Dataset Information

Associations of Caregiver-Oncologist Discordance in Prognostic Understanding With Caregiver-Reported Therapeutic Alliance and Anxiety.

ABSTRACT:

Context

Discordance in prognostic understanding between caregivers of adults with advanced cancer and the oncologist may shape caregivers' views of the oncologist and bereavement outcomes.

Objectives

We examined prospective associations of caregiver-oncologist discordance with caregiver-oncologist therapeutic alliance and caregiver anxiety after patient death.

Methods

We conducted a secondary analysis of data collected in a cluster randomized controlled trial from August 2012 to June 2014 in Western New York and California. At enrollment, caregivers and oncologists used a seven-point scale to rate their beliefs about the patient's curability and living two years or more: 100%, about 90%, about 75%, about 50 of 50, about 25%, about 10%, and 0%. Discordance was defined as a difference of two points or more. Outcomes at seven months after patient death included caregiver-oncologist therapeutic alliance (The Human Connection scale, modified into five items) and caregiver anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7). We conducted multivariable linear regression models to assess the independent associations of discordance with alliance and anxiety.

Results

We included 97 caregivers (mean age 63) and 38 oncologists; 41% of caregiver-oncologist dyads had discordant beliefs about the patient's curability, and 63% of caregiver-oncologist dyads had discordant beliefs about living two years or more. On multivariate analysis, discordance in beliefs about curability was associated with lower anxiety (β = -2.20; SE 0.77; P = 0.005). Discordance in beliefs about length of life was associated with a weaker alliance (β = -5.87; SE = 2.56; P = 0.02).

Conclusion

A better understanding of how caregivers understand and come to terms with poor prognoses will guide interventions to improve cancer care delivery and outcomes of cancer treatment.

SUBMITTER: Loh KP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7311277 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCaregivers of adults with cancer often report a different understanding of the patient's prognosis than the oncologist. We examine the associations of caregiver-oncologist prognostic concordance with caregiver depressive symptoms, distress, and quality of life (QoL). We also explore whether these relationships differed by caregiver environment mastery, an individual's sense of control, and effectiveness in managing life situations.Materials and methodsWe used data from a national geriatric assessment cluster-randomized trial (URCC 13070) that recruited patients aged 70 years and older with incurable cancer considering any line of cancer treatment at community oncology practices, their caregivers, and their oncologists. At enrollment, caregivers and oncologists estimated the patient's prognosis (0-6 months, 7-12 months, 1-2 years, 2-5 years, and >5 years; identical responses were concordant). Caregivers completed the Ryff's environmental mastery at enrollment. At 4-6 weeks, caregivers completed the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (depressive symptoms), distress thermometer, and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (quality of life [QoL]). We used generalized estimating equations in models adjusted for covariates. We then assessed the moderation effect of caregiver mastery.ResultsOf 411 caregiver-oncologist dyads (mean age = 66.5 years), 369 provided responses and 28% were concordant. Prognostic concordance was associated with greater caregiver depressive symptoms (β = 0.30; p = .04) but not distress or QoL. A significant moderation effect for caregiver depressive symptoms was found between concordance and mastery (p = .01). Specifically, among caregivers with low mastery (below median), concordance was associated with greater depressive symptoms (β = 0.68; p = .003).ConclusionsCaregiver-oncologist prognostic concordance was associated with caregiver depressive symptoms. We found a novel moderating effect of caregiver mastery on the relationship between concordance and caregiver depressive symptoms.Implications for practiceCaregiver-oncologist prognostic concordance is associated with greater caregiver depressive symptoms, particularly in those with low caregiver mastery. When discussing prognosis with caregivers, physicians should be aware that prognostic understanding may affect caregiver psychological health and should assess their depressive symptoms. In addition, while promoting accurate prognostic understanding, physicians should also identify strengths and build resilience among caregivers.

Project description:ImportanceThe patient-clinician therapeutic alliance is an important aspect of high-quality cancer care. However, components of the therapeutic alliance in adolescents and young adults (AYAs, aged 12-39 years) with cancer have not been defined.ObjectiveTo identify components of and barriers to the therapeutic alliance between AYAs, caregivers, and clinicians from the perspective of all key stakeholders.Design, setting, and participantsIn this qualitative study, semistructured in-depth interviews with patients, caregivers, and clinicians were conducted from 2018 to 2021 with no additional follow-up, with content analysis of resulting transcripts. Participants were recruited from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, and an online cancer support community (Cactus Cancer Society). Eligible participants were English- or Spanish-speaking. Eligible patients were aged 12 to 39 years with stage IV or recurrent cancer. Eligible caregivers cared for an AYA living with advanced cancer or one who had died within 5 years. Eligible clinicians routinely provided care for AYAs with cancer.Main outcomes and measuresPerspectives on therapeutic alliance.ResultsInterviews were conducted with 80 participants: 23 were patients (48% were female; 78% were White), 28 were caregivers (82% were female; 50% were White), and 29 were clinicians (69% were female; 45% were White). The mean (SD) age of patients was 29 (7.3) years. Interviews identified 6 components of therapeutic alliance: (1) compassion; (2) sense of connection; (3) clinician presence; (4) information sharing; (5) shared goals; and (6) individualization of care. While some domains were represented in prior models of therapeutic alliance, a unique domain was identified related to the need for individualization of the approach to care for AYA patients and their caregivers. Interviews also identified potential barriers to building the therapeutic alliance specific to the AYA population, including managing discordant needs between patients and caregivers and communication challenges at the end of life.Conclusions and relevanceThis study identified core components and barriers to building therapeutic alliance in the AYA advanced cancer population from the perspective of all the key stakeholders in the relationship. A novel component highlighting the need for individualization was identified. This model enables a deeper understanding of how to build therapeutic alliance in the AYA advanced cancer population, which may guide clinician training and facilitate improved care for this vulnerable population.

Project description:BackgroundPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) can be used to monitor patients during treatment. Healthcare provider preferences for individualized vs. standardized PROs have been understudied.MethodsThis study surveyed oncology and mental health providers to compare attitudes towards individualized and standardized PROs. We have developed a method for individualizing PROs, called precision PROs, and the survey specifically assessed preferences for this method. We compared attitudes and preferences by provider type and by whether respondents were current or never users of PROs.ResultsOncology providers expressed more positive attitudes for standardized PROs in treatment planning compared to mental health providers (F(1,440) = 5.978, p = 0.015). The interaction between provider type (oncology vs. mental health) and type of PRO (individualized vs. standardized) was not significant for the attitudes about the clinical utility of PROs (p = 0.709). When directly asked about the precision PRO approach, oncologists were less likely to prefer standardized items (OR = 0.478, p = 0.001) or have no preference (OR = 0.445, p = 0.007) to the precision PRO approach when compared to mental health providers. Qualitative analyses suggested standardized PROs may be simpler or easier to understand whereas individualized PROs better capture patient variability and the unique aspects of each patient's condition. Some mental health providers expressed reticence about letting patients choose how to tailor PROs. Never users of PROs reported more positive attitudes towards individualized measures than standardized measures whereas current users of PROs did not have a difference in attitudes (p = 0.010). User status was mostly unrelated to preferences.ConclusionResults suggest that healthcare provider preference for individualized PROs may differ by medical specialty. How PROs are tailored may need to differ by discipline. This is particularly important given that previous research showing a preference for individualized PROs over standardized was conducted with psychotherapists. Further research on patient preferences for individualized and standardized PROs is warranted as is research on the clinical utility of individualized PROs such as the precision PRO approach.