Dataset Information

Parent and Clinician Perspectives on Challenging Parent-Clinician Relationships in Pediatric Oncology.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Parents of children with cancer value strong therapeutic relationships with oncology clinicians, but not every relationship is positive.

Objective

To identify the prevalence of challenging parent-clinician relationships in pediatric oncology and factors associated with these challenges from parent and clinician perspectives.

Design, setting, and participants

This survey was conducted among parents and oncology clinicians of children with cancer within 3 months of diagnosis from November 2015 to July 2019 at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Boston Children's Hospital and Texas Children's Hospital. Participants were 400 parents of children with cancer and 80 clinicians (ie, oncology physicians and nurse practitioners). Parents completed surveys about relationships with 1 to 2 primary oncology clinicians; clinicians completed surveys about relationships with parents. Data were analyzed from July 2020 to August 2021.

Exposures

At least 3 previous clinical visits between parent and clinician.

Main outcomes and measures

The Relationship Challenges Scale Parent Version and Clinician Version were developed and used to measure threats to the therapeutic alliance. For the Relationship Challenges Scale-Parent version, relationships were considered challenging if a parent responded to any single question in the 2 lowest of 4 possible categories. For the Relationship Challenges Scale-Clinician version, challenges were considered to be present if a clinician reported responses in the 3 lowest of 6 possible response categories to any question.

Results

Among 400 parents, there were 298 [74.5%] women, 25 Asian individuals (6.3%), 28 Black individuals (7.0%), 97 Hispanic individuals (24.3%), 223 White individuals (55.8%), and 10 individuals (2.4%) with other race or ethnicity; race and ethnicity data were missing for 17 (4.3%) individuals. Among 80 clinicians, there were 57 (71.3%) women, 38 attending physicians (47.5%), 32 fellows (40.0%), and 10 nurse practitioners (12.5%). Parents identified 676 unique relationships with clinicians, and clinician reports were available for 338 relationships. Among 338 relationships with paired parent and clinician surveys, 81 relationships (24.0%) were considered challenging by parents, 127 relationships (37.6%) were considered challenging by clinicians, and 33 relationships (9.8%) were considered challenging by parent and clinician. Parents with Asian or other race or ethnicity (odds ratio [OR] vs White parents, 3.62; 95% CI, 1.59-8.26) or who had lower educational attainment (OR for ≤high school vs >high school, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.56-5.90) were more likely to experience relationships as challenging. Clinicians used a variety of strategies more frequently in 127 relationships in which they perceived challenges vs 211 relationships in which they did not perceive challenges, such as holding regular family meetings (22 relationships [17.3%] vs 13 relationships [6.2%]; P = .009) and offering extra time and attention (66 relationships [52%] vs 60 relationships [28.4%]; P < .001). However, these strategies were not used with increased frequency when parents experienced relationships as challenging vs when parents did not experience this.

Conclusions and relevance

This survey study found that nearly one-quarter of parents of children with cancer reported challenges in the therapeutic relationship with their oncologist and that clinicians used strategies to improve relationships more frequently when they experienced the relationship as challenging. These findings suggest that new strategies are needed to improve experiences for parents and to help clinicians recognize and attend to parents whose experiences are suboptimal.

SUBMITTER: Mack JW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8600390 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPediatric oncology patients have a high rate of clinical deterioration frequently requiring critical care. Patient deterioration events are distressing for clinicians, but little is known about how Pediatric Early Warning Systems (PEWS) impact clinicians' emotional responses to deterioration events.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 83 nurses, pediatricians, oncologists, and intensive care clinicians who had recently participated in a patient deterioration event at two pediatric oncology hospitals of different resource-levels: St. Jude Children's Research Hospital (N = 42 participants) in Memphis, Tennessee or Unidad Nacional de Oncología Pediátrica (N = 41 participants) in Guatemala City, Guatemala. Interviews were conducted in the participants' native language (English or Spanish), transcribed, and translated into English. Each transcript was coded by two researchers and analyzed for thematic content.ResultsEmotions around patient deterioration including concern, fear, and frustration were reported across all disciplines at both hospitals. Concern was often triggered by an elevated PEWS score and usually resulted in increased attention, which reassured bedside clinicians that patients were receiving necessary interventions. However, persistently elevated PEWS scores, particularly at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, occasionally resulted in a false sense of relief, diminishing clinician attention and negatively impacting patient care. Nurses at both institutions described how PEWS amplified their voices, engendering confidence and empowerment, two of the only positive emotions described in the study.ConclusionClinicians experienced a range of emotions while caring for high-risk patients in the setting of clinical deterioration. These emotions have the potential to contribute to compassion fatigue and burnout, or to resilience. Acknowledgment and further investigation of the complex interplay between PEWS and clinician emotions are necessary to maximize the impact of PEWS on patient safety while simultaneously supporting staff wellbeing.

