Facilitating patient-oncologist communication in advanced treatment-resistant cancer: development and feasibility testing of a question prompt list.

BACKGROUND: Patients' expectations regarding medical information in advanced stages of cancer are still poorly understood. Tailoring information to advanced cancer patients is a subtle task. We developed a question prompt list (QPL) that serves as a patient-oncologist communication aid in France. METHODS: A four-step sequential mixed method involving patients with luminal B/triple-negative metastatic breast cancer or metastatic uveal melanoma (N = 110) and patients' partners, oncologists, and researchers (N = 18) was used. In-depth interviews and questionnaires focused on the information needed at the disclosure of metastasis or resistance to treatment (step 1), the formulation of questions and procedures for use in oncology visits (steps 2 and 3), and the acceptability of the final tool (stage 4). RESULTS: The initial version of the QPL consists of 17 questions covering 5 themes (disease, current treatment, other options, living with cancer, prognosis). In step 2, 13 questions were added, 2 were merged, and 5 were deleted; a short form (4 questions) and recommendations for clinical use were proposed. In step 3, 2 questions were merged, and 6 were deleted. Four oncologists (27% of the target population) took part in step 4, and the QPL was discussed with 20 patients, revealing a positive appraisal. CONCLUSION: We provide a rigorously developed, relevant, concise, and acceptable question prompt list for clinical application in the advanced cancer care setting in France. Further research needs to assess whether this tool actually facilitates oncologist-patient communication and improves satisfaction with care and health outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is listed on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04118062) and registered under identification n° IRRID "International Registered Report Identifier": DERR1-10.2196/26414.

Improving young patient - practitioner communication about sexual health during medical visits.

OBJECTIVES: Young people face barriers that lead to gaps in sexual and reproductive health care communications. Issues such as discomfort discussing sexual health lead to inadequate delivery of services resulting in unintended pregnancies and STIs. Closing this communication gap between patients and health care practitioners would improve communication and health outcomes. The objective of this study was to gain feedback from focus groups about: (a) barriers and facilitators to communication surrounding sexual health and (b) the feasibility and acceptability of a question prompt list (QPL) and informational video emphasizing asking questions about sexual health during medical visits as tools young people could use to be more involved during visits. METHODS: Three focus groups were conducted: two with young adults (n=14) and one with practitioners (n=5) of sexual/reproductive health care services. Practitioners were recruited from healthcare clinics. RESULTS: Young adults were aged 18-22 years old. Participants identified barriers to communication such as embarrassment over sexual health topics and practitioner assumptions about patients' base of knowledge. A facilitator to communication was patient-friendly language. Focus group participants offered suggestions on how to improve the QPL as well as themes that should be covered in an educational video. Participants viewed the QPL and educational video as useful for encouraging conversations between patient and practitioner. CONCLUSIONS: Many barriers obstruct communication between young adults and practitioners on topics relating to sexual health. Both the QPL and an educational video could be used to enhance patient-practitioner communication.

A pre-visit video/question prompt list intervention to increase youth question-asking about attention deficit hyperactivity disorder during pediatric visits.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a pragmatic randomized controlled trial to test the effectiveness of an ADHD question prompt list with video intervention to increase youth question-asking and provider education about ADHD during visits. METHODS: English-speaking youth ages 11-17 with ADHD and their caregivers were enrolled from two pediatric clinics. Youth were randomized to intervention or usual care groups. Intervention group adolescents watched the video and then completed an ADHD question prompt list before their visits. Multivariable regression was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Twenty-one providers and 102 of their patients participated. Intervention group youth were significantly more likely to ask one or more questions about ADHD and its treatment than usual care youth (odds ratio=5.4, 95 % Confidence Interval (CI)= 1.8, 15.9). Providers were significantly more likely to educate youth who asked one or more questions during visits about more ADHD medication areas (unstandardized beta=0.98, 95 % CI=0.31 to 1.64) and more non-medication strategies for ADHD (unstandardized beta=0.50, 95 % CI=0.13 to 0.88). CONCLUSION: The intervention increased youth question-asking about ADHD and its treatment. Providers provided more education to youth who asked one or more questions about ADHD and its treatment. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Providers and practices should consider having youth complete ADHD question prompt lists and watch the video before visits to increase youth question-asking during visits.

Shared decision-making support program for older patients with advanced cancer using a question prompt list and geriatric assessment: A pilot randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Older patients with cancer are less likely to express their treatment preferences than younger patients. Question prompt lists (QPLs) facilitate communication between patients and physicians. Geriatric assessment (GA) is recommended when older patients with cancer make treatment decisions. This study estimated the effect size of a shared decision-making (SDM) support program combining QPLs with GA in terms of patients' subjective evaluation of the SDM process for a future definitive randomized controlled trial. We also evaluated the number and quality of aging-related communication during consultations, and feasibility and acceptability of the study for exploratory purposes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a pilot study with randomized allocation and blind evaluation. Patients aged 65 years or older at the National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan, scheduled to discuss the changes of their treatment, were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the SDM support program or usual care. This program consisted of 30-60 min of face-to-face coaching, with QPLs and GA provided before the coaching. As the primary endpoint, the decisional conflict scores given by the patients immediately after the consultation were compared between the two groups. For the secondary endpoints, the number and quality of aging-related communications during the consultations were assessed by evaluators (blinded) using audio-recordings. Adherence, burden, and usefulness were assessed for evaluating feasibility and acceptability of the SDM support program. RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled. All patients completed the GA questionnaire, for which 70% did not require any individual assistance. Answering the questionnaires took approximately 11 min. The decisional conflict scores were mean [standard deviation (SD)]: 19.3 [10.8] vs. 18.0 [11.1] (effect size: Cohen's d = 0.12) for the SDM support program and usual care groups, respectively. The number of aging-related communications during the consultation for the new treatment was higher in the SDM support program group than the usual care (mean [SD]: 3.3 [1.2] vs. 2.2 [1.5], effect size: cohen's d = 1.32). Patients felt that the SDM support program was useful but not burdensome or difficult. DISCUSSION: The SDM support program was considered useful and feasible for older patients and able to facilitate communication regarding aging-related concerns. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study protocol was registered on September 23, 2020, in the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000041867).

Development and initial evaluation of the usefulness of a question prompt list to promote patients' level of information about work-related medical rehabilitation: a pilot study.

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to develop a question prompt list (QPL) to support patients undergoing work-related medical rehabilitation in obtaining relevant information and to explore how patients and physicians rate the QPL regarding its usefulness, practicability, and perceived (additional) effort. Methods: An initial item pool was assessed by rehabilitation patients (N = 3) in cognitive interviews, rated by physicians and other health professionals (N = 11), and then further modified. The final QPL version (16 items) was used by patients (N = 36) in medical admission interviews in an inpatient medical rehabilitation facility and then evaluated. Physicians evaluated the QPL after each interview with a study participant (N = 6; k = 39 interviews). Results: The QPL was used by 50% of patients who rated its usefulness and comprehensibility positively. Neither the need for information nor satisfaction with the information received was correlated with QPL use. The physicians' assessment showed a positive evaluation regarding the provision of information and structuring of the conversation, but also a higher perceived time expenditure. Discussion: While initial testing of the QPL in work-related medical rehabilitation as a tool to support patient-provider communication generally showed a favorable evaluation by patients using it and physicians, future research should address its validity and effectiveness.

Question prompt list intervention for patients with advanced cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced communication in end-of-life care (EOL) improves preparation and treatment decisions for patients with advanced cancer, affecting their quality of life at the end of life. Question prompt list (QPL) has been shown to enhance physician-patient communication in patients with cancer, but there is a lack of systematic review and meta-analysis for those with advanced cancer. Enhanced communication in end-of-life care improves preparation and treatment decisions for patients with advanced cancer, affecting their quality of life at the end of life. OBJECTIVE: To review the effectiveness of QPL intervention on physician-patient communication and health outcomes during consultation in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, and PsycINFO databases were undertaken using inclusion criteria for relevant articles up to August 2021. Pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models. We used the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool and modified Jadad scale to assess the quality of the studies. RESULTS: Seven RCTs with 1059 participants were included, of which six studies were eligible for the meta-analysis. The pooled meta-analysis results indicated that QPL in patients with advanced cancer had a significant positive effect on the total number of questions asked (SMD, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.28 to 1.18; I2 = 83%) and on the patients' expectations for the future (SMD, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.08 to 1.25; I2 = 88%). There were no significant improvements in health-related outcomes such as end of life, anxiety, and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Using QPL in advanced cancer consultations boosts patient questions which helps communication but not health-related indicators. Optimal results depend on full reading, but timing varies. Future research should examine the relationship between communication and health outcomes, including patient/physician behavior and social context.

Development of a question prompt list for Indian cancer patients receiving radiation therapy treatment and their primary family caregivers.

AIM: We aimed to develop two question prompt lists (QPLs), one for Indian cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy and the second for their primary family caregivers. METHODS: The study comprised three phases: (1) qualitative interviews with patients (n = 65) and PFCs (n = 39) to identify their information needs, queries and concerns regarding RT; (2) development of draft QPLs using conventional content analysis and translation into Hindi and Marathi using European Organisation Research and Treatment of Cancer guidelines; and, (3) A readability analysis, and acceptability study with patients (n = 22), PFCs (n = 26) and Radiation Oncology (RO) staff (n = 20) exploring barriers to QPL implementation. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Analysis in Phase I identified questions patients and PFCs asked or wanted to ask their physician. A list of 125 and 136 questions were generated for patients and PFCs, respectively. After five iterations, the draft QPLs were finalised, translated, and back-translated from English into Hindi and Marathi (Phase II). In Phase III, most patients and PFCs reported the QPLs were easy to read, they did not find it difficult to ask the questions, and the questions were not emotionally upsetting. Conversely, RO staff reported concerns that patients may find it difficult to discuss the questions with their physician. CONCLUSION: The study highlights the need to empower patients and PFCs to ask questions and for staff to feel comfortable answering them. Implementing physician-endorsed QPLs could achieve these aims.

A Previsit Intervention's Influence on Glaucoma Topics Discussed between Black Patients and Providers.

PURPOSE: The objectives of this study were to conduct a randomized controlled trial testing the effectiveness of a previsit glaucoma video/question prompt list intervention, and to examine the impact on how often providers educate Black patients about glaucoma and glaucoma medication topics during visits. DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial of a glaucoma question prompt list/video intervention. PARTICIPANTS: Black patients with a diagnosis of glaucoma who are taking 1 or more glaucoma medications and report being nonadherent. METHODS: One hundred eighty-nine Black patients with glaucoma were enrolled and assigned to either a usual care or an intervention group where they watched a video emphasizing the importance of asking questions and received a glaucoma question prompt list to complete before clinic visits. Visits were audio-taped and patients were interviewed after visits. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Whether the provider educates about different glaucoma and glaucoma medication topics. RESULTS: Patients in the intervention group were significantly more likely to ask providers 1 or more questions about glaucoma and its treatment. Providers were significantly more likely to educate intervention patients about their diagnosis (P = 0.001), intraocular pressure (P = 0.03), the likelihood of the need for long-term therapy (P = 0.001), and the physical changes associated with glaucoma (P = 0.001) than usual-care patients. Providers were also significantly more likely to educate intervention patients about the purpose of their medications (P = 0.03) and side effects (P = 0.001) than usual-care patients. Providers only educated 29% of patients about adherence (33% of intervention group patients and 25% of usual-care patients). Few providers educated patients about barriers and fears/concerns in using glaucoma medications, the cost of medications and insurance coverage, how to administer eye drops, and nasolacrimal occlusion. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention significantly increased provider education about many glaucoma and glaucoma medication topics. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Co-design of a question prompt list about pregnancy and childbearing for women with polycystic kidney disease: an exploratory sequential mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Although women with polycystic kidney disease (PKD) generally have healthy pregnancies and babies, pregnancy is associated with a greater risk of maternal complications and requires planning and management of their condition. Given these possible complications, routine communication about childbearing between women with PKD and their treating team is important. A question prompt list (QPL), a structured list of questions used by patients during consultations with healthcare providers, may be beneficial in assisting women with PKD to discuss their childbearing concerns with, and seek related information from, their treating team. The aims of this study were to co-design a QPL about pregnancy and childbearing for women with PKD, and evaluate its comprehensibility, salience, and acceptability. METHODS: An exploratory sequential mixed-methods study of women of reproductive age with PKD living in Australia, using an experience-based co-design approach with two phases. Women were recruited from a metropolitan public health service and via social media and invited to complete an anonymous online survey about the development of the PKD QPL (phase one) and participate in an online discussion group about its refinement (phase two). RESULTS: Sixteen women completed the development survey and seven participated in the evaluation discussion group. Participants reported that women with PKD would value and use a QPL to prompt discussions with and seek further information about pregnancy and childbearing from their healthcare providers. Women identified four main topics for the QPL: 'thinking about having a baby', 'pregnancy', 'my medications' and 'after my baby is born'. Within each section a series of questions was developed. Based on the findings, a QPL about pregnancy and childbearing for women with PKD was co-designed. CONCLUSIONS: Women with PKD often find it difficult to access information and have discussions with their health care providers about pregnancy and childbearing. The PKD QPL co-designed in this study was perceived to be an acceptable tool which will, from the perspectives of participants, assist women with PKD to access information more easily about pregnancy, childbearing and PKD; ask more targeted questions of their treating team; and make informed childbearing decisions.

Evaluation of a Novel Question Prompt List in Pediatric Surgical Oncology.

INTRODUCTION: Parents of children with cancer describe interactions with clinicians as emotionally distressing. Patient engagement in treatment discussions decreases decisional conflict and improves decision quality which may limit such distress. We have shown that parents prefer to engage surgeons by asking questions, but parents may not know what to ask. Question Prompt Lists (QPLs), structured lists of questions designed to help patients ask important questions, have not been studied in pediatric surgery. We developed a QPL designed to empower parents to ask meaningful questions during pediatric surgical oncology discussions. We conducted a mixed methods analysis to assess the acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of using the QPL. METHODS: Key stakeholders at an academic children's hospital participated in focus groups to discuss the QPL. Focus groups were recorded and transcribed. Participants were surveyed regarding QPL acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Thematic content analysis of transcripts was performed. RESULTS: Four parents, five nurses, five nurse practitioners, five oncologists, and four surgeons participated. Seven key themes were identified: (1) QPL as a tool of empowerment; (2) stick to the surgical details; (3) QPLs can impact discussion quality; (4) time consuming, but not overly disruptive; (5) parental emotion may impact QPL use; (6) provide QPLs prior to surgical consultation in both print and digital formats; and (7) expansion of QPLs to other disciplines. Over 70% of participants agreed that the QPL was acceptable, appropriate, and feasible. CONCLUSIONS: Our novel QPL is acceptable, appropriate, and feasible to use with parents of pediatric surgical oncology patients.

