Creation and evaluation of a cancer survivorship curriculum for pediatric resident physicians.

PURPOSE: There is a paucity of formal clinician education concerning cancer survivorship care, which produces care barriers and poorer outcomes for survivors of childhood cancer. To address this, we implemented a curriculum in childhood cancer survivorship care for pediatric residents at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). We examined the efficacy of this curriculum following program completion. METHODS: A case-based curriculum was created and integrated within existing educational structures using Kern's model. We utilized the retrospective pre-posttest method to evaluate participating residents' knowledge, clinical skills, and attitudes towards cancer survivorship topics before and after receiving the curriculum. Pre-posttest items were compared using paired t tests and one-sided binomial tests. We analyzed free-response question items for major themes using constant comparative methods. RESULTS: Thirty-four residents completed the curriculum and its evaluation. Each assessment item significantly increased from pre- to post-curriculum; p < 0.05. Greater than 40% of residents improved in all but one assessment item post-curriculum; p < 0.05. Residents reported the curriculum enhanced their pediatric knowledge base (M = 3.24; SD = 0.65) and would recommend it to other residency programs; M = 3.24; SD = 0.69. Major themes included residents' request for additional oncofertility information, training in counseling survivors, and cancer survivorship training opportunities. CONCLUSIONS: A cancer survivorship curriculum can successfully increase trainees' knowledge, clinical skills, and comfort in discussing topics relevant to survivorship care. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: With increasing numbers of childhood cancer survivors living into adulthood, residents will likely treat this population regardless of intended career path. This curriculum represents one method to deliver formal cancer survivorship training.

The prevalence of social and behavioral topics and related educational opportunities during attending rounds.

PURPOSE: To quantify the prevalence of social and behavioral sciences (SBS) topics during patient care and to rate team response to these topics once introduced. METHOD: This cross-sectional study used five independent raters to observe 80 inpatient ward teams on internal medicine and pediatric services during attending rounds at two academic hospitals over a five-month period. Patient-level primary outcomes-prevalence of SBS topic discussions and rate of positive responses to discussions-were captured using an observational tool and summarized at the team level using hierarchical models. Teams were scored on patient- and learner-centered behaviors. RESULTS: Observations were made of 80 attendings, 83 residents, 75 interns, 78 medical students, and 113 allied health providers. Teams saw a median of 8.0 patients per round (collectively, 622 patients), and 97.1% had at least one SBS topic arise (mean = 5.3 topics per patient). Common topics were pain (62%), nutrition (53%), social support (52%), and resources (39%). After adjusting for team characteristics, the number of discussion topics raised varied significantly among the four services and was associated with greater patient-centeredness. When topics were raised, 38% of teams' responses were positive. Services varied with respect to learner- and patient-centeredness, with most services above average for learner-centered, and below average for patient-centered behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: Of 30 SBS topics tracked, some were addressed commonly and others rarely. Multivariable analyses suggest that medium-sized teams can address SBS concerns by increasing time per patient and consistently adopting patient-centered behaviors.

Role-modeling and medical error disclosure: a national survey of trainees.

PURPOSE: To measure trainees' exposure to negative and positive role-modeling for responding to medical errors and to examine the association between that exposure and trainees' attitudes and behaviors regarding error disclosure. METHOD: Between May 2011 and June 2012, 435 residents at two large academic medical centers and 1,187 medical students from seven U.S. medical schools received anonymous, electronic questionnaires. The questionnaire asked respondents about (1) experiences with errors, (2) training for responding to errors, (3) behaviors related to error disclosure, (4) exposure to role-modeling for responding to errors, and (5) attitudes regarding disclosure. Using multivariate regression, the authors analyzed whether frequency of exposure to negative and positive role-modeling independently predicted two primary outcomes: (1) attitudes regarding disclosure and (2) nontransparent behavior in response to a harmful error. RESULTS: The response rate was 55% (884/1,622). Training on how to respond to errors had the largest independent, positive effect on attitudes (standardized effect estimate, 0.32, P < .001); negative role-modeling had the largest independent, negative effect (standardized effect estimate, -0.26, P < .001). Positive role-modeling had a positive effect on attitudes (standardized effect estimate, 0.26, P < .001). Exposure to negative role-modeling was independently associated with an increased likelihood of trainees' nontransparent behavior in response to an error (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.15-1.64; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to role-modeling predicts trainees' attitudes and behavior regarding the disclosure of harmful errors. Negative role models may be a significant impediment to disclosure among trainees.

Listening in on difficult conversations: an observational, multi-center investigation of real-time conversations in medical oncology.

