Gaps in Patient-Centered Decision-Making Related to Complex Surgery: A Mixed-Methods Study.

INTRODUCTION: We sought to understand the perceptions of surgeons around patient preferred roles in decision-making and their approaches to patient-centered decision-making (PCDM). METHODS: A concurrent embedded mixed-methods design was utilized among a cohort of surgeons performing complex surgical procedures. Data were collected through online surveys. Associations between perceptions and PCDM approaches were examined. RESULTS: Among 241 participants, most respondents were male (67.2%) with an average age of 47.6 y (standard deviation = 10.3); roughly half (52.4%) had practiced medicine for 10 or more years. Surgeons most frequently agreed (94.2%) with the statement, "Patients prefer to make health decisions on their own after seriously considering their physician's opinion." Conversely, surgeons most frequently disagreed (73.0%) with the statement, "Patients prefer that their physician make health decisions for them." Nearly one-third (30.4%) of surgeon qualitative responses (n = 115) indicated that clinical/biological information would help them tailor their approach to PCDM. Only 12.2% of respondents indicated that they assess patient preferences regarding both decision-making and information needs. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons most frequently agree that patients want to make their own health decisions after seriously considering their physicians opinion. A greater focus on what information surgeons should know before treatment decision-making may help optimize patient experience and outcomes related to complex surgical procedures.

Assessing the Impact of Provider Training and Perceived Barriers on the Provision of Spiritual Care: a Mixed Methods Study.

The current study evaluated formal training around spiritual care for healthcare providers and the relationships between that training, perceived barriers to spiritual care, and frequency of inquiry around spiritual topics. A mixed methods explanatory sequential design was used. Quantitative methods included an online survey administered to providers at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center. Main and interactive effects of formal training and barriers to spiritual care on frequency of inquiry around spiritual topics were assessed with two-way ANOVA. Qualitative follow-up explored provider strategies to engage spiritual topics. Among 340 quantitative participants, most were female (82.1%) or White (82.6%) with over one-half identifying as religious (57.5%). The majority were nurses (64.7%) and less than 10% of all providers (n = 26) indicated formal training around spiritual care. There were main effects on frequency of inquiry around spiritual topics for providers who indicated "personal discomfort" as a barrier (p < 0.001), but not formal training (p = 0.526). Providers who indicated "personal discomfort" as a barrier inquired about spirituality less frequently, regardless of receiving formal training (M = 8.0, SD = 1.41) or not (M = 8.76, SD = 2.96). There were no interactive effects between training and "may offend patients" or "personal discomfort" (p = 0.258 and 0.125, respectively). Qualitative analysis revealed four strategies with direct and indirect approaches: (1) permission-giving, (2) self-awareness/use-of-self, (3) formal assessment, and (4) informal assessment. Training for providers should emphasize self-awareness to address intrapersonal barriers to improve the frequency and quality of spiritual care for cancer patients.

Intersectionality in cancer care: A systematic review of current research and future directions.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the current review was to synthesize the literature on intersectionality relative to disparities across the cancer care continuum. A model to support future intersectional cancer research was proposed. METHODS: Web-based discovery services and discipline-specific databases were queried for both peer-reviewed and gray literature. Study screening and data extraction were facilitated through the Covidence software platform. RESULTS: Among 497 screened studies, 28 met study inclusion criteria. Most articles were peer-reviewed empirical studies (n = 22) that focused on pre-diagnosis/screening (n = 19) and included marginalized racial/ethnic (n = 22) identities. Pre-cancer diagnosis, sexual orientation and race influenced women's screening and vaccine behaviors. Sexual minority women, particularly individuals of color, were less likely to engage in cancer prevention behaviors prior to diagnosis. Race and socioeconomic status (SES) were important factors in patient care/survivorship with worse outcomes among non-white women of low SES. Emergent themes in qualitative results emphasized the importance of patient intersectional identities, as well as feelings of marginalization, fears of discrimination, and general discomfort with providers as barriers to seeking cancer care. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with intersectional identities often experience barriers to cancer care that adversely impact screening, diagnosis, treatment, as well as survivorship. The use of an "intersectional lens" as a future clinical and research framework will facilitate a more multidimensional and holistic approach to the care of cancer patients.

