Core information sets for informed consent to surgical interventions: baseline information of importance to patients and clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Consent remains a crucial, yet challenging, cornerstone of clinical practice. The ethical, legal and professional understandings of this construct have evolved away from a doctor-centred act to a patient-centred process that encompasses the patient's values, beliefs and goals. This alignment of consent with the philosophy of shared decision-making was affirmed in a recent high-profile Supreme Court ruling in England. The communication of information is central to this model of health care delivery but it can be difficult for doctors to gauge the information needs of the individual patient. The aim of this paper is to describe 'core information sets' which are defined as a minimum set of consensus-derived information about a given procedure to be discussed with all patients. Importantly, they are intended to catalyse discussion of subjective importance to individuals. MAIN BODY: The model described in this paper applies health services research and Delphi consensus-building methods to an idea orginally proposed 30 years ago. The hypothesis is that, first, large amounts of potentially-important information are distilled down to discrete information domains. These are then, secondly, rated by key stakeholders in multiple iterations, so that core information of agreed importance can be defined. We argue that this scientific approach is key to identifying information important to all stakeholders, which may otherwise be communicated poorly or omitted from discussions entirely. Our methods apply systematic review, qualitative, survey and consensus-building techniques to define this 'core information'. We propose that such information addresses the 'reasonable patient' standard for information disclosure but, more importantly, can serve as a spring board for high-value discussion of importance to the individual patient. CONCLUSION: The application of established research methods can define information of core importance to informed consent. Further work will establish how best to incorporate this model in routine practice.

Doctors' perspectives of informed consent for non-emergency surgical procedures: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: The need to involve patients more in decisions about their care, the ethical imperative and concerns about ligation and complaints has highlighted the issue of informed consent and how it is obtained. In order for a patient to make an informed decision about their treatment, they need appropriate discussion of the risks and benefits of the treatment. OBJECTIVES: To explore doctors' perspectives of gaining informed consent for routine surgical procedures. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews selected by purposive sampling. Data were analysed thematically. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Twenty doctors in two teaching hospitals in the UK. RESULTS: Doctors described that while consent could be taken over a series of consultations, it was common for consent to be taken immediately prior to surgery. Juniors were often taking consent when they were unfamiliar with the procedure. Doctors used a range of communication techniques to inform patients about the procedure and its risks including quantifying risks, personalizing risk, simplification of language and use of drawings. Barriers to effective consent taking were reported to be shortage of time, clinician inexperience and patients' reluctance to be involved. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Current consent processes do not appear to be ideal for many doctors. In particular, junior doctors are often not confident taking consent for surgical procedures and require more support to undertake this task. This might include written information for junior staff, observation by senior colleagues when undertaking the task and ward-based communication skills teaching on consent taking.

Empathy among undergraduate medical students: A multi-centre cross-sectional comparison of students beginning and approaching the end of their course.

BACKGROUND: Although a core element in patient care the trajectory of empathy during undergraduate medical education remains unclear. Empathy is generally regarded as comprising an affective capacity: the ability to be sensitive to and concerned for, another and a cognitive capacity: the ability to understand and appreciate the other person's perspective. The authors investigated whether final year undergraduate students recorded lower levels of empathy than their first year counterparts, and whether male and female students differed in this respect. METHODS: Between September 2013 and June 2014 an online questionnaire survey was administered to 15 UK, and 2 international medical schools. Participating schools provided both 5-6 year standard courses and 4 year accelerated graduate entry courses. The survey incorporated the Jefferson Scale of Empathy-Student Version (JSE-S) and Davis's Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), both widely used to measure medical student empathy. Participation was voluntary. Chi squared tests were used to test for differences in biographical characteristics of student groups. Multiple linear regression analyses, in which predictor variables were year of course (first/final); sex; type of course and broad socio-economic group were used to compare empathy scores. RESULTS: Five medical schools (4 in the UK, 1 in New Zealand) achieved average response rates of 55 % (n = 652) among students starting their course and 48 % (n = 487) among final year students. These schools formed the High Response Rate Group. The remaining 12 medical schools recorded lower response rates of 24.0 % and 15.2 % among first and final year students respectively. These schools formed the Lower Response Rate Group. For both male and female students in both groups of schools no significant differences in any empathy scores were found between students starting and approaching the end of their course. Gender was found to significantly predict empathy scores, with females scoring higher than males. CONCLUSIONS: Participant male and female medical students approaching the end of their undergraduate education, did not record lower levels of empathy, compared to those at the beginning of their course. Questions remain concerning the trajectory of empathy after qualification and how best to support it through the pressures of starting out in medical practice.