BACKGROUND: The quality of communication in medical care has been shown to influence health outcomes. Cancer patients, a highly diverse population, communicate with their clinical care team in diverse ways over the course of their care trajectory. Whether that communication happens and how effective it is may relate to a variety of factors including the type of cancer and the patient's position on the cancer care continuum. Yet, many of the routine needs of cancer patients after initial cancer treatment are often not addressed adequately. Our goal is to identify areas of strength and areas for improvement in cancer communication by investigating real-time cancer consultations in a cross section of patient-clinician interactions at diverse study sites. METHODS/DESIGN: In this paper we describe the rationale and approach for an ongoing observational study involving three institutions that will utilize quantitative and qualitative methods and employ a short-term longitudinal, prospective follow-up component to investigate decision-making, key topics, and clinician-patient-companion communication dynamics in clinical oncology. DISCUSSION: Through a comprehensive, real-time approach, we hope to provide the fundamental groundwork from which to promote improved patient-centered communication in cancer care.

Shared decision making in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and knee: results of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence that shared decision-making tools for treatment decisions improve decision quality and patient engagement, they are not commonly employed in orthopaedic practice. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of decision and communication aids on patient knowledge, efficiency of decision making, treatment choice, and patient and surgeon experience in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-three patients who were considered medically appropriate for hip or knee replacement were randomized to either a shared decision-making intervention or usual care. Patients in the intervention group received a digital video disc and booklet describing the natural history and treatment alternatives for hip and knee osteoarthritis and developed a structured list of questions for their surgeon in consultation with a health coach. Patients in the control group received information about the surgeon's practice. Both groups reported their knowledge and stage in decision making and their treatment choice, satisfaction, and communication with their surgeon. Surgeons reported the appropriateness of patient questions and their satisfaction with the visit. The primary outcome measure tracked whether patients reached an informed decision during their first visit. Statistical analyses were performed to evaluate differences between groups. RESULTS: Significantly more patients in the intervention group (58%) reached an informed decision during the first visit compared with the control group (33%) (p = 0.005). The intervention group reported higher confidence in knowing what questions to ask their doctor (p = 0.0034). After the appointment, there was no significant difference between groups in the percentage of patients choosing surgery (p = 0.48). Surgeons rated the number and appropriateness of patient questions higher in the intervention group (p < 0.0001), reported higher satisfaction with the efficiency of the intervention group visits (p < 0.0001), and were more satisfied overall with the intervention group visits (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Decision and communication aids used in orthopaedic practice had benefits for both patients and surgeons. These findings could be important in facilitating adoption of shared decision-making tools into routine orthopaedic practice.

Measuring informed decision making about prostate cancer screening in primary care.

PURPOSE: To measure the extent of informed decision making (IDM) about prostate cancer screening in physician-patient encounters, describe the coding process, and assess the reliability of the IDM measure. METHODS: Audiorecoded encounters of 146 older adult men and their primary care physicians were obtained in a randomized controlled trial of mediated decision support related to prostate cancer screening. Each encounter was dual coded for the presence or absence of 9 elements that reflect several important dimensions of IDM, such as information sharing, patient empowerment, and engaging patients in preference clarification. An IDM-9 score (range = 0-9) was determined for each encounter by summing the number of elements that were coded as present. Estimates of coding reliability and internal consistency were calculated. RESULTS: Male patients tended to be white (59%), married (70%), and between the ages of 50 and 59 (70%). Physicians tended to be white (90%), male (74%), and have more than 10 years of practice experience (74%). IDM-9 scores ranged from 0 to 7.5 (mean [SD], 2.7 [2.1]). Reliability (0.90) and internal consistency (0.81) of the IDM-9 were both high. The IDM dimension observed most frequently was information sharing (74%), whereas the dimension least frequently observed was engagement in preference clarification (3.4%). CONCLUSIONS: In physician-patient encounters, the level of IDM concerning prostate cancer screening was low. The use of a dual-coding approach with audiorecorded encounters produced a measure of IDM that was reliable and internally consistent.

Mediated decision support in prostate cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial of decision counseling.

OBJECTIVE: This randomized trial was conducted to assess the impact of a mediated decision support intervention on primary care patient prostate cancer screening knowledge, decisional conflict, informed decision making (IDM), and screening. METHODS: Before a routine office visit, 313 male patients eligible for prostate cancer screening completed a baseline telephone survey and received a mailed brochure on prostate cancer screening. At the visit, participants were randomized to either an enhanced intervention (EI) or a standard intervention (SI) group. Before meeting with their physician, EI Group men had a nurse-led "decision counseling" session, while SI Group men completed a practice satisfaction survey. An endpoint survey was administered. Survey data, encounter audio-recordings, and chart audit data were used to assess study outcomes. RESULTS: Knowledge increased in the EI Group (mean difference of +0.8 on a 10-point scale, p=0.001), but decisional conflict did not change (mean difference of -0.02 on a 4-point scale, p=0.620). The EI Group had higher IDM (rate ratio=1.30, p=0.029) and lower screening (odds ratio=0.67, p=0.102). CONCLUSION: Nurse-mediated decision counseling increased participant prostate cancer screening knowledge, and influenced informed decision making and screening. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Nurses trained in decision counseling can facilitate shared decision making about screening.

Patient-centered discussions about prostate cancer screening: a real-world approach.

National guidelines recommend that primary care providers discuss the risks and benefits of prostate cancer screening with their patients but give little guidance on how to fit such a complex discussion into a busy clinic encounter. The authors propose a process-oriented approach (Ask-Tell-Ask) that promotes tailored conversations and value-based recommendations. The Ask-Tell-Ask approach includes diagnosing a patient's informational needs, providing targeted education based on those needs, and making a shared decision about testing. This time-efficient model emphasizes the provider's role as an interactive guide rather than a one-way supplier of information. Although there is no way to make these discussions simple, this streamlined strategy can help patients and providers efficiently negotiate the complex and important decision of screening for prostate cancer.

An approach to enhance communication about screening mammography in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: Informed decision making for preventive and screening services in primary care is receiving increased emphasis, yet the actual practice of informed decision making in clinical settings is limited. Lack of training, time, and standardized approaches to engage patients in decision making have been cited as barriers. In initiating screening mammography for women in their 40s, most organizations advise clinicians to educate women about the benefits and potential harms of screening, yet provide no practical guidelines on how to do so in clinical practice. METHODS: We describe an ethically sound, practical model dialogue that may be used to communicate with women in their 40s about initiating screening mammography and include a discussion of the potential benefits and harms. The dialogue is based on a previously described informed decision-making framework, synthesis of evidence from the breast cancer screening and patient-physician communication literature, field testing with practicing academic and community-based general internists and recommendations by health communication experts. CONCLUSIONS: The dialogue may be used in office and in academic clinical settings to engage women in decision making about initiating screening mammography, to educate them about the potential benefits and harms, and may also serve as a foundation for teaching medical students and residents about patient-centered communication.

Informed decision-making and colorectal cancer screening: is it occurring in primary care?

BACKGROUND: Current recommendations advise patients to participate in the decision-making for selecting a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening option. The degree to which providers communicate the information necessary to prepare patients for participation in this process is not known. OBJECTIVE: To assess the level of informed decision-making occurring during actual patient-provider communications on CRC screening and test for the association between informed decision-making and screening behavior. RESEARCH DESIGN: Observational study of audiotaped clinic visits between patients and their providers in the primary care clinic at a Veterans Administration Medical Center. SUBJECTS: Male patients, age 50-74 years, presenting to a primary care visit at the study site. MEASURES: The Informed Decision-Making (IDM) Model was used to code the audiotapes for 9 elements of communication that should occur to prepare patients for participation in decision-making. The primary outcome is completion of CRC screening during the study period. RESULTS: The analytic cohort consisted of 91 patients due for CRC screening who had a test ordered at the visit. Six of the 9 IDM elements occurred in < or =20% of the visits with none addressed in > or =50%. CRC screening occurred less frequently for those discussing "pros and cons" (12% vs. 46%, P = 0.01) and "patient preferences" (6% vs. 47%, P = 0.001) compared with those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: We found that a lack of informed decision-making occurred during CRC screening discussions and that particular elements of the process were negatively associated with screening. Further research is needed to better understand the effects of informed decision-making on screening behavior.

Bringing ethics education to the clinical years: ward ethics sessions at the University of Washington.

PURPOSE: Although most medical schools teach medical ethics during preclinical years, incorporating these ethics into clinical training remains challenging. During clinical rotations, students' professional behaviors and attitudes are profoundly affected. This project was intended to develop an educational intervention to incorporate medical ethics training as a part of students' professional development within the context of clinical training. METHOD: "Ward Ethics" is a series of peer discussions guided by clinical faculty mentors trained in fostering issue identification and strategy development. The sessions described here were conducted during medicine and surgery rotations for third-year medical students at the University of Washington School of Medicine from 1998 to 2003. Thirty clinical faculty participated as facilitators. Written evaluations were collected from students and faculty at each session, and faculty interviews were conducted in 2001. RESULTS: The data reported are from 24 sessions and 15 faculty interviews from 1999 to 2001. The topics were consistent with prior reports of ethical issues that students encountered. Students reported a variety of learned strategies such as knowing how and when to speak up and transitioning from prioritizing evaluations to focusing on patient care, resulting in their feeling more confident. Faculty reported noticing positive results to their professional development as well. CONCLUSIONS: Medical students in the clinical years face ethically challenging situations. Some circumstances, if left unexamined, may erode students' abilities to maintain and develop appropriate professional behaviors. Students participating in this activity agreed that it served as a way to fight isolation, share stories, and exchange ideas for future problem solving.