Promoting Patient and Caregiver Engagement to Care in Cancer.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Saita E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5079095 | biostudies-other | 2016
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Publications
Promoting Patient and Caregiver Engagement to Care in Cancer.
Saita Emanuela E Acquati Chiara C Molgora Sara S
Frontiers in psychology 20161025
The positive outcomes associated with Patient Engagement (PE) have been strongly supported by the recent literature. However, this concept has been marginally addressed in the context of cancer. Limited attention has also received the role of informal caregivers in promoting physical and psychological well-being of patients, as well as the interdependence of dyads. The Cancer Dyads Group Intervention (CDGI) is a couple-based psychosocial intervention developed to promote engagement in management ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background: A national priority in the United States is to promote patient engagement in cancer genomics research, especially among diverse and understudied populations. Several cancer genomics research programs have emerged to accomplish this priority, yet questions remain about the meaning and methods of patient engagement. This study explored how cancer genomics research programs define engagement and what strategies they use to engage patients across stages in the conduct of research. Methods: An environmental scan was conducted of cancer genomics research programs focused on patient engagement. Research programs were identified and characterized using materials identified from publicly available sources (e.g., websites), a targeted literature review, and interviews with key informants. Descriptive information about the programs and their definitions of engagement, were synthesized using thematic analysis. The engagement strategies were synthesized and mapped to different stages in the conduct of research, including recruitment, consent, data collection, sharing results, and retention. Results: Ten research programs were identified, examples of which include the Cancer Moonshot Biobank, the MyPART Network, NCI-CONNECT, and the Participant Engagement and Cancer Genome Sequencing (PE-CGS) Network. All programs aimed to include understudied or underrepresented populations. Based on publicly available information, four programs explicitly defined engagement. These definitions similarly characterized engagement as being interpersonal, reciprocal, and continuous. Five general strategies of engagement were identified across the programs: 1) digital (such as websites) and 2) non-digital communications (such as radio broadcasts, or printed brochures); 3) partnering with community organizations; 4) providing incentives; and 5) affiliating with non-academic medical centers. Digital communications were the only strategy used across all stages of the conduct of research. Programs tailored these strategies to their study goals, including overcoming barriers to research participation among diverse populations. Conclusion: Programs studying cancer genomics are deeply committed to increasing research participation among diverse populations through patient engagement. Yet, the field needs to reach a consensus on the meaning of patient engagement, develop a taxonomy of patient engagement measures in cancer genomics research, and identify optimal strategies to engage patients in cancer genomics. Addressing these needs could enable patient engagement to fulfill its potential and accelerate the pace of cancer genomic discoveries.
| S-EPMC9889863 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionImproving health services integration through primary health care (PHC) teams for patients with chronic conditions is essential to address their complex health needs and facilitate better health outcomes. The objective of this study was to explore if and how patients, family members, and caregivers were engaged or wanted to be engaged in developing, implementing and evaluating health policies related to PHC teams. This patient-oriented research was carried out in three provinces across Canada: British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario.MethodsA total of 29 semi-structured interviews with patients were conducted across the three provinces and data were analysed using thematic analysis.ResultsThree key themes were identified: motivation for policy engagement, experiences with policy engagement and barriers to engagement in policy. The majority of participants in the study wanted to be engaged in policy processes and advocate for integrated care through PHC teams. Barriers to patient engagement in policy, such as lack of opportunities for engagement, power imbalances, tokenism, lack of accessibility of engagement opportunities and experiences of racism and discrimination were also identified.ConclusionThis study increases the understanding of patient, family member, and caregiver engagement in policy related to PHC team integration and the barriers that currently exist in this engagement process. This information can be used to guide decision-makers on how to improve the delivery of integrated health services through PHC teams and enhance patient, family member, and caregiver engagement in PHC policy.Patient or public contributionWe would like to acknowledge the contributions of our patient partners, Brenda Jagroop and Judy Birdsell, who assisted with developing and pilot testing the interview guide. Judy Birdsell also assisted with the preparation of this manuscript. This study also engaged patients, family members, and caregivers to share their experiences with engagement in PHC policy.