Randomized Trial of the Choosing Wisely Consumer Questions and a Shared Decision-Making Video Intervention on Decision-Making Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Despite widespread use, there are few studies evaluating the consumer Choosing Wisely questions. METHODS: We evaluated the impact of the Choosing Wisely questions on consumers' decision-making outcomes. Adults living in Australia were presented with a hypothetical low-value care scenario. Using a 2×2×2 between-subjects factorial design, they were randomized to either the Choosing Wisely questions ("Questions"), a shared decision-making (SDM) preparation video ("Video"), both interventions, or control (no intervention). Primary outcomes were 1) self-efficacy to ask questions and be involved in decision-making and 2) intention to engage in SDM. RESULTS: A total of 1,439 participants (45.6% with "inadequate" health literacy) were eligible and included in the analysis. Intention to engage in SDM was higher in people randomized to the Video (mean difference [MD] = 0.24 [scale 0-6], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.14, 0.35), Questions (MD = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.01, 0.22), and both interventions (MD = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.23-0.44, P < 0.001, d = 0.28) compared with control. Combining interventions had a greater impact than presenting the Questions alone (MD = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.11, 0.32; P < 0.001). Those who received the Video or both interventions reported lower intention to follow the low-value treatment plan without further questioning (all P < 0.05) and more positive attitudes toward SDM (all P < 0.05) compared with control. Intervention acceptability was high in all study arms (>80%), but proactive access was low (1.7%-20.8%). Compared with control, participants who received one or both interventions asked more questions that mapped to the Choosing Wisely questions (all P < .001). There were no main effects of either intervention on self-efficacy or knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: The Choosing Wisely questions and a video to promote SDM may improve intention to engage in SDM and support patients in identifying questions that align with the Choosing Wisely campaign (with some additional benefits of the video intervention). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR376477. HIGHLIGHTS: We conducted a randomized controlled trial online with adults living in Australia to test the effectiveness of the consumer Choosing Wisely questions and a shared decision-making (SDM) preparation video.Both interventions improved intention to engage in SDM and supported participants to identify questions that align with the Choosing Wisely campaign.There were some additional benefits of the Video intervention in reducing willingness to accept low-value treatment for low-back pain without asking questions; however, neither intervention changed participants' self-efficacy to ask questions and be involved in decision-making nor affected perceptions of preparedness to engage in SDM or knowledge of rights to be involved in health care decision-making.The simple, low-cost nature of the interventions may make them appropriate for implementation within a suite of approaches to address low-value care at a population level.

Patients' attitudes towards using a question prompt list in community pharmacies.

OBJECTIVE: To explore patients' usage rate and perceived usefulness and benefits of a question prompt list (QPL) when collecting prescribed medication in community pharmacies. METHODS: Data were collected in Swedish pharmacies using questionnaires and semi-structured interviews with patients. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) was used, and the outcomes were usage rate, factors impacting on use, and perceived ease of use, usefulness, and benefits of self-reported question-asking and self-perceived medication knowledge. Descriptive statistics and group comparisons were performed, and qualitative data were analyzed thematically with the TAM. RESULTS: Out of 145 patients filling out the questionnaire, 72 (50.0%) reported they had used the QPL. Patients with new prescriptions and non-native Swedish speakers used the QPL more often (p = 0.03; p = 0.009, respectively). The QPL was quick to read (86.3%) and easy to understand (91.4%). Forty percent stated that they asked more questions, and self-reported users scored higher on self-perceived medication knowledge. In the interviews (n = 14), the QPL was described as an eye-opener as to what one could ask the pharmacist. CONCLUSIONS: Patients were willing to use a QPL in community pharmacies. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: A QPL in pharmacies might improve patients' engagement medication knowledge, as well as showcase the expertise of pharmacists.

Development and Acceptability of a Kidney Therapy Decision Aid for Patients Aged 75 Years and Older: A Design-Based Research Involving Patients, Caregivers, and a Multidisciplinary Team.

Rationale & Objective: Many older adults prefer quality of life over longevity, and some prefer conservative kidney management (CKM) over dialysis. There is a lack of patient-decision aids for adults aged 75 years or older facing kidney therapy decisions, which not only include information on dialysis and CKM but also encourage end-of-life planning. We iteratively developed a paper-based patient-decision aid for older people with low literacy and conducted surveys to assess its acceptability. Study Design: Design-based research. Setting and Participants: Informed by design-based research principles and theory of behavioral activation, a multidisciplinary team of experts created a first version of the patient-decision aid containing 2 components: (1) educational material about kidney therapy options such as CKM, and (2) a question prompt list relevant to kidney therapy and end-of-life decision making. On the basis of the acceptability input of patients and caregivers, separate qualitative interviews of 35 people receiving maintenance dialysis, and with the independent feedback of educated layperson, we further modified the patient-decision aid to create a second version. Analytical Approach: We used descriptive statistics to present the results of acceptability surveys and thematic content analyses for patients' qualitative interviews. Results: The mean age of patients (n=21) who tested the patient-decision aid was 80 years and the mean age of caregivers (n=9) was 70 years. All respondents held positive views about the educational component and would recommend the educational component to others (100% patients and caregivers). Most of the patients reported that the question prompt list helped them put concerns into words (80% patients and 88% caregivers) and would recommend the question prompt list to others (95% patients and 100% caregivers). Limitations: Single-center study. Conclusions: Both components of the patient-decision aid received high acceptability ratings. We plan to launch a larger effectiveness study to test the outcomes of a decision-supporting intervention combining the patient-decision aid with palliative care-based decision coaching.

Developing a question prompt list for family caregivers concerning the progression and palliative care needs of nursing home residents living with dementia.

Objective: Communication around a palliative approach to dementia care often is problematic or occurs infrequently in nursing homes (NH). Question prompt lists (QPLs), are evidence-based lists designed to improve communication by facilitating discussions within a specific population. This study aimed to develop a QPL concerning the progression and palliative care needs of residents living with dementia. Methods: A mixed-methods design in 2 phases. In phase 1, potential questions for inclusion in the QPL were identified using interviews with NH care providers, palliative care clinicians and family caregivers. An international group of experts reviewed the QPL. In phase 2, NH care providers and family caregivers reviewed the QPL assessing the clarity, sensitivity, importance, and relevance of each item. Results: From 127 initial questions, 30 questions were included in the first draft of the QPL. After review by experts, including family caregivers, the QPL was finalized with 38 questions covering eight content areas. Conclusion: Our study has developed a QPL for persons living with dementia in NHs and their caregivers to initiate conversations to clarify questions they may have regarding the progression of dementia, end of life care, and the NH environment. Further work is needed to evaluate its effectiveness and determine optimal use in clinical practice. Innovation: This unique QPL is anticipated to facilitate discussions around dementia care, including self-care for family caregivers.

Development and modification of a dysphagia question prompt list to improve patient-physician communication: Incorporating both esophageal expert and patient perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Question prompt lists (QPLs) are structured sets of disease-specific questions, intended to encourage question-asking by patients and enhance patient-physician communication. To date, a dysphagia-specific QPL has not been developed for patients with esophageal dysphagia symptoms. We aim to develop a dysphagia-specific QPL incorporating both esophageal expert and patient perspectives, applying rigorous methodology. METHODS: The QPL content was generated applying a two-round modified Delphi (RAND/UCLA) method among 11 experts. In round one, experts provided five answers to the prompts: "What general questions should patients ask when being seen for dysphagia?" and "What questions do I not hear patients asking but, given my experience, I believe they should be asking?" In round two, experts rated proposed questions on a 5-point Likert scale. Responses rated as "essential" or "important", determined by an a priori median threshold of ≥4.0, were accepted for inclusion. Subsequently, 20 patients from Stanford Health Care were enrolled to modify the preliminary QPL, to incorporate their perspectives and opinions. Patients independently rated questions applying the same 5-point Likert scale. At the end, patients were encouraged to propose additional questions to incorporate into the QPL by open-endedly asking "Are there questions we didn't ask, that you think we should?" KEY RESULTS: Eleven experts participated in both voting rounds. Of 85 questions generated from round one, 60 (70.6%) were accepted for inclusion, meeting a median value of ≥4.0. Questions were combined to reduce redundancy, narrowing down to 44 questions. Questions were categorized into the following six themes: 1. "What is causing my dysphagia?"; 2. "Associated symptoms"; 3. "Testing for dysphagia"; 4. "Lifestyle modifications"; 5. "Treatment for dysphagia"; and 6. "Prognosis". The largest number of questions covered "What is causing my dysphagia" (27.3%). Twenty patients participated and modified the QPL. Of the 44 questions experts agreed were important, only 30 questions (68.2%) were accepted for inclusion. Six patients proposed 10 additional questions and after incorporating the suggested questions, the final dysphagia-specific QPL created by esophageal experts and modified by patients consisted of 40 questions. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Incorporating expert and patient perspectives, we developed a dysphagia-specific QPL to enhance patient-physician communication. Our study highlights importance of incorporating patient perspective when developing such a communication tool. Further studies will measure the impact of this communication tool on patient engagement.

