Dataset Information

The "Day Zero Talk": the Initial Communication of a Pediatric Oncology Diagnosis by Primary Care Physicians and Other Primary Care Providers.

ABSTRACT: While much is known about the initial communication of a definitive pediatric cancer diagnosis by the child's pediatric oncologist, little is known about the discussions leading up to this formal conversation, which are often had with nononcologists. We sought to describe these initial conversations regarding the possibility of a child's oncologic diagnosis, from the perspective of both the patient/family as well as the provider. Semistructured interviews were performed with individuals involved with a child with recently diagnosed cancer at a quaternary care institution in an urban, mid-Atlantic city. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using qualitative thematic analysis. In total, 71 people were interviewed, representing the experiences of 29 unique pediatric patients. Patient and caregiver themes included recognition of the urgency of the situation and variety of terms used to indicate the potential of cancer. Physician themes included the impact of health literacy on the discussion and varying opinions on how direct to be regarding the possibility of a cancer diagnosis. The initial discussions of the possibility of a pediatric cancer diagnosis often occur with nononcologists, and this day zero talk is critical in laying the groundwork for future communication with providers.

SUBMITTER: Wharton B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9199113 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The "Day Zero Talk": the Initial Communication of a Pediatric Oncology Diagnosis by Primary Care Physicians and Other Primary Care Providers.

Wharton Bernadette B Beeler Dori Michelle DM Cooper Stacy S

Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education 20200918 3

While much is known about the initial communication of a definitive pediatric cancer diagnosis by the child's pediatric oncologist, little is known about the discussions leading up to this formal conversation, which are often had with nononcologists. We sought to describe these initial conversations regarding the possibility of a child's oncologic diagnosis, from the perspective of both the patient/family as well as the provider. Semistructured interviews were performed with individuals involved ...[more]

PMID: 32946047

Similar Datasets

Project description:Patients admitted to general medicine inpatient services are increasingly cared for by hospital-based physicians rather than their primary care providers (PCPs). This separation of hospital and ambulatory care may result in important care discontinuities after discharge. We sought to determine whether communication between hospital-based physicians and PCPs influences patient outcomes.We approached consecutive patients admitted to general medicine services at six US academic centers from July 2001 to June 2003. A random sample of the PCPs for consented patients was contacted 2 weeks after patient discharge and surveyed about communication with the hospital medical team. Responses were linked with the 30-day composite patient outcomes of mortality, hospital readmission, and emergency department (ED) visits obtained through follow-up telephone survey and National Death Index search. We used hierarchical multi-variable logistic regression to model whether communication with the patient's PCP was associated with the 30-day composite outcome.A total of 1,772 PCPs for 2,336 patients were surveyed with 908 PCPs responses and complete patient follow-up available for 1,078 patients. The PCPs for 834 patients (77%) were aware that their patient had been admitted to the hospital. Of these, direct communication between PCPs and inpatient physicians took place for 194 patients (23%), and a discharge summary was available within 2 weeks of discharge for 347 patients (42%). Within 30 days of discharge, 233 (22%) patients died, were readmitted to the hospital, or visited an ED. In adjusted analyses, no relationship was seen between the composite outcome and direct physician communication (adjusted odds ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.56 - 1.34), the presence of a discharge summary (0.84, 95% CI 0.57-1.22), or PCP awareness of the index hospitalization (1.08, 95% CI 0.73-1.59).Analysis of communication between PCPs and inpatient medical teams revealed much room for improvement. Although communication during handoffs of care is important, we were not able to find a relationship between several aspects of communication and associated adverse clinical outcomes in this multi-center patient sample.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Reach Out and Read promotes early literacy and school readiness by incorporating book delivery and anticipatory guidance into well-child visits. There is a need to train future healthcare providers in the knowledge and skills to communicate with parents/caregivers about early childhood literacy. We developed and evaluated a curriculum to improve learners' knowledge, attitudes, and skills towards the incorporation of parent-provider literacy communication into well-child visits. METHODS:Family medicine residents (n = 30), physician assistant students (n = 36), and medical students (n = 28) participated in a curriculum consisting of service learning, online didactic training, objective structured clinical exams (OSCEs) and a debriefing session. Standardized patients (SPs; 6 months to 5 years) and standardized patient caregivers were recruited and trained. Learners were evaluated on their abilities to offer books to patients, provide anticipatory guidance, and demonstrate parent-provider communication skills. Knowledge, attitudes, and satisfaction were collected pre- and post-curriculum. RESULTS:Significant increases in total knowledge were observed after completing curriculum activities (p < 0.001). All attitudes improved after training (p < 0.05). All learners (100%) recommended that caregivers talk back and forth with their 6‑ to 12-month-old babies and make eye contact. Few (18.2%) learners recommended playing games like 'peek-a-boo' while reading. When caregivers evaluated learners' basic parent-provider communication skills, all reported that the learners treated them with respect and used plain language. DISCUSSION:Our curriculum extends beyond previous studies by measuring recommended books, anticipatory guidance, and communication skills using paediatric SPs and standardized patient caregivers. Curriculum activities can be tailored to best promote parent-provider literacy communication training in other programs.