Tackling obesity: the challenge of obesity management for practice nurses in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Nurses in primary care, who see a large proportion of the population, are well placed to discuss weight with patients and offer management advice. Interventions to promote weight loss have shown that there are effective ways of making small changes for patients. OBJECTIVES: To use qualitative semi-structured interviews to explore how practice nurses manage obesity within primary care and to identify good practice and explore barriers to achieving effective management. METHODS: Eighteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with practice nurses within two local health board areas in South Wales. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed qualitatively using a thematic approach. RESULTS: Nurses described two roles. One role was providing obesity management to patients who had co-morbid conditions and were seen regularly in chronic disease clinics. All nurses perceived that these patients needed their weight addressing routinely. The other role was to broach the subject with overweight but healthy patients. Nurses were of divided opinion whether to address obesity with these patients and what primary care had to offer. Weight management advice, when given, lacked consistency of approach. CONCLUSIONS: Broaching the subject of weight opportunistically with healthy but overweight patients may require a deeper appreciation of their motivations for change and discussion beyond future health risks. These patients also need clearer follow up to monitor their progress with weight loss. All overweight patients also need clearer guidance tailored to their own particular circumstances as to how to lose weight. For patients being counselled about their weight, interventions that promote consistency of advice are advocated to improve care.

Interventions to promote informed consent for patients undergoing surgical and other invasive healthcare procedures.

BACKGROUND: Achieving informed consent is a core clinical procedure and is required before any surgical or invasive procedure is undertaken.  However, it is a complex process which requires patients be provided with information which they can understand and retain, opportunity to consider their options, and to be able to express their opinions and ask questions.  There is evidence that at present some patients undergo procedures without informed consent being achieved. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects on patients, clinicians and the healthcare system of interventions to promote informed consent for patients undergoing surgical and other invasive healthcare treatments and procedures. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases using keywords and medical subject headings: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 5, 2012), MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1950 to July 2011), EMBASE (OvidSP) (1980 to July 2011) and PsycINFO (OvidSP) (1806 to July 2011). We applied no language or date restrictions within the search. We also searched reference lists of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials and cluster randomised trials of interventions to promote informed consent for patients undergoing surgical and other invasive healthcare procedures. We considered an intervention to be intended to promote informed consent when information delivery about the procedure was enhanced (either by providing more information or through, for example, using new written materials), or if more opportunity to consider or deliberate on the information was provided. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors assessed the search output independently to identify potentially-relevant studies, selected studies for inclusion, and extracted data. We conducted a narrative synthesis of the included trials, and meta-analyses of outcomes where there were sufficient data. MAIN RESULTS: We included 65 randomised controlled trials from 12 countries involving patients undergoing a variety of procedures in hospitals. Nine thousand and twenty one patients were randomised and entered into these studies. Interventions used various designs and formats but the main data for results were from studies using written materials, audio-visual materials and decision aids. Some interventions were delivered before admission to hospital for the procedure while others were delivered on admission.Only one study attempted to measure the primary outcome, which was informed consent as a unified concept, but this study was at high risk of bias.  More commonly, studies measured secondary outcomes which were individual components of informed consent such as knowledge, anxiety, and satisfaction with the consent process.  Important but less commonly-measured outcomes were deliberation, decisional conflict, uptake of procedures and length of consultation.Meta-analyses showed statistically-significant improvements in knowledge when measured immediately after interventions (SMD 0.53 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.69) I(2) 73%), shortly afterwards (between 24 hours and 14 days) (SMD 0.68 (95% CI 0.42 to 0.93) I(2) 85%) and at a later date (15 days or more) (SMD 0.78 (95% CI 0.50 to 1.06) I(2) 82%). Satisfaction with decision making was also increased (SMD 2.25 (95% CI 1.36 to 3.15) I(2) 99%) and decisional conflict was reduced (SMD -1.80 (95% CI -3.46 to -0.14) I(2) 99%). No statistically-significant differences were found for generalised anxiety (SMD -0.11 (95% CI -0.35 to 0.13) I(2) 82%), anxiety with the consent process (SMD 0.01 (95% CI -0.21 to 0.23) I(2) 70%) and satisfaction with the consent process (SMD 0.12 (95% CI -0.09 to 0.32) I(2) 76%). Consultation length was increased in those studies with continuous data (mean increase 1.66 minutes (95% CI 0.82 to 2.50) I(2) 0%) and in the one study with non-parametric data (control 8.0 minutes versus intervention 11.9 minutes, interquartile range (IQR) of 4 to 11.9 and 7.2 to 15.0 respectively). There were limited data for other outcomes.In general, sensitivity analyses removing studies at high risk of bias made little difference to the overall results.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Informed consent is an important ethical and practical part of patient care.  We have identified efforts by researchers to investigate interventions which seek to improve information delivery and consideration of information to enhance informed consent.  The interventions used consistently improve patient knowledge, an important prerequisite for informed consent.  This is encouraging and these measures could be widely employed although we are not able to say with confidence which types of interventions are preferable. Our results should be interpreted with caution due to the high levels of heterogeneity associated with many of the main analyses although we believe there is broad evidence of beneficial outcomes for patients with the pragmatic application of interventions. Only one study attempted to measure informed consent as a unified concept.

Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice.

The principles of shared decision making are well documented but there is a lack of guidance about how to accomplish the approach in routine clinical practice. Our aim here is to translate existing conceptual descriptions into a three-step model that is practical, easy to remember, and can act as a guide to skill development. Achieving shared decision making depends on building a good relationship in the clinical encounter so that information is shared and patients are supported to deliberate and express their preferences and views during the decision making process. To accomplish these tasks, we propose a model of how to do shared decision making that is based on choice, option and decision talk. The model has three steps: a) introducing choice, b) describing options, often by integrating the use of patient decision support, and c) helping patients explore preferences and make decisions. This model rests on supporting a process of deliberation, and on understanding that decisions should be influenced by exploring and respecting "what matters most" to patients as individuals, and that this exploration in turn depends on them developing informed preferences.

Communicating with parents about vaccination: a framework for health professionals.

BACKGROUND: A critical factor shaping parental attitudes to vaccination is the parent's interactions with health professionals. An effective interaction can address the concerns of vaccine supportive parents and motivate a hesitant parent towards vaccine acceptance. Poor communication can contribute to rejection of vaccinations or dissatisfaction with care. We sought to provide a framework for health professionals when communicating with parents about vaccination. METHODS: Literature review to identify a spectrum of parent attitudes or 'positions' on childhood vaccination with estimates of the proportion of each group based on population studies. Development of a framework related to each parental position with determination of key indicators, goals and strategies based on communication science, motivational interviewing and valid consent principles. RESULTS: Five distinct parental groups were identified: the 'unquestioning acceptor' (30-40%), the 'cautious acceptor' (25-35%); the 'hesitant' (20-30%); the 'late or selective vaccinator' (2-27%); and the 'refuser' of all vaccines (<2%). The goals of the encounter with each group will vary, depending on the parents' readiness to vaccinate. In all encounters, health professionals should build rapport, accept questions and concerns, and facilitate valid consent. For the hesitant, late or selective vaccinators, or refusers, strategies should include use of a guiding style and eliciting the parent's own motivations to vaccinate while, avoiding excessive persuasion and adversarial debates. It may be necessary to book another appointment or offer attendance at a specialised adverse events clinic. Good information resources should also be used. CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals have a central role in maintaining public trust in vaccination, including addressing parents' concerns. These recommendations are tailored to specific parental positions on vaccination and provide a structured approach to assist professionals. They advocate respectful interactions that aim to guide parents towards quality decisions.

