Understanding the influences and impact of patient-clinician communication in cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Patient-clinician communication is thought to be central to care outcomes, but when and how communication affects patient outcomes is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: We propose a conceptual model and classification framework upon which the empirical evidence base for the impact of patient-clinician communication can be summarized and further built. DESIGN: We use the proposed model and framework to summarize findings from two recent systematic reviews, one evaluating the use of shared decision making (SDM) on cancer care outcomes and the other evaluating the role of physician recommendation in cancer screening use. KEY RESULTS: Using this approach, we identified clusters of studies with positive findings, including those relying on the measurement of SDM from the patients' perspective and affective-cognitive outcomes, particularly in the context of surgical treatment decision making. We also identify important gaps in the literature, including the role of SDM in post-surgical treatment and end-of-life care decisions, and those specifying particular physician communication strategies when recommending cancer screening. CONCLUSIONS: Transparent linkages between key conceptual domains and the influence of methodological approaches on observed patient outcomes are needed to advance our understanding of how and when patient-clinician communication influences patient outcomes. The proposed conceptual model and classification framework can be used to facilitate the translation of empirical evidence into practice and to identify critical gaps in knowledge regarding how and when patient-clinician communication impacts care outcomes in the context of cancer and health care more broadly.

Parent-Provider Communication of HPV Vaccine Hesitancy.

: media-1vid110.1542/5754332185001PEDS-VA_2017-2312Video Abstract OBJECTIVES: To prevent human papillomavirus (HPV)-related cancers, providers must effectively communicate with HPV vaccine-hesitant parents. Here, we developed a typology characterizing parent-provider communication around HPV vaccine hesitancy. METHODS: We audio-recorded 43 visits with unvaccinated adolescents at 6 pediatric clinics in Dallas, Texas in which parents were undecided about HPV vaccination. We qualitatively coded how parents verbally expressed hesitancy (assertive response, asking a question, or expressing concern) and whether providers responded with acquiescence (agree to defer vaccination) and/or persistence (continue discussion). We described the frequency of parent and provider communication codes and same-day vaccination. RESULTS: Among the 43 visits, 37 parents expressed hesitancy ≥1 times in many ways. Assertive responses were most common (27 visits), followed by questions (16 visits), and concerns (12 visits). When the first expression of hesitancy was a question or concern, 71% and 75% of adolescents, respectively, received same-day vaccinations, whereas 33% of adolescents who received an initial assertive response were vaccinated. Providers responded with only persistence in 18 visits, a mix of acquiescence and persistence in 13 visits, and only acquiescence in 6 visits. When providers only used persistence, 17 of 18 adolescents were vaccinated; when providers responded with only acquiescence, no adolescents received the vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: Our exploratory analysis reveals that providers engaging hesitant parents and addressing their concerns can lead to same-day HPV vaccination. Data reveal that even parents making assertive statements are amenable to influence by providers. Our findings reveal an important missed opportunity when providers simply acquiesce to parental hesitation.