p at least twice. Clinical gains were identified for 17/19 residents (mean number of symptoms 3 SD 1.67, range 0-7). Examples included management of: pain (six residents), seizures (three), dyspnoea (one), diarrhoea (laxatives reduced, two), falls (two of five able to stand). One or more medicine was de-prescribed or dose reduced for 12/19 residents. ADRe administration and review cost ~£30 in staff time. ADRe-p helped carers and nurses bring residents' problems to the attention of prescribers.ImplicationsADRe-p relieved unnecessary suffering. It supported carers and nurses by providing a tool to engage with pharmacists and prescribers, and was the only observable strategy for multidisciplinary team working around medicines optimisation. ADRe-p improved care by: a) regular systematic checks and problem documentation; b) information transfer from care home staff to prescribers and pharmacists; c) recording changes.RegistrationNLM Identifier NCT03955133; ClinicalTrials.gov.

Dataset Information

Patient participation in multidisciplinary tumour conferences in breast cancer care (PINTU): a mixed-methods study protocol.

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Ethics and dissemination

Trial registration number

Publications

Patient participation in multidisciplinary tumour conferences in breast cancer care (PINTU): a mixed-methods study protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets