Dataset Information

The development of PROmunication: a training-tool for clinicians using patient-reported outcomes to promote patient-centred communication in clinical cancer settings.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The value of using real-time patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in cancer communication has gained attention both in the clinic and in research. Despite this, no internationally accepted guidelines or training programs for clinicians on how to engage in patient-centred communication based on PROs exist. Lack of training may complicate implementation and systematic use of PROs in the clinic. We aimed to develop a short and feasible manual and training session in PRO-based dialogue rooted in patient-centred communication, coined PROmunication. METHODS:PROmunication was implemented in two studies using PROs in different clinical cancer settings. We interviewed clinicians twice during the development phase. First, adopting a clinical perspective, they provided ideas for content, length and structure of the training session and the manual. Second, they approved the draft of the manual with minor adjustments on how to document clinician-patient communication. The final version of the PROmunication tool was built on clinicians' input, theory on patient-centred communication, a literature review, and didactic considerations. RESULTS:The one-page manual gave clinicians a brief and clear overview of how to prepare for, undergo and document a PRO-based consultation. Illustrations and verbal phrases were offered to operationalize and facilitate patient-centred communication. The training session included elements like evidence-based knowledge about the rationale, benefits and challenges of using PROs and comprised theory, experimental training and instructions for the use of the manual in clinical practice. Ad hoc training and feedback in the clinic followed the training session. CONCLUSIONS:This paper presents the development of a short, theory-driven manual and training session intended to support and engage clinicians in PRO-based dialogue leading to patient-centred communication. Further testing of the tool is necessary and adjustments may be required if the PROmunication tool should be applied in other clinical settings were patients are seen regularly. An evaluation of the tool is planned to be performed in future studies. Training in PROmunication may further systematic and consistent use of PRO data in the consultation, leading to patient-centred consultations and increased patient involvement.

SUBMITTER: Skovlund PC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7013008 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The development of PROmunication: a training-tool for clinicians using patient-reported outcomes to promote patient-centred communication in clinical cancer settings.

Skovlund Pernille C PC Ravn Sissel S Seibaek Lene L Thaysen Henriette Vind HV Lomborg Kirsten K Nielsen Berit Kjærside BK

Journal of patient-reported outcomes 20200211 1

<h4>Background</h4>The value of using real-time patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in cancer communication has gained attention both in the clinic and in research. Despite this, no internationally accepted guidelines or training programs for clinicians on how to engage in patient-centred communication based on PROs exist. Lack of training may complicate implementation and systematic use of PROs in the clinic. We aimed to develop a short and feasible manual and training session in PRO-based ...[more]

PMID: 32048085

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The benefits of electronic patient reported outcomes (PRO) questionnaires have been demonstrated in many settings, including in hospitals and patient homes. However, it remains to be investigated how melanoma patients and their treating clinicians experience the electronic self-reporting of side effects and the derived communication. OBJECTIVE:The primary objective of this study was to examine patients' and clinicians' experiences with an eHealth intervention for weekly monitoring of side effects during treatment with immunotherapy. METHODS:An eHealth intervention based on questions from the PRO-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) library was used and tested in a randomized clinical trial with patients receiving immunotherapy for malignant melanoma and clinicians at a university hospital in Denmark. On a weekly basis, patients reported their symptoms from home during the treatment via a provided tablet. The electronic patient reports were available to clinicians in the outpatient clinic. A mixed methods approach was applied to investigate the patients' and clinicians' experiences with the intervention. Data from patient experiences were collected in a short survey, the Patient Feedback Form. Moreover, a subset of the patients participating in the survey was interviewed about their experience. Furthermore, one focus group interview with clinicians was carried out to elucidate their views. RESULTS:A total of 57 patients completed the Patient Feedback Form, and 14 patients were interviewed. The focus group interview included 5 clinicians. Overall, patients and clinicians were satisfied with the tool. They believed it enhanced patients' awareness of side effects and increased their feeling of involvement. The patients reported that it was easy to fill out the questionnaire and that it made sense to do so. However, a minority of the patients expressed in the interviews that they did not believe that the health care professionals had seen their reports when they came to the clinic, and that the reporting did not lead to increased contact with the department. CONCLUSIONS:Overall, satisfaction with the eHealth intervention was high among patients and their treating clinicians. The tool was easy to use and contributed to greater symptom awareness and patient involvement. Thus, in terms of patient and clinician satisfaction with the tool, it makes sense to continue using the tool beyond the project period. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03073031; https://tinyurl.com/tjx3gtu.