Surgeon Strategies to Patient-Centered Decision-making in Cancer Care: Validation and Applications of a Conceptual Model.

We sought to construct and validate a model of cancer surgeon approaches to patient-centered decision-making (PCDM) and compare applications of that model relative to surgical specialties. Ten PCDM strategies were assessed using a cross-sectional survey administered online to 295 board-certified cancer surgeons. Structural equation modeling was used to empirically validate and compare approaches to PCDM. Within the full sample, 7 strategies comprised a latent construct labeled, "physical & emotional accessibility," associated with surgeon approaches to PCDM (ß = 0.37, p < .05). Three individual strategies were included: "expectations (Q4)" (ß = 0.52, p < .05), "decision preferences (Q5) (ß = 0.47, p < .05), and "access medical information (Q3)" (ß = 0.75). Surgical specialties for subgroup analysis were classified as general/other (67.6%) or hepato-pancreato-biliary and upper gastrointestinal (HPB/UGI) (34.2%). For general/other surgeons, 7 individual strategies composed the model of surgeon approaches to PCDM, with "time (Q6) (ß = 0.70, p < .001) and "therapeutic relationship building (Q9)" (ß = 0.69, p < .001) being the strongest predictors. The HPB/UGI model included 2 latent constructs labeled "physical accessibility" (ß = 0.72, p < .05) and "creating a decision-making dialogue" (ß = 0.62) as well as the individual strategy, "effective communication (Q8)" (ß = 0.51, p < .05). Although models of surgeon PCDM varied, there were 4 overlapping strategies, including effective communication. Tailoring models of PCDM may improve surgeon uptake and thus, overall patient satisfaction with their cancer care.

Do Religious/Spiritual Preferences and Needs of Cancer Patients Vary Based on Clinical- and Treatment-Level Factors?

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to characterize the religion and spiritual (R&S) needs of patients who undergo cancer-directed surgery. In addition, we seek to examine how R&S needs vary based on R&S identity and clinical and surgical treatment characteristics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was administered to potential participants who were recruited through outpatient clinics and online. Respondent desires for R&S resources and engagement with the healthcare team  around R&S topics were assessed. RESULTS: Among 383 potential participants who were identified, 236 respondents were included in the analytic cohort. Mean age was 58.8 (SD 12.10) years, and most participants were female (75.8%) and White/Caucasian (94.1%). The majority (78.4%) identified as currently cancer free. Commonly treated malignancies included breast (43.2%), male reproductive (8.9%), skin (8.5%), and gastrointestinal (GI) (7.2%). Two-thirds of the respondents indicated a desire to have R&S incorporated into their cancer treatment (63.3%). Patients who identified as highly/moderately religious reported wanting R&S more often (highly religious: 95.2% versus moderately religious: 71.4% vs. nonreligious but spiritual: 4.5%). On multivariable analysis, patients who believed their health would improve in the future were more likely to report wanting R&S service (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.0-4.7) as well as wanting to engage their healthcare providers on R&S topics (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.2-4.7). In contrast, perception of current or future health status was not associated with patient desire for the actual surgeon/doctor him/herself to be involved in R&S activities (OR 1.83, 95% CI 0.97-3.45). CONCLUSIONS: Two-thirds of patients undergoing cancer-directed surgery expressed a desire to have R&S incorporated into their cancer treatment. Incorporating R&S into cancer treatment can help a subset of patients throughout their cancer experience.

Healthcare provider self-reported observations and behaviors regarding their role in the spiritual care of cancer patients.

