Dataset Information

Oncology patients' experiences in experimental medicine cancer trials: a qualitative study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The study aimed to explore patients' experiences of experimental cancer medicine (ECM) clinical trials.

Design

The study's design was qualitative. Two focus groups with patients were undertaken followed by semistructured interviews, to explore patients' experiences of ECM clinical trials. Interviews and focus groups were audiorecorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

Setting

A regional cancer centre (tertiary care) in North-West England.

Participants

Twelve patients (aged 52-79) participated in one of the two focus groups and 22 patients (aged 42-83) participated in interviews.

Primary outcome measure

Patients' experiences of an ECM trial.

Results

Four main themes were identified from the analysis: decision making, information needs, the experience of trial participation and impact of trial participation. Subthemes are presented in the manuscript.

Conclusion

To make fully informed decisions about trial participation, patients required the simplification of trial information and wanted more information about side effects, their response to trial treatment and the overall trial progress throughout the trial. Patients highlighted the need for improvement for the support provided to their family and friends.

SUBMITTER: Sawyer C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8493921 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Providing patients with unrestricted access to their electronic medical records through patient portals has impacted patient-provider communication and patients' personal health knowledge. However, little is known about how patient portals are used in oncology.The aim of this study was to understand attitudes of the portal's adoption for oncology and to identify the advantages and disadvantages of using the portal to communicate and view medical information.In-depth semistructured interviews were conducted with 60 participants: 35 patients, 13 oncologists, and 12 medical informaticists. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed to identify critical incidents and general attitudes encountered by participants.Two primary themes were discovered: (1) implementation practices influence attitudes, in which the decision-making and execution process of introducing portals throughout the hospital did not include the input of oncologists. Lack of oncologists' involvement led to a lack of knowledge about portal functionality, such as not knowing the time period when test results would be disclosed to patients; (2) perceptions of portals as communication tools varies by user type, meaning that each participant group (patients, oncologists, and medical informaticists) had varied opinions about how the portal should be used to transmit and receive information. Oncologists and medical informaticists had difficulty understanding one another's culture and communication processes in their fields, while patients had preferences for how they would like to receive communication, but it largely depended upon the type of test being disclosed.The majority of patients (54%, 19/35) who participated in this study viewed lab results or scan reports via the portal before being contacted by a clinician. Most were relatively comfortable with this manner of disclosure but still preferred face-to-face or telephone communication. Findings from this study indicate that portal education is needed for both patients and oncologists, especially when portals are implemented across entire health systems since highly specialized areas of medicine may have unique needs and uses. Patient portals in oncology can potentially alter the way diagnoses are delivered and how patients and oncologists communicate. Therefore, communication about the portal should be established during initial consultations so patients can decide whether they want to be informed in such a manner.

Project description:BackgroundClinical Ethics Support Services (CESS) have been established to support healthcare professionals in addressing ethically sensitive issues in clinical practice and, in many countries, they are under development. In the context of growing CESS, exploring how healthcare professionals experience and address clinical ethics issues in their daily practice represents a fundamental step to understand their potential needs. This is even more relevant in the context of extremely sensitive diseases, such as cancer. On this basis, we carried out a qualitative study conducting in-depth semi-structured interviews with stakeholders of a major comprehensive cancer centre in Italy, with the twofold aim of investigating what ethical issues arise in the context of clinical oncology and how they are addressed, as well as stakeholders' expectations about a potential CESS to be implemented within the Institution.MethodsThe study was conducted within the theoretical framework of Grounded Theory. Participants were healthcare professionals and other key stakeholders working within the cancer centre. The semi-structured interview aimed at exploring common ethical aspects of oncology, investigating stakeholders' professional experience in dealing with clinical ethics issues, their expectations and requests regarding ethics support services. Transcripts of the interviews were coded and analysed according to the principles of Grounded Theory.ResultsTwenty-one stakeholders were interviewed. Our analysis showed a wide consensus on the identification of ethically relevant issues, above all those concerning communication, end-of-life, and resource allocation. The absence of institutional tools or strategies to address and manage ethical issues at the patient bedside emerged, and this is reflected in the widespread request for their development in the future. The ideal support service should be fast and flexible in order to adapt to different needs and clinical cases.ConclusionsThe interviewees showed a limited degree of 'ethical awareness': despite having reported many issues in clinical practice, they could hardly identify and describe the ethical aspects, while complaining about a lack of ethical resources in their management. To build a truly effective support service, it therefore seems appropriate to take such context into consideration and address the emerged needs. Ethical sensitivity seems to be key and it becomes even more relevant in critical clinical areas, such as the therapeutic pathways of terminally ill patients.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Evidence-based medicine is the integration of individual clinical expertise, best external evidence and patient values which was introduced more than two decades ago. Yet, primary care physicians in Malaysia face unique barriers in accessing scientific literature and applying it to their clinical practice. AIM:This study aimed to explore the views and experiences of rural doctors' about evidence-based medicine in their daily clinical practice in a rural primary care setting. METHODS:Qualitative methodology was used. The interviews were conducted in June 2013 in two rural health clinics in Malaysia. The participants were recruited using purposive sampling. Four focus group discussions with 15 medical officers and three individual in-depth interviews with family medicine specialists were carried out. All interviews were conducted using a topic guide and were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, checked and analyzed using a thematic approach. RESULTS:Key themes identified were: (1) doctors viewed evidence-based medicine mainly as statistics, research and guidelines, (2) reactions to evidence-based medicine were largely negative, (3) doctors relied on specialists, peers, guidelines and non-evidence based internet sources for information, (4) information sources were accessed using novel methods such as mobile applications and (5) there are several barriers to evidence-based practice, including doctor-, evidence-based medicine-, patient- and system-related factors. These included inadequacies in knowledge, attitude, management support, time and access to evidence-based information sources. Participants recommended the use of online services to support evidence-based practice in the rural settings. CONCLUSION:The level of evidence-based practice is low in the rural setting due to poor awareness, knowledge, attitude and resources. Doctors use non-evidence based sources and access them through new methods such as messaging applications. Further research is recommended to develop and evaluate interventions to overcome the identified barriers.