Cancer Clinicians' Views Regarding an App That Helps Patients With Cancer Meet Their Information Needs: Qualitative Interview Study.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with cancer have unmet information needs during the course of the illness. Smart devices, such as smartphones and tablet computers, provide an opportunity to deliver information to patients remotely. We aim to develop an app intervention to help patients with cancer meet their illness-related information needs in noninpatient settings. In addition to the in-depth exploration of the issues faced by the target users of a potential intervention, it is important to gain an understanding of the context in which the intervention will be used and the potential influences on its adoption. As such, understanding the views of clinicians is key to the successful implementation of this type of app in practice. Additionally, clinicians have an awareness of their patients' needs and can provide further insight into the type of app and features that might be most beneficial. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore cancer clinicians' views on this type of intervention and whether they would support the use of an app in cancer care. Specifically, the perceived acceptability of an app used in consultations, useful app features, the potential benefits and disadvantages of an app, and barriers to app use were explored. METHODS: A total of 20 qualitative, semistructured interviews were conducted with 22 clinicians from urological, colorectal, breast, or gynecological cancer clinics across 2 hospitals in South Wales. The interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Clinicians felt that it would be acceptable for patients to use such an app in noninpatient settings, including during consultations. The benefits of this type of app were anticipated to be a more informed patient, an increased sense of control for patients, better doctor-patient communication, and a more efficient and effective consultation. In contrast, an increase in clinicians' workload and poorer communication in consultations, which depended on the included app features, were identified as potential disadvantages. The anticipated barriers to app use included patients' age and prior experience with smart technology, their access to smart devices, the confidentiality of information, and an avoidant coping approach to their condition. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that clinicians should support their patients in using an app to help them meet their information needs both at home and during consultations. This study highlights some of the potential barriers for this type of intervention in practice, which could be minimized during the intervention design process.

A question of balance: a qualitative study of mothers' interpretations of dietary recommendations.

PURPOSE: Poor nutrition is an increasing problem for economically deprived families, and mothers play a key role in establishing children's diets. We explored mothers' understanding of health-promotion recommendations for healthy eating. METHODS: We conducted qualitative semistructured interviews of 46 mothers within a relatively socioeconomically deprived community. Data were subject to framework analysis. RESULTS: The basic slogans of health promotion were known by mothers and had been adopted into everyday language. Television was the main source of information on dietary advice. Barriers to making changes were due to practical constraints (time, money, family preferences) and a desire to enhance quality of life through enjoyment of food. Although the headline messages of the importance of a healthy diet and what constitutes a healthy diet had reached mothers, misunderstandings were common and led to inappropriate actions. Many descriptions of what mothers reported as a balanced diet would not satisfy official definitions. Some women willfully adapted their understanding of advice to suit their preferences and the reality of their lives and family circumstances. CONCLUSIONS: To provide effective advice and guidance, health professionals need a deeper understanding of how families interpret messages about healthy eating. In addition, they should provide advice based on more individual understandings of diet and take into account patient preferences and life circumstances.

Delays in response and triage times reduce patient satisfaction and enablement after using out-of-hours services.

BACKGROUND: several different models of out-of-hours primary care now exist in the UK. Important outcomes of care include users' satisfaction and enablement to manage their illness or condition, but the determinants of these outcomes in the unscheduled care domain are poorly understood. Aim. To identify predictors of user satisfaction and enablement across unscheduled care or GP out-of-hours service providers in Wales. The design of the study is a cross-sectional survey. The setting of the study is nine GP out-of-hours services, three Accident and Emergency units and an all Wales telephone advice service in Wales. METHODS: postal survey using the Out-of-hours Patient Questionnaire. Logistic regression was used to fit both satisfaction and enablement models, based on demographic variables, service provider and treatment received and perceptions or ratings of the care process. RESULTS: eight hundred and fifty-five of 3250 users responded (26% response rate, range across providers 14-41%, no evidence of non-response bias for age or gender). Treatment centre consultations were significantly associated with decreased patient satisfaction and decreased enablement compared with telephone advice. Delays in call answering or callback for triage and shorter consultations were significantly associated with lower satisfaction. Waiting more than a minute for initial call answering was associated with lower enablement. CONCLUSIONS: giving users more time to discuss their illness in consultations may enhance satisfaction and enablement but this may be resource intensive. More simple interventions to improve access by quicker response and triage, and keeping users informed of waiting times, could also serve to increase satisfaction and ultimately impact on their enablement.