PURPOSE: The provision of spiritual care by an interprofessional healthcare team is an important, yet frequently neglected, component of patient-centered cancer care. The current study aimed to assess the relationship between individual and occupational factors of healthcare providers and their self-reported observations and behaviors regarding spiritual care in the oncologic encounter. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was administered to healthcare providers employed at a large Comprehensive Cancer Center. Pearson's chi-square test and logistic regression were used to determine potential associations between provider factors and their observations and behaviors regarding spiritual care. RESULTS: Among the participants emailed, 420 followed the survey link, with 340 (80.8%) participants completing the survey. Most participants were female (82.1%) and Caucasian (82.6%) with a median age was 35 years (IQR: 31-48). Providers included nurses (64.7%), physicians (17.9%), and "other" providers (17.4%). There was a difference in provider observations about discussing patient issues around religion and spirituality (R&S). Specifically, nurses more frequently inquired about R&S (60.3%), while physicians were less likely (41.4%) (p = 0.028). Also, nurses more frequently referred to chaplaincy/clergy (71.8%), while physicians and other providers more often consulted psychology/psychiatry (62.7%, p < 0.001). Perceived barriers to not discussing R&S topics included potentially offending patients (56.5%) and time limitations (47.7%). CONCLUSION: Removing extrinsic barriers and understanding intrinsic influences can improve the provision of spiritual care by healthcare providers.

The beliefs of cancer care providers regarding the role of religion and spirituality within the clinical encounter.

PURPOSE: To characterize cancer care provider perceptions of the role of religion and spirituality (R&S) within the clinical encounter. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was administered to healthcare professionals (defined as someone who is authorized to diagnose and/or treat physical or mental health disorders) currently employed at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center. Beliefs around the role of R&S within the clinical encounter were assessed using four adapted subscales/dimensions (D1-D4) from the Religion and Spirituality in Medicine: Physicians' Perspectives measure: God actively intervenes in patient health (D1), R&S is beneficial for patient mental health (D2), provider inquires about (D3) and discusses (D4) R&S in the clinical encounter. Logistic (D1) and linear (D2-D4) regression were performed using SAS v9.4 to determine the relationship between provider type and each subscale while controlling for gender, race, relationship status, education, and R&S identity. RESULTS: Among 340 participants, most participants were female (82.1%) or Caucasian (82.6%) and the median age was 35 years (IQR 31-48). Providers included physicians (17.9%), nurses (64.7%), and "other" (17.4%). Most participants identified as religious (57.5%), followed by spiritual (30.2%) and neither religious nor spiritual (12.3%). Nurses and other providers were more likely than physicians to believe that God intervenes in patient health (physician 41.7% vs. nurse 61.8% vs. other 60.3%; p = 0.02). All providers were equally as likely to believe that R&S is beneficial for patient mental health and to discuss R&S with patients within the clinical encounter (both p > 0.05). In contrast, nurses more frequently reported inquiring about R&S (median 1.7; IQR 0.9-2.0) compared with physicians (median 1.0; IQR 0.9-2.0) or other providers (median 1.4; IQR 1.0-2.1) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There were differences between providers in beliefs regarding the role of R&S in the clinical cancer encounter. Of note, nurses and other provider types were more likely than physicians to inquire about R&S with patients. Understanding variations in these beliefs will help determine how to best incorporate R&S support for patients during their cancer care.

Marginalized patient identities and the patient-physician relationship in the cancer care context: a systematic scoping review.

PURPOSE: We sought to examine and categorize the current evidence on patient-physician relationships among marginalized patient populations within the context of cancer care using a systemic scoping review approach. METHODS: Web-based discovery services (e.g., Google Scholar) and discipline-specific databases (e.g., PubMed) were queried for articles on the patient-physician relationship among marginalized cancer patients. The marginalized populations of interest included (1) race and ethnicity, (2) gender, (3) sexual orientation and gender identity, (4) age, (5) disability, (6) socioeconomic status, and (7) geography (rural/urban). Study screening and data extraction were facilitated through the Covidence software platform. RESULTS: Of the 397 screened studies, 37 met study criteria-most articles utilized quantitative methodologies (n = 28). The majority of studies focused on racial and ethnic cancer disparities (n = 27) with breast cancer (n = 20) as the most common cancer site. Trust and satisfaction with the provider were the most prevalent issues cited in the patient-physician relationship. Differences in patient-physician communication practices and quality were also frequently discussed. Overall, studies highlighted the need for increased culturally congruent care among providers. CONCLUSION: Results from this review suggest marginalized cancer patients face significant barriers in establishing culturally and linguistically congruent patient-physician relationships. Future studies should focus on the intersectionality of multiple marginalized identities and optimization of the patient-physician relationship.

A mixed-methods approach to comparing perceptions of cancer patients' and cancer care providers' religious and spiritual beliefs, behaviours, and attitudes.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the perceptions of cancer patients' and cancer care providers' religious and spiritual (R&S) beliefs, behaviours, and attitudes. METHODS: A concurrent, nested, quantitative dominant, mixed-methods design was utilised. Data were collected from patient and provider groups via online survey. Analyses include chi-square tests of independence and independent t-tests for quantitative data and content analysis for qualitative data. RESULTS: The final analytic cohort for the study included 576 participants (npatients  = 236, nproviders  = 340) with an average age of 47.4 years (SD = 15.0). Over half of participants were partnered (n = 386, 70.1%), female (n = 317, 57.3%) and had an advanced degree (n = 284, 51.2%). The most common diagnosis for patients was breast cancer (n = 103, 43.2%). The most common provider role was nurse (n = 220; 64.7%), while a smaller subset included physicians (n = 61; 17.9%) and "other" providers (n = 59; 17.4%). There was no difference between patients and providers in relation to R&S identity (p = 0.49) or behaviour (p = 0.28). Providers more frequently indicated that patients should receive R&S resources in the hospital (n = 281, 89.7% vs. n = 111, 49.6%, p < 0.001). For resource type, patients most frequently endorsed written resources (n = 93, 83.8%) while providers endorsed relational resources (n = 281, 97.9%). CONCLUSION: Aligning patient and provider expectations of spiritual care will contribute to provision of optimal patient-centred cancer care.

The religious/spiritual beliefs and needs of cancer survivors who underwent cancer-directed surgery.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to characterize patients' preferences for the role of religious and spiritual (R&S) beliefs and practices during cancer treatment and describe the R&S resources desired by patients during the perioperative period. METHOD: A cross-sectional survey was administered to individuals who underwent cancer-directed surgery. Data on demographics and R&S beliefs/preferences were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Among 236 participants, average age was 58.8 (SD = 12.10) years; the majority were female (76.2%), white (94.1%), had a significant other or spouse (60.2%), and were breast cancer survivors (43.6%). Overall, more than one-half (55.9%) of individuals identified themselves as being religious, while others identified as only spiritual (27.9%) or neither (16.2%). Patients who identified as religious wanted R&S integrated into their care more often than patients who were only spiritual or neither (p < 0.001). Nearly half of participants (49.6%) wanted R&S resources when admitted to the hospital including the opportunity to speak with an R&S leader (e.g., rabbi; 72.1%), R&S texts (64.0%), and journaling materials (54.1%). Irrespective of R&S identification, 68.0% of patients did not want their physician to engage with them about R&S topics. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Access to R&S resources is important during cancer treatment, and incorporating R&S into cancer care may be especially important to patients that identify as religious. R&S needs should be addressed as part of the cancer care plan.

Provision of supportive spiritual care for hepatopancreatic cancer patients: an unmet need?

BACKGROUND: Among patients with a serious cancer diagnosis, like hepatopancreatic (HP) cancer, spiritual distress needs to be addressed, as these psychosocial-spiritual symptoms are often more burdensome than some physical symptoms. The objective of the current study was to characterize supportive spiritual care utilization among patients with HP cancers. METHODS: Patients with HP cancer were identified from the electronic medical record at a large comprehensive cancer center; data on patients with breast/prostate cancer (non-HP) were collected for comparison. Associations between patient characteristics and receipt of supportive spiritual care were evaluated within the overall sample and end-of-life subsample. RESULTS: Among 8,961 individuals (nHP=1,419, nnon-HP =7,542), 51.7% of HP patients utilized supportive spiritual care versus 19.8% of non-HP patients (p<0.001). Younger age and religious identity were associated with receiving spiritual care (p<0.001). HP patients had higher odds of receiving spiritual care versus non-HP patients (OR 2.41, 95%CI: 2.10, 2.78). Within the end-of-life subsample, HP patients more frequently received spiritual care to "accept their illness" (39.5% vs. 22.5%, p<0.001), while non-HP patients needed support to "define their purpose in life" (13.1% vs. 4.5%, p=0.001). DISCUSSION: Supportive spiritual care was important to a large subset of HP patients and should be integrated into their care.

Assessing Differences in Cancer Surgeon Approaches to Patient-Centered Decision-Making Using Vignette-Based Methodology.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to assess surgeon-patient-centered decision-making (PCDM) strategies relative to surgeon and patient factors. METHODS: Approaches to PCDM were evaluated using a cross-sectional survey based on clinical vignettes assessing surgeon likeliness (0 = not at all likely, 100 = very likely) to utilize PCDM strategies. Data were analyzed using repeated-measures mixed-effects linear regression. Adjusted estimates are provided as least-squares mean (LSM) values. RESULTS: The final analytic sample consisted of 208 respondents (58.5% response rate); the majority of respondents were male (67.7%) and Caucasian (82.0%) with an average age of 51.6 years (standard deviation, SD = 9.9 years, range 34.0-78.0 years). Specialties included breast (18.9%), hepatopancreatobiliary (21.4%), and other (59.7%). Surgeons practicing at academic (versus nonacademic) hospitals were less likely to be directive (LSM: 66.2 vs. 70.3, p = 0.004), spend equal time discussing all treatment options (LSM: 77.9 vs. 82.3, p = 0.001), and make explicit treatment recommendations (LSM: 67.7 vs. 71.7, p = 0.005). Surgeons who specialized in breast cancer (versus other specialties), in practice 10+ years (versus < 10 years), and female (versus male) were more likely to spend time discussing all treatment options (LSM: 82.8 vs. 77.3; 81.6 vs. 78.6; and 82.1 vs. 78.0, all p < 0.05). Surgeons perceived patients who had blue-collar (versus white-collar) jobs as less likely to want active participation in decision-making (LSM: 62.9 vs. 65.6, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Surgeon approaches to PCDM varied based on a number of surgeon and patient characteristics. Further studies are needed to understand how surgeon PCDM strategies can be tailored to specific care contexts and patient needs.

Characterizing Perceptions Around the Patient-Oncologist Relationship: a Qualitative Focus Group Analysis.

The purpose of the current study was to characterize the experiences of cancer patients and their caregiver/family members around their relationship with their oncologist, health care team, and the hospital environment. Participants were recruited from The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center. Participant sociodemographic factors were assessed. Focus groups were moderated and recorded by two members of the research team using a semi-structured interview format. The audio recordings were transcribed and uploaded to NViVO 11 for analyses. Four focus groups were conducted with 25 participants. The mean age of participants was 58.4 years (SD = 15.1, range 26.0-76.0). Participants who were identified as patients (84%) reported different malignancy types including breast (56%), gynecologic (16%), skin (6%) oral (6%), and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (6%). Three major themes that emerged around the patient-oncologist relationship, include (1) choosing a physician and health care location, (2) relationship with the physician, health care team, and hospital environment; and (3) patient engagement and decision-making. Subthemes highlighted the importance of the flexible communication behaviors and trustworthiness of the oncologist, and the impact of other health care team members. Patients also reported the desire to be engaged in making treatment-related decisions and to include the caregiver/spouse in all stages of cancer care. Understanding the experience of cancer patients in a relationship with their oncologist in the context of the health care team and health care environment will be an important area of future research to provide optimal, tailored patient-centered cancer care.

Does spiritual and religious orientation impact the clinical practice of healthcare providers?

The objective of the current study was to assess the religious and spiritual (R&S) beliefs and practices among healthcare providers, compare R&S among provider types, as well as examine the potential relationship between organized/nonorganized religious activities and intrinsic religiosity with the incorporation of R&S into clinical practice. A cross-sectional descriptive online survey methodology was used. There were 387 participants with an average age of 45.5 years. Providers included primary care providers (26.9%), nurses (27.1%), allied health (23.5%), and mental health professionals (22.5%). Most participants reported being "religious and spiritual" (42.9%) or "spiritual and not religious" (36.6%). There was a difference in R&S among provider types (x2(6) = 12.6, p = .05) with mental health providers more often identifying as spiritual, but not religious (46.6%) compared with other providers. No mental health professional indicated almost always/often/sometimes praying with patients versus 9.5% of primary providers, 14.8% of allied providers, and 18.1% of nurses. Results from structural equation modeling showed that intrinsic religiosity was most strongly associated with how a provider interacted with patients around R&S (ß = .644, p < .001) followed by non-organized religious activities (ß = .228, p < .001) and organized religious activities (ß = .092, p = .037). Understanding the role of R&S beliefs and behaviors of healthcare providers is important to patient-centered care.

Patient Perceptions About the Role of Religion and Spirituality During Cancer Care.

We sought to assess the perspectives of cancer patients relative to their spiritual well-being, as well as examine the impact of religion/spirituality during cancer care. A mixed-methods concurrent embedded online survey design was used. While 86% of participants indicated a religious/spiritual belief, respondents also reported lower overall spiritual well-being than population norms (t(73) = - 5.30, p < 0.01). Open-ended responses revealed that 22% of participants desired the healthcare team to address the topic of religion/spirituality, but the majority preferred to discuss with a family member or friend (48%). Religion/spirituality might play a central role for a subset of patients across the cancer journey.

Reciprocity within patient-physician and patient-spouse/caregiver dyads: insights into patient-centered care.

PURPOSE: To explore the reciprocal process of decisional conflict within the patient-physician dyad, and its relationship with patient general health and patient-perceived physician helpfulness. Among the subset of participants who were in a committed relationship, we examined the congruence in reciprocal processes between patient-spouse/caregiver and patient-physician dyads. METHODS: An online retrospective survey of cancer patients was conducted in the USA. The reciprocal process of decisional conflict within the patient-physician dyad was measured using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). The Perception of Spousal Reciprocity Scale (POSRS) was used to measure reciprocity in the patient-spouse/caregiver dyad. RESULTS: The final analytic cohort consisted of 116 participants. The average age of participants was 58.4 years, the majority were female (66.7%), and the most common diagnosis was breast cancer (27.9%). Participants who perceived their physician as more helpful were more likely to report lower levels of decisional conflict on the DCS total scale and subscales (r range = 0.24-0.46, p < 0.05). Higher scores on the PSORS were associated with lower levels of decisional conflict (r = - 0.37, p < 0.01). Participants not in a relationship had higher levels of decisional conflict about their treatment decisions (M = 21.69) than participants in a relationship (M = 9.69, t(26.95) = - 2.26, p = 0.032). DISCUSSION: Physicians are an important resource for both the patient and caregiver during the cancer journey. Understanding reciprocal processes within the patient-physician relationship related to patient-centered care and including the caregiver in the medical decision-making process can decrease the threat of decisional conflict and subsequent adverse outcomes.

Assessing structure and characteristics of social networks among cancer survivors: impact on general health.