Project description:PURPOSE:Children with cancer frequently require MRI scans for clinical purposes. Sedation with general anesthesia (GA) is often used to promote compliance, reduce motion, and alleviate anxiety. The use of GA for MRI scans is costly in terms of time, personnel, and medications. In addition, prominent risks are associated with anesthesia exposure in patients with complex medical conditions. Successful behavioral interventions have been implemented in clinical research settings to promote scan success and compliance. To our knowledge, parent/caregiver acceptability of behavioral interventions to promote nonsedated MRI has not been systematically investigated in a medically complex population. As a first step toward developing a protocol-based intervention to promote nonsedated scanning, we conducted a survey to explore parental perspectives regarding acceptability of nonsedated scanning and to gain information regarding preference for specific behavioral interventions to facilitate nonsedated MRI exams. METHODS:Parents or guardians of 101 patients diagnosed with childhood cancer participated in a semi-structured survey via telephone. The sample was stratified by age group (8-12 years; 13-18 years), gender, and diagnosis (solid tumor (ST), brain tumor (BT), and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL)). RESULTS:The majority of parents indicated that nonsedated MRI scans would be acceptable. Reduced anesthesia exposure was the most frequently identified benefit, followed by decreased irritability post-MRI scan, and shorter appointment time. Challenges included fear of movement and noise during scans and change in routine, with parents of younger children and those with a history of sedated exams identifying more challenges. Behavioral intervention preference differed by patient age and gender; however, education was ranked as most preferred overall. CONCLUSION:Parents of children treated for cancer consider behavior interventions to promote nonsedated scanning as acceptable. Patient characteristics should be considered when tailoring behavioral interventions. Results can inform future studies of behavioral interventions to promote nonsedated MRI scans. Future research should also investigate the risks associated with failed exams, both in terms of patient medical care and cost effectiveness.

Project description:BackgroundCommunication serves several functions in pediatric oncology, but communication deficiencies persist. Little is known about the broad spectrum of barriers contributing to these deficiencies. Identifying these barriers will support new strategies to improve communication.MethodsThe authors performed 10 focus groups on perceived communication barriers with nurses, nurse practitioners, physicians, and psychosocial professionals across 2 academic institutions. They analyzed transcripts by adapting a multilevel framework from organizational psychology.ResultsThe authors identified 6 levels of barriers to communication from the clinicians' perspectives: individual, team, organization, collaborating hospital, community, and policy. Individual barriers were subdivided into clinician characteristics, family characteristics, or characteristics of the clinician-family interaction. Within each level and sublevel, several manifestations of barriers were identified. Some barriers, such as a lack of comfort with difficult topics (individual), cultural differences (individual), a lack of a shared team mental model (team), and time pressure (organization), manifested similarly across professions and institutions. Other barriers, such as a need for boundaries (individual), intimidation or embarrassment of family (individual), unclear roles and authority (team), and excessive logistical requirements (policy), manifested differently across professions. With the exception of collaborating hospitals, participants from all professions identified barriers from each level. Physicians did not discuss collaborating hospital barriers.ConclusionsNurses, nurse practitioners, physicians, and psychosocial professionals experience communication barriers at multiple levels, which range from individual- to policy-level barriers. Yet their unique clinical roles and duties can lead to different manifestations of some barriers. This multilevel framework might help clinicians and researchers to identify targets for interventions to improve communication experiences for families in pediatric oncology.Lay summaryClinicians and families experience many barriers to communication in pediatric oncology. The authors performed 10 focus groups with 59 clinicians who cared for children with cancer. In these focus groups, barriers to effective communication were discussed. In this article, the authors report on an analysis of the responses. Six levels of barriers to communication were found: individual, team, organization, collaborating hospital, community, and policy. With an understanding of these barriers, interventions can be developed to target these barriers in hopes of improving communication for parents and patients in pediatric oncology.