The need to improve the interface between in-hours and out-of-hours GP care, and between out-of-hours care and self-care.

BACKGROUND: considerable changes have occurred over the last 5 years in the organization of out-of-hours care in the UK. Users' experiences of their care are an important part of 'quality of care' and are valuable for identifying areas for improvement. AIM: to identify strengths and weaknesses of out-of hours service provision in Wales. The design of the study is a cross-sectional survey. The setting of the study is nine GP services, three Accident and Emergency units and NHS Direct in Wales. METHOD: survey using the validated Out-of-Hours questionnaire. We identified the four most and least favourably rated items regarding users' experience of care. These were analysed by type of care provided, telephone advice, treatment centre and home visit groups. RESULTS: eight hundred and fifty-five of 3250 users responded (26% response rate). Across providers and types of care, consistent strengths were the 'manner of treatment by call operator' and the 'explanation of the next step by call operator'. Consistent weaknesses were the 'speed of call back by the clinician', the 'information provided by the GP', 'getting medication after the consultation' and 'when to contact the (in-hours) GP'. CONCLUSIONS: users of out-of-hours care identify clear and consistent strengths and weaknesses of service provision across Wales. Specific areas for improvement concern the interface between in-hours care and out-of-hours care and between out-of-hours care and self-care. GP surgeries need to give better information on how to access the out-of-hours services. Out-of-hours providers should improve their advice on how and when to access in-hours surgeries and also improve the availability of medicines after out-of-hours consultations.

Supporting informed decision making for prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing on the web: an online randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Men considering the prostate specific antigen (PSA) test for prostate cancer, an increasingly common male cancer, are encouraged to make informed decisions, as the test is limited in its accuracy and the natural history of the condition is poorly understood. The Web-based PSA decision aid, Prosdex, was developed as part of the UK Prostate Cancer Risk Management Programme in order to help men make such informed decisions. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the Web-based PSA decision aid, Prosdex, on informed decision making. METHODS: A Web-based randomized controlled trial was conducted in South Wales, United Kingdom. Men aged 50 to 75 who had not previously had a PSA test were randomly allocated to two intervention and two control groups. Participants in the intervention groups either viewed Prosdex or were given a paper version of the text. The main outcome measures were the three components of informed decision making: (1) knowledge of prostate cancer and PSA, (2) attitude toward PSA testing, (3) behavior using a proxy measure, intention to undergo PSA testing. Decisional conflict and anxiety were also measured as was uptake of the PSA test. Outcomes were measured by means of an online questionnaire for the Prosdex group, the paper version group, and one of two control groups. Six months later, PSA test uptake was ascertained from general practitioners' records, and the online questionnaire was repeated. Results are reported in terms of the Mann-Whitney U-statistic divided by the product of the two sample sizes (U/mm), line of no effect 0.50. RESULTS: Participants were 514 men. Compared with the control group that completed the initial online questionnaire, men in the Prosdex group had increased knowledge about the PSA test and prostate cancer (U/mn 0.70; 95% CI 0.62 - 0.76); less favourable attitudes to PSA testing (U/mn 0.39, 95% CI 0.31 - 0.47); were less likely to undergo PSA testing (U/mn 0.40, 95% CI 0.32 - 0.48); and had less decisional conflict (U/mn 0.32, 95% CI 0.25 - 0.40); while anxiety level did not differ (U/mn 0.50, 95% CI 0.42 - 0.58). For these outcomes there were no significant differences between men in the Prosdex group and the paper version group. However, in the Prosdex group, increased knowledge was associated with a less favourable attitude toward testing (Spearman rank correlation [rho] = -0.49, P < .001) and lower intention to undergo testing (rho = -0.27, P = .02). After six months, PSA test uptake was lower in the Prosdex group than in the paper version and the questionnaire control group (P = .014). Test uptake was also lower in the control group that did not complete a questionnaire than in the control group that did, suggesting a possible Hawthorne effect of the questionnaire in favour of PSA testing. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to Prosdex was associated with improved knowledge about the PSA test and prostate cancer. Men who had a high level of knowledge had a less favourable attitude toward and were less likely to undergo PSA testing. Prosdex appears to promote informed decision making regarding the PSA test. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN48473735; http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN48473735 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/5r1TLQ5nK).