| S-EPMC9327874 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study examined the differences of opinion between cancer patients and caregivers with regard to treatment and care decisions. 184 advanced lung cancer patients and 171 primary caregivers were recruited as a convenience sample from hospitals in Cleveland, Ohio. A telephone interview was conducted to collect data using a semi-structured questionnaire. Nonparametric tests and regression analysis were performed. The findings showed that patients and caregivers reported significant disagreement on three main issues: trade-off between treatment side effects and benefits; reporting treatment side effects to physicians, and hospice care. Caregivers were more concerned about patient's quality of life and more willing to discuss hospice issues than were patients (p < or = 01). Perceived family disagreement is associated with depression in both patients and caregivers (p < or = 01; R(2)=8%). The study provided empirical evidence for patient-caregiver disagreement about treatment and care decisions and its significant adverse impact on both patients and caregivers.
| S-EPMC2840198 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealthcare policies have focused on centralizing care to high-volume centers in an effort to optimize patient outcomes; however, little is known about patients' and caregivers' considerations and selection process when selecting hospitals for care. We aim to explore how patients and caregivers select hospitals for complex cancer care and to develop a taxonomy for their selection considerations.MethodsThis was a qualitative study in which data were gathered from in-depth interviews conducted from March to November 2019 among patients with hepatopancreatobiliary cancers who were scheduled to undergo a pancreatectomy (n = 20) at a metropolitan, urban regional, or suburban medical center and their caregivers (n = 10).ResultsThe interviews revealed six broad domains that characterized hospital selection considerations: hospital factors, team characteristics, travel distance to hospital, referral or recommendation, continuity of care, and insurance considerations. The identified domains were similar between participants seen at the metropolitan center and urban/suburban medical centers, with the following exceptions: participants receiving care specifically at the metropolitan center noted operative volume and access to specific services such as clinical trials in their hospital selection; participants receiving care at urban/suburban centers noted health insurance considerations and having access to existing medical records in their hospital selection.ConclusionsThis study delineates the many considerations of patients and caregivers when selecting hospitals for complex cancer care. These identified domains should be incorporated into the development and implementation of centralization policies to help increase patient access to high-quality cancer care that is consistent with their priorities and needs.
| S-EPMC9123936 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In surveys and in research, proxies such as family members may be used to assess patient health-related quality of life. The aim of this research is to help cancer researchers select a validated health-related quality of life tool if they anticipate using proxy-reported data.Systematic review and methodological appraisal of studies examining the concordance of paired adult cancer patient and proxy responses for multidimensional, validated HRQOL tools. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO and perused bibliographies of reviewed papers. We reviewed concordance assessment methods, results, and associated factors for each validated tool.A total of 32 papers reporting on 29 study populations were included. Most papers were cross-sectional (N = 20) and used disease-specific tools (N = 19), primarily the FACT and EORTC. Patient and proxy mean scores were similar on average for tools and scales, with most mean differences <10 points but large standard deviations. Average ICCs for the FACT and EORTC ranged from 0.35 to 0.62, depending on the scale. Few papers (N = 15) evaluated factors associated with concordance, and results and measurement approaches were inconsistent. The EORTC was the most commonly evaluated disease-specific tool (N = 5 papers). For generic tools, both concordance and associated factor information was most commonly available for the COOP/WONCA (N = 3 papers). The MQOL was the most frequently evaluated end-of-life tool (N = 3 papers).Proxy and patient scores are similar on average, but there is large, clinically important residual variability. The evidence base is strongest for the EORTC (disease-specific tools), COOP/WONCA (generic tools), and MQOL (end-of-life-specific tools).
| S-EPMC5571651 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundSince the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, virtual care solutions have been rapidly adopted across the country to provide safe, quality care to diverse patient populations. The objective of this qualitative case study was to understand patient and caregiver experiences of virtual care to identify barriers and gather suggestions to address them.MethodsIn this patient-oriented project, we sought to understand gaps in virtual care experienced by patients and caregivers, using virtual focus groups. With the assistance of a patient research liaison, we engaged 2 patient partners as full partners; they participated in study conception, data collection, data analysis and knowledge translation. Recruitment was done through email by disseminating the study poster to 30 community organizations and health units in Ontario and British Columbia. We conducted a constructivist, qualitative study guided by grounded theory methodology. One researcher employed in-vivo coding, followed by axial coding with focus group participants, followed by selective coding with the study team. The study took place from November to December 2020.ResultsWe conducted 6 focus groups with 13 patients and 5 caregivers. The analysis resulted in 6 major themes and 17 minor themes. Key findings showed that barriers related to access to technology and Internet, language and cultural differences were challenges to virtual care. Participants identified special considerations surrounding caregiver and family involvement; privacy, consent and confidentiality; and the patient-physician relationship. Participants suggested that technology and the Internet be universally accessible and that virtual care modalities be integrated (e.g., consolidated patient portal) to improve virtual care.InterpretationThere are multiple patient-identified barriers to accessing virtual care in Canada; patients can provide insights into ways to address these barriers. Future research should include robust patient engagement to explore ways to address these challenges and barriers to ensure that virtual care can be equitable, accessible and safe for all users.Plain language summaryAlthough virtual care has been rapidly adopted and scaled up in health care institutions across the country, few improvements informed by patient and caregiver experiences have been made. Driven by concerns expressed by patient partners, our study team undertook a patient-partnered qualitative study to understand the barriers of virtual care from the perspectives and experiences of patients and caregivers. Our study team created the interview guide drawing from our previous patient-oriented qualitative studies and designed an orientation package to provide resources related to the focus groups and to introduce participants to the study team. Drawing from local health teams, clinics and patient advisory groups, the study team recruited 13 patients and 5 caregivers to participate in 6 focus group interviews. An analysis based on grounded theory was undertaken, with participation from both the study team and participants. Lack of access to technology or Internet and language barriers were determined to be the primary challenges in virtual care. Special considerations to caregiver and family involvement, privacy and confidentiality, as well as the patient-physician relationship were considered priorities to improving access to virtual care. Participants offered recommendations and potential solutions to address barriers and challenges in virtual care, which can serve to encourage large-scale policy and programmatic changes in patient-centred ways.
| S-EPMC8896530 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundChinese medicine (CM) modalities, including acupuncture and Chinese herbal medicine (CHM), are popular palliative interventions among patients with cancer, but further clinical research is required to assess their effectiveness and safety.ObjectiveTo prioritize top ten important CM clinical research questions from patients with cancer, cancer survivors and caregivers' perspectives via a face-to-face prioritization workshop in Hong Kong.MethodsA list of 25 CM clinical research questions for cancer palliative care, which were identified from existing systematic reviews (SRs) and overview of SRs, was presented to 17 participants (patients with cancer [n = 5], cancer survivors [n = 6] and caregivers [n = 6]). The participants were then invited to establish consensus on prioritizing top ten research questions.ResultsAmong the top ten priorities, five (50%) focused on acupuncture and related therapies, while five (50%) were on CHM. The three most important research priorities were (i) manual acupuncture plus opioids for relieving pain; (ii) CHM for improving quality of life among patients receiving chemotherapy; and (iii) concurrent use of CHM plus loperamide for reducing stomatitis.ConclusionThe top ten participant-endorsed CM clinical research priorities for cancer palliative care can guide local researchers on future direction. They can also inform local research funders on patient-centred allocation of limited funding. Under limited research funding, the most important co-prioritized research question from professional and patient perspectives may be addressed first.Patient or public contributionPatients with cancer, cancer survivors and caregivers participated in conduct of the study to prioritize CM clinical research questions.