Optimizing the design and implementation of question prompt lists to support person-centred care: A scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Question prompt lists (QPLs) are lists of questions that patients may want to discuss with clinicians. QPLs support person-centred care and have been associated with many beneficial outcomes including improved patient question-asking, and the amount and quality of the information provided by clinicians. The purpose of this study was to review published research on QPLs to explore how QPL design and implementation can be optimized. METHODS: We performed a scoping review by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Joanna Briggs Database from inception to 8 May 2022, for English language studies of any design that evaluated QPLs. We used summary statistics and text to report study characteristics, and QPL design and implementation. RESULTS: We included 57 studies published from 1988 to 2022 by authors in 12 countries on a range of clinical topics. Of those, 56% provided the QPL, but few described how QPLs were developed. The number of questions varied widely (range 9-191). Most QPLs were single-page handouts (44%) but others ranged from 2 to 33 pages. Most studies implemented a QPL alone with no other accompanying strategy; most often in a print format before consultations by mail (18%) or in the waiting room (66%). Both patients and clinicians identified numerous benefits to patients of QPLs (e.g., increased patient confidence to ask questions, and patient satisfaction with communication or care received; and reduced anxiety about health status or treatment). To support use, patients desired access to QPLs in advance of clinician visits, and clinicians desired information/training on how to use the QPL and answer questions. Most (88%) studies reported at least one beneficial impact of QPLs. This was true even for single-page QPLs with few questions unaccompanied by other implementation strategies. Despite favourable views of QPLs, few studies assessed outcomes amongst clinicians. CONCLUSION: This review identified QPL characteristics and implementation strategies that may be associated with beneficial outcomes. Future research should confirm these findings via systematic review and explore the benefits of QPLs from the clinician's perspective. PATIENT/PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Following this review, we used the findings to develop a QPL on hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and interviewed women and clinicians about QPL design including content, format, enablers and barriers of use, and potential outcomes including beneficial impacts and possible harms (will be published elsewhere).

Ask questions (ASQ): Implementation of a question prompt list communication intervention in a network of outpatient medical oncology clinics.

OBJECTIVE: This descriptive, single-arm study assessed the implementation and patient perceptions of an evidence-based Question Prompt List (QPL), the ASQ brochure, across a network of oncology clinics in a diverse patient population. METHOD: The QPL was revised in collaboration with stakeholders. Implementation was assessed using the RE-AIM framework. Eligible patients were scheduled for a first appointment with an oncologist at any of eight participating clinics. All participants received the ASQ brochure and completed three surveys: one at baseline, one immediately before, and one following their appointment. Surveys assessed sociodemographic characteristics; communication-related outcomes (perceived knowledge, self-efficacy in interacting with physicians, trust in physicians, distress); and perceptions of the ASQ brochure. Analyses included descriptive statistics and linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Reach: Participants (n = 81) represented the diverse population served by the clinic network. EFFICACY: All outcomes improved significantly, with no significant differences by clinic site or patient race. Adoption: All eight invited clinics participated and recruited patients. Patient perceptions of the ASQ brochure were overwhelmingly positive. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the ASQ brochure was successful in this oncology clinic network providing care to a diverse patient population. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: This evidence-based communication intervention can be implemented widely in similar medical contexts and populations.

Improving Black Patient Question-Asking and Provider Education During Glaucoma Visits.