Underpinning of the sharing knowledge about immunisation (SKAI) communication approach: A qualitative study using recorded observations.

OBJECTIVE: To refine communication strategies to assist clinician conversations with vaccine hesitant and declining parents as part of the Sharing Knowledge About Immunisation (SKAI) package. METHODS: We recorded and analysed consultations held in two Specialist Immunisation Clinics in tertiary hospitals in Australia between consenting clinicians and parents. We undertook content analysis that was both iterative and informed by the Calgary Cambridge Model of health communication and motivational interviewing. RESULTS: We found common strengths and opportunities in clinician's communication styles. Strengths included: rapport building; communicating care for both the parent and child; exhibiting depth of vaccination-specific communication skill and content knowledge. Opportunities for strengthening communication practices included: eliciting parents' concerns to saturation early in the consultation; structuring the consultation to prioritise and address parents' concerns; recognising and responding to parents' motivation to vaccinate; effectively closing consultations. CONCLUSION: This study has synthesised clinical communication strategies from expert vaccination communicators using well-established communication frameworks to advance a unique approach to the challenging task of addressing vaccine hesitancy and refusal. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The clinic observations helped us to create a structured consultation guide that can enhance and provide greater structure to a clinician's existing communication skills.

Evaluation of different delivery modes of an interactive e-learning programme for teaching cultural diversity.

OBJECTIVE: UK medical schools find it challenging to provide standardised teaching to expanding year intakes. In addition, developing and implementing diversity training can cause difficulties. This paper describes the evaluation of an interactive e-learning programme to raise awareness and understanding of communication difficulties in diversity consultations. METHODS: The programme was part of an undergraduate portfolio-based community module. Three hundred and two students were assigned to one of three delivery methods--a large group setting, small groups with a facilitator, and as part of distance learning while on community placement. The evaluation included analysis of their coursework marks, a self-completed evaluation questionnaire, and small group discussions. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-three students took part in the evaluation. They were able to apply the concepts they learnt to clinical examples from their own experiences. Type of delivery did not affect coursework marks, but students tended to prefer the e-learning as part of a distance learning package. They offered helpful suggestions to improve its complexity and range. CONCLUSION: The acceptability and utility of this e-learning module both in face to face teaching and remote placement has been demonstrated, and evaluation by the students has provided valuable information for its further development. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: All medical schools should include some diversity training, and further research should concentrate on the effects of this type of learning on longer term outcomes such as attitude and performance tests. Such tools could reduce demands on staff time in facilitation of small groupwork, and their cost effectiveness could be increased by making them available to other medical schools.

The Preferences of Patients With Cancer Regarding Apps to Help Meet Their Illness-Related Information Needs: Qualitative Interview Study.

BACKGROUND: The shift from inpatient to outpatient and community cancer care means that more patients with cancer need to manage their condition at home, without the direct supervision of their clinician. Subsequently, research has reported that many patients with cancer have unmet information needs during their illness. Mobile devices, such as mobile phones and tablet computers, provide an opportunity to deliver information to patients remotely. Before designing an app intervention to help patients with cancer to meet their information needs, in-depth qualitative research is required to gain an understanding of the views of the target users. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop an app intervention to help patients meet their illness-related information needs in noninpatient settings. This study explored the information needs of patients with cancer and their preferences for an app and desired app features. Specifically, the perceived acceptability of an app, desired app features, and the potential benefits and disadvantages of, and barriers to, an app were explored. METHODS: Qualitative, one-on-one semistructured interviews were conducted with patients with urological, colorectal, breast, or gynecological cancers (N=23) across two hospitals in South Wales. Interviews were audio-taped, transcribed, and analyzed using a thematic analysis. RESULTS: Findings indicated that barriers to information exchange and understanding in consultations, and identification of reliable information sources between consultations, appeared to contribute to patients' unmet information needs. Consequently, app feature suggestions included a question prompt list, a glossary of cancer terms, a resources feature, and a contacts feature. Anticipated benefits of this type of app included a more informed patient, improved quality of life, decreased anxiety, and increased confidence to participate in their care. The anticipated barriers to app use are likely to be temporary or can be minimized with regard to these findings during app development and implementation. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the desire of patients with cancer for an app intervention to help them meet their information needs during and between consultations with their clinicians. This study also highlights the anticipated acceptability and benefits of this type of intervention; however, further research is warranted.

Use of Mobile Devices to Help Cancer Patients Meet Their Information Needs in Non-Inpatient Settings: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The shift from inpatient to outpatient cancer care means that patients are now required to manage their condition at home, away from regular supervision by clinicians. Subsequently, research has consistently reported that many patients with cancer have unmet information needs during their illness. Mobile devices, such as mobile phones and tablet computers, provide an opportunity to deliver information to patients remotely. To date, no systematic reviews have evaluated how mobile devices have been used specifically to help patients meet to their information needs. OBJECTIVE: A systematic review was conducted to identify studies that describe the use of mobile interventions to enable patients with cancer meet their cancer-related information needs in non-inpatient settings, and to describe the effects and feasibility of these interventions. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO databases were searched up until January 2017. Search terms related to "mobile devices," "information needs," and "cancer" were used. There were no restrictions on study type in order to be as inclusive as possible. Study participants were patients with cancer undergoing treatment. Interventions had to be delivered by a mobile or handheld device, attempt to meet patients' cancer-related information needs, and be for use in non-inpatient settings. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklists were used to assess the methodological quality of included studies. A narrative synthesis was performed and findings were organized by common themes found across studies. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 1020 results. We included 23 articles describing 20 studies. Interventions aimed to improve the monitoring and management of treatment-related symptoms (17/20, 85%), directly increase patients' knowledge related to their condition (2/20, 10%), and improve communication of symptoms to clinicians in consultations (1/20, 5%). Studies focused on adult (17/20; age range 24-87 years) and adolescent (3/20; age range 8-18 years) patients. Sample sizes ranged from 4-125, with 13 studies having 25 participants or fewer. Most studies were conducted in the United Kingdom (12/20, 52%) or United States (7/20, 30%). Of the 23 articles included, 12 were of medium quality, 9 of poor quality, and 2 of good quality. Overall, interventions were reported to be acceptable and perceived as useful and easy to use. Few technical problems were encountered. Adherence was generally consistent and high (periods ranged from 5 days to 6 months). However, there was considerable variation in use of intervention components within and between studies. Reported benefits of the interventions included improved symptom management, patient empowerment, and improved clinician-patient communication, although mixed findings were reported for patients' health-related quality of life and anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: The current review highlighted that mobile interventions for patients with cancer are only meeting treatment or symptom-related information needs. There were no interventions designed to meet patients' full range of cancer-related information needs, from information on psychological support to how to manage finances during cancer, and the long-term effects of treatment. More comprehensive interventions are required for patients to meet their information needs when managing their condition in non-inpatient settings. Controlled evaluations are needed to further determine the effectiveness of these types of intervention.

Sharing knowledge about immunisation (SKAI): An exploration of parents' communication needs to inform development of a clinical communication support intervention.

INTRODUCTION: The SKAI (Sharing Knowledge About Immunisation) project aims to develop effective communication tools to support primary health care providers' consultations with parents who may be hesitant about vaccinating their children. AIM: This study explored parents' communication needs using a qualitative design. METHODS: Parents of at least one child less than five years old were recruited from two major cities and a regional town known for high prevalence of vaccine objection. Focus groups of parents who held similar vaccination attitudes and intentions were convened to discuss experiences of vaccination consultations and explore their communication needs, including preferences. Draft written communication support tools were used to stimulate discussion and gauge acceptability of the tools. RESULTS: Important differences in communication needs between group types emerged. The least hesitant parent groups reported feeling reassured upon reading resources designed to address commonly observed concerns about vaccination. As hesitancy of the group members increased, so did their accounts of the volume and detail of information they required. Trust appeared to be related to apparent or perceived transparency. More hesitant groups displayed increased sensitivity and resistance to persuasive language forms.

