Reasons for accepting or declining to participate in randomized clinical trials for cancer therapy

This paper reports on the reasons why patients agreed to or declined entry into randomized trials of cancer following discussions conducted by clinicians in both District General and University Hospitals. Two hundred and four patients completed a 16-item questionnaire following the consultation, of these 112 (55%) were women with breast cancer. Overall results showed that 147 (72.1%) patients accepted entry to a randomized clinical trial (RCT). The main reasons nominated for participating in a trial were that ‘others will benefit’ (23.1%) and ‘trust in the doctor’ (21.1%). One of the main reasons for declining trial entry was that patients were ‘worried about randomization’ (19.6%). There was a significantly higher acceptance rate for trials providing active treatment in every arm 98 (80.6%) compared with those trials with a no treatment arm 46 (60.5%), χ2test P = 0.003. The study outlines a number of factors that appear to influence a patient’s decision to accept or decline entry into an RCT of cancer therapy. An important factor is whether or not the trial offers active treatment in all arms of the study. Communication that promotes trust and confidence in the doctor is also a powerful motivating influence. © 2000 Cancer Research Campaig

Management of major depression in outpatients attending a cancer centre: a preliminary evaluation of a multicomponent cancer nurse-delivered intervention

A novel nurse-delivered multicomponent intervention for major depressive disorder (MDD) in cancer outpatients was compared with usual care alone in a nonrandomised matched group design (n=30 per group). At the final 6-month outcome, 38.5% (95% CI, 5.4-57%) fewer patients in the intervention group still met the criteria for MDD

Screening for psychological distress in patients with lung cancer: results of a clinical audit evaluating the use of the patient Distress Thermometer

Patients with lung cancer frequently suffer psychological distress and guidelines in the United Kingdom recommend screening of all cancer patients for this problem. The audit investigated use of the Distress Thermometer in terms of staff adherence to locally developed guidelines, patient willingness to use the tool, its impact on referral rates to clinical psychology services and concordance between the tool and the clinical assessment. Use of the Distress Thermometer was audited over a 3-month period in one lung cancer outpatient clinic. Referrals to clinical psychology services in response to clearly delineated referral indicators were assessed. Patient-reported outcomes were compared with practitioner assessment of need during clinical consultations to see whether the tool was measuring distress effectively. Thirty three of 34 patients used the Distress Thermometer during the audit period. Ten reported distress levels above 4 in the emotional or family problems domains. On ten occasions, the clinical interview identified problems not elicited by the Distress Thermometer. Guidelines were adhered to by staff, and patients were offered information about local support services and referral to clinical psychology services where indicated. Whilst all patients were happy to receive written information about further sources of support, none wanted to be referred to psychological services at that time. The Distress Thermometer is acceptable to patients with lung cancer in outpatient settings but it did not increase referrals for psychological support. Staff found it to be a useful tool in opening up communication about patient issues although it should not replace a comprehensive clinical interview

The unrecognised cost of cancer patients' unrelieved symptoms:a nationwide follow-up of their surviving partners

We investigated if a cancer patient's unrelieved symptoms during the last 3 months of life increase the risk of long-term psychological morbidity of the surviving partner. All women (n=506) living in Sweden under 80 years of age, who lost their husband/partner owing to cancer of the prostate in 1996 or of the urinary bladder in 1995 or 1996 were asked to answer an anonymous postal questionnaire, 2–4 years after their loss. The widows' psychological morbidity was associated with the patient's unrelieved mental symptoms. When the patient was perceived to have been very anxious during last three months of life (compared to no observed symptoms) the relative risks for the widows' psychological morbidity were: 2.5 (1.4–4.3) for depression and 3.4 (1.4–8.2) for anxiety. When comparing reports of the patient's pain (much vs no), the relative risks were 0.8 (0.5–1.2) for widowhood depression, and 0.8 (0.4–1.7) for widowhood anxiety. The patients were found to have had adequate access to physical pain control but poor access to psychological symptom control. Efficiency in diagnosing and treating psychological complications of terminally ill cancer patients may not only improve their quality of life but possibly also prevent long-term psychological morbidity of their surviving partners

A systematic review on the impact of leg ulceration on patients' quality of life

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A systematic review was conducted to analyse journal articles that describe or measure the impact of leg ulceration on patients' quality of life (QoL) in order to improve the content of an educational programme that aims to enhance self-care agency in leg ulcer patients.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>Original articles published in English and German between 1990 and 2006 were included if the findings were analysed at the level of patients. Articles were excluded if (1) they investigated the impact of specific treatments or settings on QoL or (2) focused mainly on arterial ulcers or diabetic foot ulcers.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Twenty-four original research articles met the inclusion criteria; 11 studies used a quantitative, 11 studies a qualitative, and 2 used a mixed method approach. The findings were collapsed into 5 core domains. Quantitative studies commonly investigated the parameters of pain, sleep, social isolation, and physical mobility. Patients had significantly more pain, more restrictions regarding social functioning, less vitality, and limitations with respect to emotional roles compared to the respective controls. Other problem areas identified were restrictions in work capacity, recreation, social interaction, psychological well-being, as well as problems caused by treatment regimes. Inconclusive results were obtained regarding pain intensity, physical restrictions, and gender effects.</p> <p>Limitations</p> <p>Numerous original studies neither undertook a differentiation of participants by ulcer aetiology nor did they analyse the results according to gender differences.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>As leg ulceration has an impact on QoL, national guidelines on the treatment of leg ulceration need to more specifically address these far-ranging effects identified in this review.</p

Patient experiences of receiving a diagnosis of Parkinsons's disease

Objective: To report patients’ own experiences of receiving a diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease (PD) and to identify factors influencing this experience. Methods: A survey by the European Parkinson’s Disease Association in 11 European countries. Results: 1775 patients with an average age of 69.7 years participated of whom 54% were male. Those living in rural areas reported having waited longer to seek medical help (p < 0.05). A possible diagnosis of PD was made at the first appointment in a third of respondents. When the diagnosis was made, only 50% reported that the diagnosis was communicated sensitively. 38% of patients reported having been given enough time to ask questions and discuss concerns, but 29% did not. 98% of participants reported having been given information about PD at the time of diagnosis but 36% did not find the information given helpful. Patient satisfaction with the diagnostic consultation was positively associated with more sensitive delivery of diagnosis, the helpfulness and quantity of the information provided and time to ask questions (all p < 0.001). Where diagnosis was given by a specialist, participants reported greater perceived satisfaction with the diagnostic consultation, greater sensitivity of communicating the diagnosis, time to ask questions, provision and helpfulness of information, and earlier medication prescription (all p < 0.0001). Conclusions: There is a need to improve how the diagnosis of PD is communicated to patients, the opportunity to ask questions soon after diagnosis, and the amount, timing and quality of life information provided, as this is associated with greater satisfaction with the diagnostic process

Assessing the information desire of patients with advanced cancer by providing information with a decision aid, which is evaluated in a randomized trial: a study protocol

Contains fulltext : 95653.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: There is a continuing debate on the desirability of informing patients with cancer and thereby involving them in treatment decisions. On the one hand, information uptake may be hampered, and additional stress could be inflicted by involving these patients. On the other hand, even patients with advanced cancer desire information on risks and prognosis. To settle the debate, a decision aid will be developed and presented to patients with advanced disease at the point of decision making. The aid is used to assess the amount of information desired. Factors related to information desire are explored, as well as the ability of the medical oncologist to judge the patient's information desire. The effects of the information on patient well-being are assessed by comparing the decision aid group with a usual care group. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a randomized controlled trial of patients with advanced colorectal, breast, or ovarian cancer who have started treatment with first-line palliative chemotherapy. The trial will consist of 100 patients in the decision aid group and 70 patients in the usual care group. To collect complete data of 170 patients, 246 patients will be approached for the study. Patients will complete a baseline questionnaire on sociodemographic data, well-being measures, and psychological measures, believed to predict information desire. The medical oncologist will judge the patient's information desire. After disease progression is diagnosed, the medical oncologist offers the choice between second-line palliative chemotherapy plus best supportive care (BSC) and BSC alone. Randomization will take place to determine whether patients will receive usual care (n = 70) or usual care and the decision aid (n = 100). The aid offers information about the potential risks and benefits of both treatment options, in terms of adverse events, tumour response, and survival. Patients decide for each item whether they desire the information or not. Two follow-up questionnaires will evaluate the effect of the decision aid. DISCUSSION: This study attempts to settle the debate on the desirability of informing patients with cancer. In contrast to several earlier studies, we will actually deliver information on treatment options to patients at the point of decision making

Dunno if you've any plans for the future: medical student indirect questioning in simulated oncology interviews

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This exploratory study investigated the motives of medical students (N = 63) for using indirect questions of the type <it>I don't know if </it>[you have already heard about chemotherapies], <it>I don't know how </it>[you are], or <it>I don't know what </it>[you do for a living] in simulated patient interviews during a communication skills course.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p><it>I don't know </it>questions (IDK-Qs) were observed during the initial evaluation of students' communication skills; they were systematically identified through video screening and subjected to a qualitative content and discourse analysis considering their context, their content, their intent and their effect on the simulated patients. To evaluate the specificity of medical students' IDK-Qs, the data were compared with a data set of oncologists (N = 31) conducting simulated patient interviews in the context of a Communication Skills Training (CST).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>During the interviews, 41.3% of the students asked 1-6 IDK-Qs. The IDK-Qs were attributed to three content categories: medical/treatment questions (N = 24); lifestyle/psychosocial questions (N = 18); and "inviting questions" questions (N = 11). Most of the IDK-Qs had an exploratory function (46/53), with simulated patients providing detailed responses or asking for more information (36/53). IDK-Qs were rare in the oncologist sample compared to the student sample (5 vs. 53 occurrences).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>IDK-Qs showed a question design difference between medical students and oncologists in simulated patient interviews. Among other reasons for this difference, the possible function of IDK-Qs as a protective linguistic strategy and marker for psychological discomfort is discussed.</p

Duty, desire or indifference? A qualitative study of patient decisions about recruitment to an epilepsy treatment trial

BACKGROUND: Epilepsy is a common neurological condition, in which drugs are the mainstay of treatment and drugs trials are commonplace. Understanding why patients might or might not opt to participate in epilepsy drug trials is therefore of some importance, particularly at a time of rapid drug development and testing; and the findings may also have wider applicability. This study examined the role of patient perceptions in the decision-making process about recruitment to an RCT (the SANAD Trial) that compared different antiepileptic drug treatments for the management of new-onset seizures and epilepsy. METHODS: In-depth interviews with 23 patients recruited from four study centres. All interviews were tape-recorded and transcribed; the transcripts were analysed thematically using a qualitative data analysis package. RESULTS: Of the nineteen informants who agreed to participate in SANAD, none agreed for purely altruistic reasons. The four informants who declined all did so for very specific reasons of self-interest. Informants' perceptions of the nature of the trial, of the drugs subject to trial, and of their own involvement were all highly influential in their decision-making. Informants either perceived the trial as potentially beneficial or unlikely to be harmful, and so agreed to participate; or as potentially harmful or unlikely to be beneficial and so declined to participate. CONCLUSION: Most patients applied 'weak altruism', while maintaining self-interest. An emphasis on the safety and equivalence of treatments allowed some patients to be indifferent to the question of involvement. There was evidence that some participants were subject to 'therapeutic misconceptions'. The findings highlight the individual nature of trials but nonetheless raise some generic issues in relation to their design and conduct