Adam Walczak

Values and options in cancer care (VOICE): study design and rationale for a patient-centered communication and decision-making intervention for physicians, patients with advanced cancer, and their caregivers

BackgroundCommunication about prognosis and treatment choices is essential for informed decision making in advanced cancer. This article describes an investigation designed to facilitate communication and decision making among oncologists, patients with advanced cancer, and their caregivers.Methods/designThe Values and Options in Cancer Care (VOICE) Study is a National Cancer Institute sponsored randomized controlled trial conducted in the Rochester/Buffalo, NY and Sacramento, CA regions. A total of 40 oncologists, approximately 400 patients with advanced cancer, and their family/friend caregivers (one per patient, when available) are expected to enroll in the study. Drawing upon ecological theory, the intervention uses a two-pronged approach: oncologists complete a multifaceted tailored educational intervention involving standardized patient instructors (SPIs), and patients and caregivers complete a coaching intervention to facilitate prioritizing and discussing questions and concerns. Follow-up data will be collected approximately quarterly for up to three years.DiscussionThe intervention is hypothesized to enhance patient-centered communication, quality of care, and patient outcomes. Analyses will examine the effects of the intervention on key elements of physician-patient-caregiver communication (primary outcomes), the physician-patient relationship, shared understanding of prognosis, patient well-being, and health service utilization (secondary outcomes).Trial registrationClinical Trials Identifier: NCT01485627

Effect of a Patient-Centered Communication Intervention on Oncologist-Patient Communication, Quality of Life, and Health Care Utilization in Advanced Cancer: The VOICE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance Observational studies demonstrate links between patient-centered communication, quality of life (QOL), and aggressive treatments in advanced cancer, yet few randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of communication interventions have been reported. Objective To determine whether a combined intervention involving oncologists, patients with advanced cancer, and caregivers would promote patient-centered communication, and to estimate intervention effects on shared understanding, patient-physician relationships, QOL, and aggressive treatments in the last 30 days of life. Design, Setting, and Participants Cluster RCT at community- and hospital-based cancer clinics in Western New York and Northern California; 38 medical oncologists (mean age 44.6 years; 11 (29%) female) and 265 community-dwelling adult patients with advanced nonhematologic cancer participated (mean age, 64.4 years, 146 [55.0%] female, 235 [89%] white; enrolled August 2012 to June 2014; followed for 3 years); 194 patients had participating caregivers. Interventions Oncologists received individualized communication training using standardized patient instructors while patients received question prompt lists and individualized communication coaching to identify issues to address during an upcoming oncologist visit. Both interventions focused on engaging patients in consultations, responding to emotions, informing patients about prognosis and treatment choices, and balanced framing of information. Control participants received no training. Main Outcomes and Measures The prespecified primary outcome was a composite measure of patient-centered communication coded from audio recordings of the first oncologist visit following patient coaching (intervention group) or enrollment (control). Secondary outcomes included the patient-physician relationship, shared understanding of prognosis, QOL, and aggressive treatments and hospice use in the last 30 days of life. Results Data from 38 oncologists (19 randomized to intervention) and 265 patients (130 intervention) were analyzed. In fully adjusted models, the intervention resulted in clinically and statistically significant improvements in the primary physician-patient communication end point (adjusted intervention effect, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.06-0.62; P = .02). Differences in secondary outcomes were not statistically significant. Conclusions and Relevance A combined intervention that included oncologist communication training and coaching for patients with advanced cancer was effective in improving patient-centered communication but did not affect secondary outcomes. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01485627

A systematic review of evidence for end-of-life communication interventions: Who do they target, how are they structured and do they work?

OBJECTIVE To identify and synthesise evidence for interventions targeting end-of-life communication. METHODS Database, reference list and author searches were conducted to identify evaluations of end-of-life communication-focussed interventions. Data were extracted, synthesised and QUALSYST quality analyses were performed. RESULTS Forty-five studies met inclusion criteria. Interventions targeted patients (n=6), caregivers (n=3), healthcare professionals (HCPs n=24) and multiple stakeholders (n=12). Interventions took various forms including communication skills training, education, advance care planning and structured practice changes. Substantial heterogeneity in study designs, outcomes, settings and measures was apparent and study quality was variable. CONCLUSION A substantial number of end-of-life communication interventions have been evaluated. Interventions have particularly targeted HCPs in cancer settings, though patient, caregiver and multi-focal interventions have also been evaluated. While some interventions were efficacious in well-designed RCTs, most evidence was from less robust studies. While additional interventions targeting patients and caregivers are needed, multi-focal interventions may more effectively remove barriers to end-of-life communication. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Despite the limitations evident in the existing literature, healthcare professionals may still derive useful insights into effective approaches to end-of-life communication if appropriate caution is exercised. However, additional RCTs, implementation studies and cost-benefit analyses are required to bolster arguments for implementing and resourcing communication interventions.

A question prompt list for patients with advanced cancer in the final year of life: development and cross-cultural evaluation.

Background: Clinicians and patients find prognosis and end-of-life care discussions challenging. Misunderstanding one’s prognosis can contribute to poor decision-making and end-of-life quality of life. A question prompt list (booklet of questions patients can ask clinicians) targeting these issues may help overcome communication barriers. None exists for end-of-life discussions outside the palliative care setting. Aim: To develop/pilot a question prompt list facilitating discussion/planning of end-of-life care for oncology patients with advanced cancer from Australia and the United States and to explore acceptability, perceived benefits/challenges of using the question prompt list, suggestions for improvements and the necessity of country-specific adaptations. Design: An expert panel developed a question prompt list targeting prognosis and end-of-life issues. Australian/US semi-structured interviews and one focus group elicited feedback about the question prompt list. Transcribed data were analysed using qualitative methods. Setting/participants: Thirty-four patients with advanced cancer (15 Australian/19 US) and 13 health professionals treating such patients (7 Australian/6 US) from two Australian and one US cancer centre participated. Results: Most endorsed the entire question prompt list, though a minority queried the utility/appropriateness of some questions. Analysis identified four global themes: (1) reinforcement of known benefits of question prompt lists, (2) appraisal of content and suggestions for further developments, (3) perceived benefits and challenges in using the question prompt list and (4) contrasts in Australian/US feedback. These contrasts necessitated distinct Australian/US final versions of the question prompt list. Conclusions: Participants endorsed the question prompt list as acceptable and useful. Feedback resulted in two distinct versions of the question prompt list, accommodating differences between Australian and US approaches to end-of-life discussions, highlighting the appropriateness of tailoring communication aides to individual populations.

Discussing prognosis and end-of-life care in the final year of life: a randomised controlled trial of a nurse-led communication support programme for patients and caregivers

Introduction Timely communication about life expectancy and end-of-life care is crucial for ensuring good patient quality-of-life at the end of life and a good quality of death. This article describes the protocol for a multisite randomised controlled trial of a nurse-led communication support programme to facilitate patients’ and caregivers’ efforts to communicate about these issues with their healthcare team. Methods and analysis This NHMRC-sponsored trial is being conducted at medical oncology clinics located at/affiliated with major teaching hospitals in Sydney, Australia. Patients with advanced, incurable cancer and life expectancy of less than 12 months will participate together with their primary informal caregiver where possible. Guided by the self-determination theory of health-behaviour change, the communication support programme pairs a purpose-designed Question Prompt List (QPL—an evidence-based list of questions patients/caregivers can ask clinicians) with nurse-led exploration of QPL content, communication challenges, patient values and concerns and the value of early discussion of end-of-life issues. Oncologists are also cued to endorse patient and caregiver question asking and use of the QPL. Behavioural and self-report data will be collected from patients/caregivers approximately quarterly for up to 2.5 years or until patient death, after which patient medical records will be examined. Analyses will examine the impact of the intervention on patients’ and caregivers’ participation in medical consultations, their self-efficacy in medical encounters, quality-of-life, end-of-life care receipt and quality-of-death indicators. Ethics and dissemination Approvals have been granted by the human ethics review committee of Royal Prince Alfred Hospital and governance officers at each participating site. Results will be reported in peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. Trial registration number Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12610000724077.

A qualitative analysis of responses to a question prompt list and prognosis and end-of-life care discussion prompts delivered in a communication support program

Discussing end‐of‐life (EOL) care is challenging when death is not imminent, contributing to poor decision‐making and EOL quality‐of‐life. A communication support program (CSP) targeting these issues may facilitate discussions. We aimed to qualitatively explore responses to a nurse‐led CSP, incorporating a question prompt list (QPL—booklet of questions patients/caregivers can ask clinicians), promoting life expectancy and EOL‐care discussions.