A randomised controlled trial of the effects of a web-based PSA decision aid, Prosdex. Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Informed decision making is the theoretical basis in the UK for men's decisions about Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) testing for prostate cancer testing. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of a web-based PSA decision-aid, Prosdex, on informed decision making in men. The objective is to assess the effect of Prosdex on six specific outcomes: (i) knowledge of PSA and prostate cancer-related issues - the principal outcome of the study; (ii) attitudes to testing; (iii) decision conflict; (iv) anxiety; (v) intention to undergo PSA testing; (vi) uptake of PSA testing. In addition, a mathematical simulation model of the effects of Prosdex will be developed. METHODS: A randomised controlled trial with four groups: two intervention groups, one viewing Prosdex and the other receiving a paper version of the site; two control groups, the second controlling for the potential Hawthorn effect of the questionnaire used with the first control group. Men between the ages of 50 and 75, who have not previously had a PSA test, will be recruited from General Practitioners (GPs) in Wales, UK. The principal outcome, knowledge, and four other outcome measures - attitudes to testing, decision conflict, anxiety and intention to undergo testing - will be measured with an online questionnaire, used by men in three of the study groups. Six months later, PSA test uptake will be ascertained from GP records; the online questionnaire will then be repeated. These outcomes, and particularly PSA test uptake, will be used to develop a mathematical simulation model, specifically to consider the impact on health service resources.

Exploring students' perceptions on the use of significant event analysis, as part of a portfolio assessment process in general practice, as a tool for learning how to use reflection in learning.

BACKGROUND: Portfolio learning enables students to collect evidence of their learning. Component tasks making up a portfolio can be devised that relate directly to intended learning outcomes. Reflective tasks can stimulate students to recognise their own learning needs. Assessment of portfolios using a rating scale relating to intended learning outcomes offers high content validity. This study evaluated a reflective portfolio used during a final-year attachment in general practice (family medicine). Students were asked to evaluate the portfolio (which used significant event analysis as a basis for reflection) as a learning tool. The validity and reliability of the portfolio as an assessment tool were also measured. METHODS: 81 final-year medical students completed reflective significant event analyses as part of a portfolio created during a three-week attachment (clerkship) in general practice (family medicine). As well as two reflective significant event analyses each portfolio contained an audit and a health needs assessment. Portfolios were marked three times; by the student's GP teacher, the course organiser and by another teacher in the university department of general practice. Inter-rater reliability between pairs of markers was calculated. A questionnaire enabled the students' experience of portfolio learning to be determined. RESULTS: Benefits to learning from reflective learning were limited. Students said that they thought more about the patients they wrote up in significant event analyses but information as to the nature and effect of this was not forthcoming. Moderate inter-rater reliability (Spearman's Rho .65) was found between pairs of departmental raters dealing with larger numbers (20-60) of portfolios. Inter-rater reliability of marking involving GP tutors who only marked 1-3 portfolios was very low. Students rated highly their mentoring relationship with their GP teacher but found the portfolio tasks time-consuming. CONCLUSION: The inter-rater reliability observed in this study should be viewed alongside the high validity afforded by the authenticity of the learning tasks (compared with a sample of a student's learning taken by an exam question). Validity is enhanced by the rating scale which directly connects the grade given with intended learning outcomes. The moderate inter-rater reliability may be increased if a portfolio is completed over a longer period of time and contains more component pieces of work. The questionnaire used in this study only accessed limited information about the effect of reflection on students' learning. Qualitative methods of evaluation would determine the students experience in greater depth. It would be useful to evaluate the effects of reflective learning after students have had more time to get used to this unfamiliar method of learning and to overcome any problems in understanding the task.