PURPOSE: The objectives of this study were to conduct a randomized, controlled trial testing the effectiveness of a previsit glaucoma video/question prompt list intervention to increase Black patient question-asking and provider education about glaucoma and glaucoma medications during visits. DESIGN: A randomized, controlled trial of a glaucoma question prompt list/video intervention. PARTICIPANTS: Black patients with a glaucoma diagnosis who were currently taking 1 or more glaucoma medications and reported being nonadherent. METHODS: One hundred and eighty-nine Black patients with glaucoma were enrolled into a randomized, controlled trial and assigned to either a usual care or an intervention group where they watched a video emphasizing the importance of asking questions and received a glaucoma question prompt list to complete before clinic visits. Visits were audiotaped and patients were interviewed after visits. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures were if the patient asked 1 or more questions about glaucoma and glaucoma medications and the number of glaucoma and glaucoma medication areas the provider educated the patient about during the visit. RESULTS: Patients in the intervention group were significantly more likely to ask 1 or more questions about glaucoma than patients in the usual care group (odds ratio, 5.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8-10.4). Patients in the intervention group were significantly more likely to ask 1 or more questions about glaucoma medications than patients in the usual care group (odds ratio, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.5-5.4). Patients in the intervention group were significantly more likely to receive more areas of education about glaucoma from their providers during visits (ß = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.49-1.4). Patients who asked 1 or more questions about glaucoma medications were significantly more likely to receive more areas of education about glaucoma medications from providers (ß = 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2-2.5). CONCLUSIONS: The intervention increased patient question-asking about glaucoma and glaucoma medications and provider education about glaucoma. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Encouraging Patients to Ask Questions: Development and Pilot Testing of a Question Prompt List for Patients Undergoing a Biopsy for Suspected Prostate Cancer.

This study assessed the acceptability and feasibility of a question prompt list (QPL) to facilitate informed treatment decision-making in men with suspected localised prostate cancer, which involves values-based choices between options with similar efficacy but different side effects. The QPL was developed through iterative consultation with consumers, clinicians and researchers. Acceptability was assessed using study-specific questions regarding QPL satisfaction and usefulness and qualitative interviews. Feasibility was determined via the proportion of men given the QPL according to medical records and the completion of standardised measures of decisional outcomes. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive and univariate statistics. Qualitative data were thematically analysed. Fifty-two men consented; 34 provided data for analysis. The QPL recipients reported moderate-high content satisfaction (70.6%) and perceived usefulness in guiding appointments when receiving biopsy results (64.7%). Two main qualitative themes also indicated the QPL acceptability: (1) the freedom to ask-acceptable timing, flexible usage and usefulness of the QPL, and (2) satisfaction with the QPL content. However, only 18.4% of eligible men received the QPL, indicating limited feasibility. The QPL is safe and acceptable, but further research is needed regarding how to facilitate the uptake of the question prompt list in clinical practice.

Talking about Meaning and Loss with Relatives of Persons with Dementia: An Ethnographic Study in a Nursing Home.

Advance care planning (ACP) can help prepare for future losses and decisions to be taken. However, relatives of persons with dementia may wait for healthcare professionals to initiate ACP conversations which may not adequately address their individual information needs. To evaluate inducing and enhancing conversations about meaning and loss, we conducted an ethnographic study on nurse-led ACP conversations using a question prompt list (QPL) on six dementia wards of a nursing home in the Netherlands from January to September 2021. Staff received training in using the QPL, with information and sample questions to inspire relatives to ask their questions, in particular on meaning and loss. Thematic analysis was applied to transcribed interviews and memos of observations. Nursing staff in particular was concerned about having to be available to answer questions continuously. Relatives used the study as an opportunity to get in touch with professionals, and they saw the QPL as an acknowledgement of their needs. There was a mismatch in that staff wished to discuss care goals and complete a care plan, but the relatives wanted to (first) address practical matters. A QPL can be helpful to conversations about meaning and loss, but nursing staff need dedicated time and substantial training. Joint agenda setting before the conversation may help resolve a mismatch in the preferred topics and timing of conversations.