| S-EPMC8369121 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEstablishing care preferences and selecting a prepared medical decision-maker (MDM) are basic components of advance care planning (ACP) and integral to treatment planning. Systematic ACP in the cancer setting is uncommon. We evaluated a systematic social work (SW)-driven process for patient selection of a prepared MDM.MethodsWe used a pre/post design, centered on SW counseling incorporated into standard-of-care practice. New patients with gynecologic malignancies were eligible if they had an available family caregiver or an established Medical Power of Attorney (MPOA). Questionnaires were completed at baseline and 3 months to ascertain MPOA document (MPOAD) completion status (primary objective) and evaluate factors associated with MPOAD completion (secondary objectives).ResultsThree hundred and sixty patient/caregiver dyads consented to participate. One hundred and sixteen (32%) had MPOADs at baseline. Twenty (8%) of the remaining 244 dyads completed MPOADs by 3 months. Two hundred and thirty-six patients completed the values and goals survey at both baseline and follow-up: at follow-up, care preferences were stable in 127 patients (54%), changed toward more aggressive care in 60 (25%), and toward the focus on the quality of life in 49 (21%). Correlation between the patient's values and goals and their caregiver's/MPOA's perception was very weak at baseline, improving to moderate at follow-up. Patients with MPOADs by study completion had statistically significant higher ACP Engagement scores than those without.ConclusionA systematic SW-driven intervention did not engage new patients with gynecologic cancers to select and prepare MDMs. Change in care preferences was common, with caregivers' knowledge of patients' treatment preferences moderate at best.
| S-EPMC10243763 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Telemedicine visits reduce the physical and financial burdens associated with in-person appointments, especially for patients with serious illness. Little is known about patient and caregiver preferences regarding telemedicine visit timing and the discussion of sensitive topics by telemedicine. Objective: To characterize the experience of patients with serious illness and their caregivers receiving palliative care (PC) by telemedicine. Design: Mixed-methods telephone survey. Setting/Subjects: Patients and family caregivers who had at least one telemedicine visit with the outpatient PC team at our urban academic medical center. Results: A total of 35 patients and 15 caregivers were surveyed. Patient mean age was 61 years, 49% had cancer, and 86% were Caucasian. Caregiver mean age was 62 years. Mean satisfaction with PC telemedicine visits was 8.9 out of 10 for patients; 8.8 for caregivers. Patients (97%) and caregivers (100%) felt comfortable discussing sensitive topics over video. Participants felt telemedicine was an acceptable format to discuss most sensitive topics but 53% of caregivers preferred to receive bad news in person. Participants valued the convenience of telemedicine; they had concerns about rapport building and desired a more user-friendly telemedicine platform. Conclusions: Patients with serious illness and their caregivers rated telemedicine visits highly and felt comfortable discussing sensitive topics by video. Concerns included rapport building and telemedicine platform setup and quality. The rapid growth of telemedicine during coronavirus disease 2019 creates an imperative for research to understand the impact on the quality of care and mitigate any negative effects of telemedicine within a diverse population of patients.
| S-EPMC8241370 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe Engagement of Patients with Advanced Cancer (EPAC), comprised of a lay health worker (LHW) who assists patients with advance care planning, is an effective intervention for improving patient experiences and reducing acute care use and total health-care costs. The objective of this study was to assess patients' and caregivers' experiences with the intervention.MethodsWe invited all patients enrolled in EPAC and their caregivers to complete an 8-item survey at the end of the intervention and a random 35% sample to participate in a qualitative interview to assess their experiences. At 15-month follow-up, we invited all caregivers of patients who died during the study to participate in a qualitative interview. We analyzed survey responses using bivariate methods and recorded, transcribed, and analyzed interviews using qualitative content analysis.ResultsSixty-nine patients were alive at completion of the intervention and all 30 identified caregivers completed the survey. All viewed the intervention as a critical part of cancer care and recommended the intervention for other patients. In qualitative interviews, among 30 patients, all reported improved comfort in discussing their end-of-life care preferences. In qualitative interviews with 24 bereaved caregivers, all viewed the intervention as critical in ensuring that their loved ones' wishes were adhered to at the end of life.Conclusions and relevanceIncorporating an LHW into end-of-life cancer care is an approach supported and viewed as highly effective in improving care by patients and caregivers. The LHW-led EPAC intervention is one solution that can significantly impact patient and caregiver experiences.
| S-EPMC6776082 | biostudies-literature