Project description:Rationale & objectiveCommunity house hemodialysis is a submodality of home hemodialysis that enables patients to perform hemodialysis independent of nursing or medical supervision in a shared house. This study describes the perspectives and experiences of patients using community house hemodialysis in New Zealand to explore ways this dialysis modality may support the wider delivery of independent hemodialysis care.Study designQualitative semi-structured in-depth interview study.Setting & participants25 patients who had experienced community house hemodialysis. Participants were asked about why they chose community house hemodialysis and their experiences and perspectives of this.Analytical approachThematic analysis using an inductive approach.Results25 patients were interviewed (14 men and 11 women, aged 31-65 years). Most were of Māori or Pacific ethnicity and in part- or full-time employment. More than two-thirds dialyzed for 20 hours a week or more. We identified 4 themes that described patients' experiences and perspectives of choosing and using community house hemodialysis: reducing burden on family (when home is not an option, minimizing family exposure to dialysis, maintaining privacy and self-identity, reducing the costs of home hemodialysis, and gaining a reprieve from home), offering flexibility and freedom (having a normal life, maintaining employment, and facilitating travel), control of my health (building independence and self-efficacy, a place of wellness, avoiding institutionalization, and creating a culture of extended-hour dialysis), and community support (building social inclusion and supporting peers).LimitationsNon-Māori and non-Pacific patient experiences of community house hemodialysis could not be explored.ConclusionsCommunity house hemodialysis is a dialysis modality that overcomes many of the socioeconomic barriers to home hemodialysis, is socially and culturally acceptable to Māori and Pacific people, and supports extended-hour hemodialysis and thereby promotes more equitable access to best practice services. It is therefore a significant addition to independent hemodialysis options available for patients.

Project description:BackgroundFundamental to the success of clinical research that involves human participants is the quality of the data that is generated. To ensure data quality, clinical trials must comply with the Good Clinical Practice guideline which recommends data monitoring. To date, the guideline is broad, requires technology for enforcement, follows strict industry standards, mostly designed for drug-registration trials and based on informal consensus. It is also unknown what challenges clinical trials and researchers face in implementing data monitoring procedures. Thus, this study aimed to describe researcher experiences with data quality monitoring in clinical trials.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured telephone interviews following a guided-phenomenological approach. Participants were recruited from the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry and were researchers affiliated with a listed clinical study. Each transcript was analysed with inductive thematic analysis before thematic categorisation of themes from all transcripts. Primary, secondary and subthemes were categorised according to the emerging relationships.ResultsData saturation were reached after interviewing seven participants. Five primary themes, two secondary themes and 21 subthemes in relation to data quality monitoring emerged from the data. The five primary themes included: education and training, ways of working, working with technology, working with data, and working within regulatory requirements. The primary theme 'education and training' influenced the other four primary themes. While 'working with technology' influenced the 'way of working'. All other themes had reciprocal relationships. There was no relationship reported between 'working within regulatory requirements' and 'working with technology'. The researchers experienced challenges in meeting regulatory requirements, using technology and fostering working relationships for data quality monitoring.ConclusionClinical trials implemented a variety of data quality monitoring procedures tailored to their situation and study context. Standardised frameworks that are accessible to all types of clinical trials are needed with an emphasis on education and training.