Promoting end-of-life discussions in advanced cancer: Effects of patient coaching and question prompt lists

Purpose To build on results of a cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a combined patient-oncologist intervention to improve communication in advanced cancer, we conducted a post hoc analysis of the patient intervention component, a previsit patient coaching session that used a question prompt list (QPL). We hypothesized that intervention-group participants would bring up more QPL-related topics, particularly prognosis-related topics, during the subsequent oncologist visit. Patients and Methods This cluster RCT with 170 patients who had advanced nonhematologic cancer (and their caregivers) recruited from practices of 24 participating oncologists in western New York. Intervention-group oncologists (n = 12) received individualized communication training; up to 10 of their patients (n = 84) received a previsit individualized communication coaching session that incorporated a QPL. Control-group oncologists (n = 12) and patients (n = 86) received no interventions. Topics of interest identified by patients during the coaching session were summarized from coaching notes; one office visit after the coaching session was audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by using linear regression modeling for group differences. Results Compared with controls, more than twice as many intervention-group participants brought up QPL-related topics during their office visits (70.2% v 32.6%; P < .001). Patients in the intervention group were nearly three times more likely to ask about prognosis (16.7% v 5.8%; P =.03). Of 262 topics of interest identified during coaching, 158 (60.3%) were QPL related; 20 (12.7%) addressed prognosis. Overall, patients in the intervention group brought up 82.4% of topics of interest during the office visit. Conclusion A combined coaching and QPL intervention was effective to help patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers identify and bring up topics of concern, including prognosis, during their subsequent oncologist visits. Considering that most patients are misinformed about prognosis, more intensive steps are needed to better promote such discussions.

How does parental cancer affect adolescent and young adult offspring? A systematic review

OBJECTIVES To i) identify and synthesise evidence published since 2007 regarding the impact of parental cancer on adolescent and young adult offspring, ii) identify methodological and evidence gaps addressed during this period and iii) highlight those requiring further attention. DESIGN A systematic review and thematic synthesis of peer reviewed literature regarding the impact of parental cancer upon AYA offspring. DATA SOURCES Online searches of CINAHL, Embase, Medline, PsychInfo and Scopus databases were conducted. Reference lists of included articles were screened and additional searches by prominent authors were performed. REVIEW METHODS Study selection, data extraction and quality analysis was undertaken by three independent researchers. Extracted study data was iteratively reviewed and discussed to achieve consensus regarding thematic synthesis of included studies. RESULTS Database and hand-searching yielded 1730 articles, 54 of which were included in the final synthesis. Included studies are discussed with respect to the following themes: i) study design and quality; ii) measurement and sampling; iii) positive and negative aspects of parental cancer; iv) needs; v) communication and information; vi) coping strategies; vii) interventions; and viii) family functioning and other predictors. Twenty-nine studies reported negative impacts related to parental cancer, while eight identified positive outcomes related to post-traumatic growth. Five returned null or mixed findings. Unmet needs were frequently explored and a new validated measure developed. Communication and information were particularly important for offspring, though these needs were often unmet and parents wanted guidance regarding discussions with their children. Offspring may adopt a variety of coping strategies, some of which appear maladaptive, and may cycle between different approaches. Few evaluations of interventions were identified, and further work in this area is needed. Further evidence has emerged that poorer family functioning and other family and illness-related factors predict worse psychosocial outcomes for offspring, however evidence for other predictors such as age and gender remain mixed. CONCLUSIONS Additional evidence for the negative psychosocial impact of parental cancer on adolescent and young adult offspring, their needs, and factors predicting psychosocial outcomes has emerged in the last decade. However, substantial gaps and methodological issues remain and evidence for the development, efficacy or implementation of interventions for this population is very limited. There is also a clear need for greater focus on bereaved and young adult offspring and those from non-western cultural groups, who remain under-represented in research conducted to date.

Levels of unmet needs and distress amongst adolescents and young adults (AYAs) impacted by familial cancer

To describe levels of, and relationships between, distress and psychosocial unmet needs in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with a family member with cancer.