Project description:BackgroundGenomics will play an increasingly prominent role in clinical medicine.ObjectiveTo describe how primary care physicians (PCPs) discuss and make clinical recommendations about genome sequencing results.DesignQualitative analysis.ParticipantsPCPs and their generally healthy patients undergoing genome sequencing.ApproachPatients received clinical genome reports that included four categories of results: monogenic disease risk variants (if present), carrier status, five pharmacogenetics results, and polygenic risk estimates for eight cardiometabolic traits. Patients' office visits with their PCPs were audio-recorded, and summative content analysis was used to describe how PCPs discussed genomic results.Key resultsFor each genomic result discussed in 48 PCP-patient visits, we identified a "take-home" message (recommendation), categorized as continuing current management, further treatment, further evaluation, behavior change, remembering for future care, or sharing with family members. We analyzed how PCPs came to each recommendation by identifying 1) how they described the risk or importance of the given result and 2) the rationale they gave for translating that risk into a specific recommendation. Quantitative analysis showed that continuing current management was the most commonly coded recommendation across results overall (492/749, 66%) and for each individual result type except monogenic disease risk results. Pharmacogenetics was the most common result type to prompt a recommendation to remember for future care (94/119, 79%); carrier status was the most common type prompting a recommendation to share with family members (45/54, 83%); and polygenic results were the most common type prompting a behavior change recommendation (55/58, 95%). One-fifth of recommendation codes associated with monogenic results were for further evaluation (6/24, 25%). Rationales for these recommendations included patient context, family context, and scientific/clinical limitations of sequencing.ConclusionsPCPs distinguish substantive differences among categories of genome sequencing results and use clinical judgment to justify continuing current management in generally healthy patients with genomic results.

Project description:BackgroundIneffective transitions of care continue to be a source of risk for patients. Although there has been widespread implementation of electronic medical record (EMR) systems, little is currently known about hospitalists' and primary care providers' (PCPs) direct communication preferences at discharge using messaging capabilities in a shared EMR system.ObjectiveWe examined how hospitalists and PCPs with a shared EMR prefer to directly communicate at the time of hospital discharge by identifying preferred modes, information prioritization, challenges, facilitators, and proposed solutions.DesignA sequential, explanatory mixed methods study with surveys and semi-structured interviews.ParticipantsThirty-eight academic hospitalists and 63 PCPs working in outpatient clinics in a single safety net hospital system with a shared EMR.Main approachDescriptive statistics were used to analyze survey responses. Interviews were analyzed using immersion/crystallization and a mixture of inductive and deductive thematic analysis.Key resultsPCPs preferred direct communication at discharge through a message within the EMR while hospitalists preferred a message within the EMR and email. Qualitative results identified key themes related to patient care and direct communication: value of direct communication, safety, social determinants of health, and clinical judgment. Both groups prioritized direct communication for high-risk medications, pending and follow-up studies, and high-risk patients that hospitalists were concerned about. Overall, both hospitalists and PCPs reported that ensuring patient safety, flagging patients with social challenges, and expressing concerns about patients based on clinical judgment were key communication priorities.ConclusionsHospitalists and primary care providers report considerable overlap in preferences for direct communication at the time of hospital discharge through a shared EMR. Specifically, both groups reported similar concerns regarding patient safety and continuity during transitions. Direct messaging within the EMR could enable "closed loop" communication that helps ensure safe transitions of care for high-risk patients.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To examine how primary care physicians define placebo concepts, use placebos in clinical practice, and view open-label placebos (OLPs). DESIGN:Semi-structured focus groups that were audio-recorded and content-coded. METHODS:Two focus groups with a total of 15 primary care physicians occurred at medical centres in the New England region of the United States. Prior experience using placebo treatments and attitudes towards open-label placebos were explored. Themes were analysed using an inductive data-driven approach. RESULTS:Physicians displayed a nuanced understanding of placebos and placebo effects in clinical contexts which sometimes focused on relational factors. Some respondents reported that they prescribed treatments with no known pharmacological effect for certain conditions and symptoms ('impure placebos') and that such prescriptions were more common for pain disorders, functional disorders, and medically unexplained symptoms. Opinions about OLP were mixed: Some viewed OLPs favourably or considered them 'harmless'; however, others strongly rejected OLPs as disrespectful to patients. Other issues in relation to OLPs included the following: lack of guidelines, legal and reputational concerns, and the notion that such treatments would run counter to customary medical practice. CONCLUSIONS:A number of physicians reported prescribing impure placebos in clinical care. Although some primary care physicians were resistant to the possibility of recommending OLPs, others regarded OLPs more favourably, viewing them as potential treatments, albeit with restricted potential. Statement of contribution What is already known? Many physicians report prescribing drugs for the purposes of eliciting a placebo effect. Initial evidence for the efficacy of open-label placebos is promising. What does this study add? A more nuanced description of the circumstances under which primary care physicians report placebo prescribing. A qualitative account of physician attitudes about using open-label placebos in clinical practice.

Dataset Information

The "Day Zero Talk": the Initial Communication of a Pediatric Oncology Diagnosis by Primary Care Physicians and Other Primary Care Providers.

Publications

The "Day Zero Talk": the Initial Communication of a Pediatric Oncology Diagnosis by Primary Care Physicians and Other Primary Care Providers.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets