Communication Interventions Targeting Both Patients and Clinicians in Oncology: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

被引:0
作者
Mcdarby, Meghan [1 ]
Mroz, Emily [2 ,3 ]
Walsh, Leah E. [4 ]
Malling, Charlotte [5 ]
Chilov, Marina [6 ]
Rosa, William E. [1 ]
Kastrinos, Amanda [1 ]
Mcconnell, Kelly M. [1 ]
Parker, Patricia A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Psychiat & Behav Sci, New York, NY 10065 USA
[2] Yale Sch Med, Dept Internal Med, Sect Geriatr, New Haven, CT USA
[3] Emory Univ, Nell Hodgson Woodruff Sch Nursing, Atlanta, GA USA
[4] Icahn Sch Med Mt Sinai, Brookdale Dept Geriatr & Palliat Med, New York, NY USA
[5] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, New York, NY USA
[6] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Technol Div, Mem Sloan Kettering Lib, New York, NY USA
关键词
QUESTION PROMPT LIST; ADVANCED CANCER-PATIENTS; OF-LIFE DISCUSSIONS; PALLIATIVE CARE; HEALTH; SKILLS; PARTICIPATION; PERSPECTIVES; ASSOCIATIONS; AMERICAN;
D O I
10.1002/pon.70108
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background High quality communication between individuals with cancer and their clinicians is a cornerstone of patient-centered oncology practice. Many communication skills training interventions have been evaluated to support either oncology clinicians or patients. However, there is little information regarding the scope and efficacy of combined communication interventions in oncology, or communication interventions targeting both patients and clinicians. Aims To systematically examine randomized controlled trials of combined communication interventions in oncology settings. Methods Four databases (Pubmed, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched using strategies developed by an expert librarian. All years were searched through May 2024. We followed PRISMA guidelines for reporting and used the Risk of Bias 2.0 assessment tool. Results The search yielded 3983 records. We assessed 52 full text articles, 13 of which were eligible (8 describing cluster randomized controlled trials, 5 describing individual randomized controlled trials). Results indicate that combined communication interventions may increase patient-centered communication in oncology settings but may be less effective in improving patient care and related outcomes. Conclusions Combined communication interventions in oncology settings and the outcomes measured to evaluate them are heterogeneous. This makes it difficult to determine the efficacy of combined communication interventions, the mechanisms by which these interventions improve patient-clinician communication as well as patient care and related outcomes, and which outcomes are most likely to be improved. Future work should clarify key targets of change for combined communication interventions and outcomes expected to be associated with patient-focused and clinician-focused intervention components.
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 54 条
  • [1] Development of a Question Prompt Sheet for Cancer Patients Receiving Outpatient Palliative Care
    Arthur, Joseph
    Yennurajalingam, Sriram
    Williams, Janet
    Tanco, Kimberson
    Liu, Diane
    Stephen, Saneese
    Bruera, Eduardo
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PALLIATIVE MEDICINE, 2016, 19 (08) : 883 - 887
  • [2] Patient-Clinician Communication Issues in Palliative Care for Patients With Advanced Cancer
    Back, Anthony L.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2020, 38 (09) : 866 - +
  • [3] Training Clinicians with Communication Skills Needed to Match Medical Treatments to Patient Values
    Back, Anthony L.
    Fromme, Erik K.
    Meier, Diane E.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY, 2019, 67 : S435 - S441
  • [4] Efficacy of communication skills training courses in oncology: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Barth, J.
    Lannen, P.
    [J]. ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, 2011, 22 (05) : 1030 - 1040
  • [5] Effect of the Serious Illness Care Program in Outpatient Oncology: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial
    Bernacki, Rachelle
    Paladino, Joanna
    Neville, Bridget A.
    Hutchings, Mathilde
    Kavanagh, Jane
    Geerse, Olaf P.
    Lakin, Joshua
    Sanders, Justin J.
    Miller, Kate
    Lipsitz, Stuart
    Gawande, Atul A.
    Block, Susan D.
    [J]. JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2019, 179 (06) : 751 - 759
  • [6] Decision Support with the Personal Patient Profile-Prostate: A Multicenter Randomized Trial
    Berry, Donna L.
    Hong, Fangxin
    Blonquist, Traci M.
    Halpenny, Barbara
    Filson, Christopher P.
    Master, Viraj A.
    Sanda, Martin G.
    Chang, Peter
    Chien, Gary W.
    Jones, Randy A.
    Krupski, Tracey L.
    Wolpin, Seth
    Wilson, Leslie
    Hayes, Julia H.
    Quoc-Dien Trinh
    Sokoloff, Mitchell
    Somayaji, Prabhakara
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2018, 199 (01) : 89 - 96
  • [7] A Question Prompt List for Advanced Cancer Patients Promoting Advance Care Planning: A French Randomized Trial
    Bouleuc, Carole
    Savignoni, Alexia
    Chevrier, Marion
    Renault-Tessier, Evelyne
    Burnod, Alexis
    Chvetzoff, Gisele
    Poulain, Phillipe
    Copel, Laure
    Cottu, Paul
    Pierga, Jean-Yves
    Bredart, Anne
    Dolbeault, Sylvie
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PAIN AND SYMPTOM MANAGEMENT, 2021, 61 (02) : 331 - +
  • [8] The characteristics and effectiveness of Question Prompt List interventions in oncology: a systematic review of the literature
    Brandes, Kim
    Linn, Annemiek J.
    Butow, Phyllis N.
    van Weert, Julia C. M.
    [J]. PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY, 2015, 24 (03) : 245 - 252
  • [9] Promoting patient participation and shortening cancer consultations: a randomised trial
    Brown, RF
    Butow, P
    Dunn, SM
    Tattersall, MHN
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2001, 85 (09) : 1273 - 1279
  • [10] Enhancing decision making about participation in cancer clinical trials: development of a question prompt list
    Brown, Richard F.
    Shuk, Elyse
    Leighl, Natasha
    Butow, Phyllis
    Ostroff, Jamie
    Edgerson, Shawna
    Tattersall, Martin
    [J]. SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2011, 19 (08) : 1227 - 1238