Patient-doctor agreement on recall of clinical trial discussion across cultures

Background The purpose was to investigate patient-doctor agreement on clinical trial discussion cross-culturally. Methods In the International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial 33-03 on shared decision-making for early breast cancer in Australian/New Zealand (ANZ) and Swiss/German/Austrian (SGA) centers, doctor and patient characteristics plus doctor stress and burnout were assessed. Within 2 weeks post-consultation about treatment options, the doctor and patient reported independently, whether a trial was discussed. Odds ratios of agreement for covariables were estimated by generalized estimating equations for each language cohort, with doctor as a random effect. Results In ANZ, 21 doctors and 339 patients were eligible; in SGA, 41 doctors and 427 patients. In cases where the doctor indicated ‘no trial discussed', 82% of both ANZ and SGA patients agreed; if the doctor indicated ‘trial discussed', 50% of ANZ and 38% of SGA patients agreed, respectively. Factors associated with higher agreement were: low tumor grade and fewer patients recruited into clinical trials in SGA; public institution, patient born in ANZ (versus other), higher doctor depersonalization and personal accomplishment in ANZ. Conclusion There is discordance between oncologists and their patients regarding clinical trial discussion, particularly when the doctor indicates that a trial was discussed. Factors contributing to this agreement vary by cultur

Correlates of unmet needs and psychological distress in adolescent and young adults who have a parent diagnosed with cancer.

Objective. Young people who have a parent with cancer experience elevated levels of psychological distress and unmet needs. In this study we examined the associations between demographics, cancer variables, and family functioning; and levels of distress and unmet needs amongst young people who have a parent diagnosed with cancer. Methods. Young people aged 12 -24 with a parent with cancer (n=255) completed the Offspring Cancer Needs Instrument (unmet needs), the Kessler-10 (distress), and the Family Relationship Index (family functioning), along with measures of demographics and cancer variables (such as: age, sex, time since cancer diagnosis). Variables associated with distress and unmet needs (including unmet need domains) were assessed using multiple linear regression. Results. Being female and older, having more unmet cancer needs and poorer family functioning was associated with increased distress. Having a father with cancer, a shorter time since diagnosis, and poor family functioning were associated with increased unmet needs. Family conflict and expressiveness were particularly important components of family functioning. Having a parent relapse with cancer was also associated with unmet needs in the domains of practical assistance, ‘time out’, and support from other young people who have been through something similar. Conclusions. Delineating factors associated with increased distress and unmet needs assists in identifying at risk young people allowing improved assessment and tailoring of support to improve the psychosocial outcomes of young people impacted by parental cancer.beyondblu

Psychosocial predictors of outcome: time to relapse and survival in patients with early stage melanoma

This study explored psychosocial predictors of relapse and survival in early stage melanoma patients. Patients with locoregional melanoma whose tumour thickness exceeded 0.69 mm, seen at the Sydney Melanoma Unit between 1991 and 1996 participated in the study. Questionnaires were sent to participating patients every 3 months for 2 years. Domains measured included cognitive appraisal of threat, coping, psychological adjustment, quality of life and perceived aim of treatment. Disease and demographic data were obtained from medical records. Multivariate analyses from baseline data used the Cox proportional hazards model. Of the 682 patients invited to participate 426 (62%) agreed. 91 (21%) relapsed and 60 (14%) died within the follow-up period, that ended in October 1997. After controlling for known prognostic indicators, several psychosocial variables predicted time to relapse and/or survival duration. Patients who perceived their aim of treatment to be cured, who did not use avoidance as a coping strategy or who were concerned about their disease experienced longer periods without relapse. Shorter survival duration was associated with a positive mood, the use of avoidance as a coping strategy, not being concerned with their disease and concern about the impact of the disease on family. There is still much to learn about the potential relationships between psychological well being, human behaviours and cancer outcome. Research in this area needs to clarify the psychological processes, as well as understand the biological and/or behavioural mechanisms that may link them to outcome. © 2000 Cancer Research Campaign http://www.bjcancer.co

Cancer Patient Experience of Uncertainty While Waiting for Genome Sequencing Results.

There is limited knowledge about cancer patients' experiences of uncertainty while waiting for genome sequencing results, and whether prolonged uncertainty contributes to psychological factors in this context. To investigate uncertainty in patients with a cancer of likely hereditary origin while waiting for genome sequencing results, we collected questionnaire and interview data at baseline, and at three and 12 months follow up (prior to receiving results). Participants (N = 353) had negative attitudes towards uncertainty (M = 4.03, SD 0.68) at baseline, and low levels of uncertainty at three (M = 8.23, SD 7.37) and 12 months (M = 7.95, SD 7.64). Uncertainty about genome sequencing did not change significantly over time [t(210) = 0.660, p = 0.510]. Greater perceived susceptibility for cancer [r(348) = 0.14, p < 0.01], fear of cancer recurrence [r(348) = 0.19, p < 0.01], perceived importance of genome sequencing [r(350) = 0.24, p < 0.01], intention to change behavior if a gene variant indicating risk is found [r(349) = 0.29, p < 0.01], perceived ability to cope with results [r(349) = 0.36, p < 0.01], and satisfaction with decision to have genome sequencing [r(350) = 0.52, p < 0.01] were significantly correlated with negative attitudes towards uncertainty at baseline. Multiple primary cancer diagnoses [B = -2.364 [-4.238, -0.491], p = 0.014], lower perceived ability to cope with results [B = -0.1.881 [-3.403, -0.359], p = 0.016] at baseline, greater anxiety about genome sequencing (avoidance) [B = 0.347 [0.148, 0.546], p = 0.0012] at 3 months, and greater perceived uncertainty about genome sequencing [B = 0.494 [0.267, 0.721] p = 0.000] at 3 months significantly predicted greater perceived uncertainty about genome sequencing at 12 months. Greater perceived uncertainty about genome sequencing at 3 months significantly predicted greater anxiety (avoidance) about genome sequencing at 12 months [B = 0.291 [0.072, 0.509], p = 0.009]. Semi-structured interviews revealed that while participants were motivated to pursue genome sequencing as a strategy to reduce their illness and risk uncertainty, genome sequencing generated additional practical, scientific and personal uncertainties. Some uncertainties were consistently discussed over the 12 months, while others emerged over time. Similarly, some uncertainty coping strategies were consistent over time, while others emerged while patients waited for their genome sequencing results. This study demonstrates the complexity of uncertainty generated by genome sequencing for cancer patients and provides further support for the inter-relationship between uncertainty and anxiety. Helping patients manage their uncertainty may ameliorate psychological morbidity

Adapting the nominal group technique for priority setting of evidence-practice gaps in implementation science

Background: There are a variety of methods for priority setting in health research but few studies have addressed how to prioritise the gaps that exist between research evidence and clinical practice. This study aimed to build a suite of robust, evidence based techniques and tools for use in implementation science projects. We applied the priority setting methodology in lung cancer care as an example. Methods: We reviewed existing techniques and tools for priority setting in health research and the criteria used to prioritise items. An expert interdisciplinary consensus group comprised of health service, cancer and nursing researchers iteratively reviewed and adapted the techniques and tools. We tested these on evidence-practice gaps identified for lung cancer. The tools were pilot tested and finalised. A brief process evaluation was conducted. Results: We based our priority setting on the Nominal Group Technique (NGT). The adapted tools included a matrix for individuals to privately rate priority gaps; the same matrix was used for group discussion and reaching consensus. An investment exercise was used to validate allocation of priorities across the gaps. We describe the NGT process, criteria and tool adaptations and process evaluation results. Conclusions: The modified NGT process, criteria and tools contribute to building a suite of methods that can be applied in prioritising evidence-practice gaps. These methods could be adapted for other health settings within the broader context of implementation science projects