Project description:BackgroundPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) (eg, symptoms, functioning) can inform patient management. However, patients and clinicians often have difficulty interpreting score meaning. The authors tested approaches for presenting PRO data to improve interpretability.MethodsThis mixed-methods study included an Internet survey of cancer patients/survivors, oncology clinicians, and PRO researchers circulated via snowball sampling, plus individual in-person interviews. Clinical importance was conveyed using 3 approaches (presented in random order): normal score range shaded green, concerning scores circled in red, and red threshold lines indicating normal versus concerning scores. Versions also tested 2 approaches to score directionality: higher = more (better for function, worse for symptoms) and higher = better for both function and symptoms. Qualitative data from online comments and in-person interviews supplemented quantitative results on interpretation accuracy, clarity, and the "most useful" format.ResultsThe survey included 1113 respondents: 627 survivors, 236 clinicians, and 250 researchers, plus 10 patients and 10 clinicians who were purposively sampled interviewees. Interpretation accuracy ranged from 53% to 100%. The formats in which higher = better were interpreted more accurately versus those in which higher = more (odds ratio [OR], 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-1.58) and were more likely to be rated "very"/"somewhat" clear (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.13-1.70) and "very" clear (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.18-1.58). Red circle formats were interpreted more accurately than green-shaded formats when the first format presented (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.00-1.65). Threshold-line formats were more likely to be rated "very" clear than green-shaded (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.19-1.71) and red-circled (OR, 1.22, 95% CI, 1.02-1.46) formats. Threshold lines were most often selected as "most useful."ConclusionsThe current results support presenting PRO data with higher = better directionality and threshold lines indicating normal versus concerning scores. Cancer 2017;123:1848-1859. © 2017 The Authors. Cancer published byWiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations aremade.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Communication impairment is a frequent consequence of stroke. Patients who cannot articulate their needs respond with frustration and agitation, resulting in poor optimization of post-stroke functions. A key component of patient-centred care is the ability of staff to communicate in a way that allows them to understand the patient's needs. We developed a patient-centred communication intervention targeting registered and unregulated nursing staff caring for complex continuing care patients with communication impairments post stroke. Research objectives include 1) examining the effects of the intervention on patients' quality of life, depression, satisfaction with care, and agitation; and (2) examining the extent to which the intervention improves staff's attitudes and knowledge in caring for patients with communication impairments. The intervention builds on a previous pilot study. METHODS/DESIGN:A quasi-experimental repeated measures non-equivalent control group design in a complex continuing care facility is being used. Patients with a communication impairment post-stroke admitted to the facility are eligible to participate. All staff nurses are eligible. Baseline data are collected from staff and patients. Follow-up will occur at 1 and 3 months post-intervention. Subject recruitment and data collection from 60 patients and 30 staff will take approximately 36 months. The Patient-Centred Communication Intervention consists of three components: (1) development of an individualized patient communication care plan; (2) a one-day workshop focused on communication and behavioural management strategies for nursing staff; and (3) a staff support system. The intervention takes comprehensive patient assessments into account to inform the development of communication and behavioural strategies specifically tailored to each patient. DISCUSSION:The Patient-Centred Communication Intervention will provide staff with strategies to facilitate interactions with patients and to minimize agitation associated with considerable stress. The improvement of these interactions will lead to a reduction of agitation, which has the additional significance of increasing patients' well-being, quality of life, and satisfaction with care. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01654029.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Patient-centered care (PCC) is one approach for ameliorating persistent gendered disparities in health care quality, yet no prior research has studied how to achieve patient-centred care for women (PCCW). The purpose of this study was to explore how clinicians deliver PCCW, challenges they face, and the strategies they suggest are needed to support PCCW. METHODS:We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews (25-60?min) with clinicians. Thirty-seven clinicians representing 7 specialties (family physicians, cardiologists, cardiac surgeons, obstetricians/gynecologist, psychiatrists, nurses, social workers) who manage depression (n?=?16), cardiovascular disease (n?=?11) and contraceptive counseling (n?=?10), conditions that affect women across the lifespan. We used constant comparative analysis to inductively analyze transcripts, mapped themes to a 6-domain PCC conceptual framework to interpret findings, and complied with qualitative research reporting standards. RESULTS:Clinicians said that women don't always communicate their health concerns and physicians sometimes disregard women's health concerns, warranting unique PCC approaches.. Clinicians described 39 approaches they used to tailor PCC for women across 6 PCC domains: foster a healing relationship, exchange information, address emotions/concerns, manage uncertainty, make decisions, and enable self-management. Additional conditions that facilitated PCCW were: privacy, access to female clinicians, accommodating children through onsite facilities, and flexible appointment formats and schedules. Clinicians suggested 7 strategies needed to address barriers of PCCW they identified at the: patient-level (online appointments, transport to health services, use of patient partners to plan and/or deliver services), clinician-level (medical training and continuing professional development in PCC and women's health), and system-level (funding models for longer appointment times, multidisciplinary teamwork to address all PCC domains). CONCLUSIONS:Our research revealed numerous strategies that clinicians can use to optimize PCCW, and health care managers and policy-makers can use to support PCCW through programs and policies. Identified strategies addressed all domains of an established PCC conceptual framework. Future research should evaluate the implementation and impact of these strategies on relevant outcomes such as perceived PCC among women and associated clinical outcomes to prepare for broad scale-up.

Dataset Information

The development of PROmunication: a training-tool for clinicians using patient-reported outcomes to promote patient-centred communication in clinical cancer settings.

Publications

The development of PROmunication: a training-tool for clinicians using patient-reported outcomes to promote patient-centred communication in clinical cancer settings.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets