Balancing trust and power:a qualitative study of GPs perceptions and strategies for retaining patients in preventive health checks

Objective: Little is known about how strategies of retaining patients are acted out by general practitioners (GPs) in the clinical encounter. With this study, we apply Grimens’ (2009) analytical connection between trust and power to explore how trust and power appear in preventive health checks from the GPs’ perspectives, and in what way trust and power affect and/or challenge strategies towards retaining patients without formal education. Design: Data in this study were obtained through semi-structured interviews with GPs participating in an intervention project, as well as observations of clinical encounters. Results: From the empirical data, we identified three dimensions of respect: respect for the patient’s autonomy, respect for professional authority and respect as a mutual exchange. A balance of respect influenced trust in the relationship between GP and patients and the transfer of power in the encounter. The GPs articulated that a balance was needed in preventive health checks in order to establish trust and thus retain the patient in the clinic. One way this balance of respect was carried out was with the use of humour. Conclusions: To retain patients without formal education in the clinical encounter, the GPs balanced trust and power executed through three dimensions of respect. In this study, retaining patients was equivalent to maintaining a trusting relationship. A strategic use of the three dimensions of respect was applied to balance trust and power and thus build or maintain a trusting relationship with patients.KEY POINTS   Little is known about how strategies for retaining patients are acted out by GPs in preventive health checks.  •  Retaining patients requires a balance of trust and power, which is executed through three dimensions of respect by the GPs.  •  Challenges of recruiting and retaining patients in public health initiatives might be associated with the balance of respect

Sexual Activity in Couples Dealing With Breast Cancer:A Cohort Study of Associations With Patient, Partner and Relationship-Related Factors

OBJECTIVE: Breast cancer may profoundly affect a couple’s sex life. The present study examines whether patient-, partner- and relationship-related characteristics are associated with sexual activity of couples following breast cancer diagnosis in the treatment phase and over time. METHODS: Women with breast cancer and their male cohabiting partners participated in a longitudinal study in Denmark. Logistic regression was used to examine associations of patient-, partner- and relationship-related characteristics at baseline (≤4 months following surgery) with couples’ sexual activity at baseline, 5 and 12 months later. The longitudinal analyses were stratified for couples’ sexual activity status at baseline. RESULTS: A total of 722, 533 and 471 couples were included in the analyses at baseline, 5- and 12-months follow-up, respectively. Older age, depressive symptoms and lower vitality of patients were associated with lower odds of couples’ sexual activity at baseline; chemotherapy treatment and older age of patients were associated with lower odds at 5-months follow-up in couples who were not sexually active at baseline. Higher ratings of emotional closeness, affectionate behavior and satisfaction with dyadic coping were associated with higher odds for sexual activity at baseline and over time in couples who were sexually active at baseline. CONCLUSION: Sexual counseling during cancer treatment and rehabilitation should include a couple perspective. Relationship-related variables may be a protective factor for remaining sexually active after breast cancer diagnosis. Interventions could focus on strengthening these factors. Health professionals also need to consider the patients’ breast cancer treatment, vitality, and emotional distress in counselling on sexuality

Feasibility and acceptability of electronic symptom surveillance with clinician feedback using the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) in Danish prostate cancer patients

Abstract Background The aim was to examine the feasibility, acceptability and clinical utility of electronic symptom surveillance with clinician feedback using a subset of items drawn from the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) in a cancer treatment setting. Methods Danish-speaking men with castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer receiving treatment at the Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen between March 9, 2015 and June 8, 2015 were invited to participate (n = 63 eligible). Participants completed the PRO-CTCAE questionnaire on tablet computers using AmbuFlex software at each treatment visit in the outpatient clinic. In total, 22 symptomatic toxicities (41 PRO-CTCAE items), corresponding to the symptomatic adverse-events profile associated with the regimens commonly used for prostate cancer treatment (Docetaxel, Cabazitaxel, Abiraterone, Alpharadin), were selected. Participants’ PRO-CTCAE responses were presented graphically to their treating oncologists via an AmbuFlex dashboard, for real-time use to enhance the patient-clinician dialogue that occurs during the consultation prior to each treatment cycle. Technical and clinical barriers and acceptability were evaluated through semi-structured interviews with both patients and oncologists. Patients receiving active treatment at the end of the study period completed an evaluation questionnaire. Results Fifty-four out of sixty-three (86%) eligible patients were enrolled. The PRO-CTCAE questionnaire was completed a total of 168 times by 54 participants (median number per patient was 3, range 1–5). Eight surveys were missed, resulting in a compliance rate of 97%. At the end of the study period, 35 patients (65%) were still receiving active treatment and completed the evaluation questionnaire. Patients reported that their PRO-CTCAE responses served as a communication tool. Oncologists stated that the availability of the PRO-CTCAE self-reports during the consultation improved patient-clinician communication about side effects. Conclusion Electronic capture of symptomatic toxicities using PRO-CTCAE and the submission of self-reports to clinicians prior to consultation were feasible among metastatic prostate cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in an outpatient setting, and this procedure was acceptable to both patients and clinicians. Continued research, including a cluster-randomized trial, will evaluate the effects of submitting patients’ PRO-CTCAE results to clinicians prior to consultation on the quality of side-effects management and resultant clinical outcomes