PURPOSE: Robust social networks are associated with improved health and quality of life for cancer survivors. Certain cancer diagnoses are associated with higher levels of stigma than breast cancer. However, little is known about the differences in social networks depending on the type of malignancy. This study aims to assess the differences in social networks and general health between breast cancer and more stigmatized cancers. METHODS: Cancer survivors were recruited to participate in a cross-sectional online survey study. Social network size and satisfaction was measured using the Cancer Survivor Social Networks Measure. General health was measured with a five-point-Likert-style item. RESULTS: The average age of the sample (n = 99) was 57.6 years old (SD = 13.4) and the majority were female (67.7%). Breast cancer survivors had an average of 1.39 more members in their social network than other cancers (t(94) = 2.28, p = 0.025). There were no significant differences between groups in network satisfaction. Results of a binary logistic regression model explained 26.9% of the variance in general health (x2(5) = 18.35, p = 0.003). There was a significant association among formal support network satisfaction (ß = - 1.23, p = 0.021), formal support network size (ß = - 0.36, p = 0.019), malignancy type (breast vs. other) (ß = 1.05, p = 0.05), and better general health. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest breast cancer survivors had more formal social supports then other malignancy types. An association among greater formal social network size and satisfaction, a diagnosis of breast instead of other cancers, and better general health was noted. Emphasizing formal support sources for all cancer survivors may improve their overall health.

A systematic review of the methods utilised to measure the relationship between cancer patients and oncologists: Implications for future research and practice.

INTRODUCTION: The patient-physician relationship is a critical component of patient-centred health care. The patient-oncologist relationship is particularly important due to the uncertainties that surround treatment of cancer. The goal of the current review was to summarise current methodological approaches to studying the relationship between cancer patients and oncologists. METHODS: A systematic review using PsychInfo, Ebsco, PubMed and Google Scholar was performed using combinations and variations of the MESH terms: "relationship," "doctor-patient," and "oncology." The included studies explicitly measured the "relationship" as an independent or dependent variable. Data were extracted and analysed. RESULTS: The 13 studies included in the review were published from 2004 to 2018. There was little agreement between studies on the definition of the patient-oncologist relationship. Trust was most frequently measured, but methods varied. Most studies evaluated the patient perspective (n = 10). The few studies that considered the oncologist perspective did not measure their perception of the relationship. CONCLUSIONS: The current review demonstrates that current approaches used to assess the patient-oncologist relationship are inconsistent. These differences may limit our understanding of patient needs in current research and practice. Future research should focus on the use of a relational lens as a theoretical framework to assess the patient-oncologist relationship.

Exploring the perception of survivors on the bidirectional impact between cancer and their social contexts: A mixed-methods approach.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the current study was to use a mixed-methods approach to assess the perspective of cancer survivors on the bidirectional impact between cancer and their social contexts. METHOD: A fixed concurrent triangulation mixed-methods survey design was used with open- and closed-ended questions that were predetermined and administered to participants. Quantitative items included demographic questions and the Life Impact Checklist. Qualitative questions were designed to explore the bidirectional impact between the patient and specific contexts including spirituality/faith, the spousal/partner relationship, and the family. A cross-sectional descriptive approach was used to evaluate the quantitative items and the constant comparative method guided the analysis of open-ended questions. RESULT: Among 116 participants (mean age 58.4 years), the majority were female (66.7%) with breast cancer (27.9%). Nearly one-half the respondents endorsed a positive impact of cancer on their spirituality/faith, but qualitative results suggested less of a bidirectional impact. The importance of the spouse/partner during the cancer experience was emphasized, including the subthemes of instrumental and emotional support; however, there was often a negative impact of cancer on the spouse/partner relationship, including sexual functioning. Survivors indicated family members provided instrumental and emotional support, but not as regularly or directly as a spouse/partner. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Social contexts are important among cancer survivors, with many cancer survivors relying more on their spouse/partner than other family members for support. The cancer experience is stressful not only for survivors, but also for individuals in their social contexts and relationships.