RESUMEN
Background: Tele-oncology became a widely used tool during the COVID-19 pandemic, but there was limited understanding of how patient-clinician communication occurred using the technology. Our goal was to identify how communication transpired during tele-oncology consultations compared with in-person appointments. Methods: A convergent parallel mixed-method design was utilized for the web-based survey, and follow-up interviews were conducted with cancer patients from March to December 2020. Participants were recruited from the University of Florida Health Cancer Center and two national cancer organizations. During the survey, participants rated their clinician's patient-centered communication behaviors. Open-ended survey responses and interview data were combined and analyzed thematically using the constant comparative method. Results: A total of 158 participants completed the survey, and 33 completed an interview. Ages ranged from 19 to 88 years (mean = 64.2; standard deviation = 13.0); 53.2% identified as female and 44.9% as male. The majority of respondents (76%) considered communication in tele-oncology equal to in-person visits. Preferences for tele-oncology included the ability to get information from the clinician, with 13.5% rating tele-oncology as better than in-person appointments. Tele-oncology was considered worse than in-person appointments for eye contact (n = 21, 12.4%) and virtual waiting room times (n = 50, 29.4%). The following qualitative themes corresponded with several quantitative variables: (1) commensurate to in-person appointments, (2) uncertainty with the digital platform, (3) lack of a personal connection, and (4) enhanced patient experience. Conclusion: Patient-centered communication behaviors were mostly viewed as equally prevalent during tele-oncology and in-person appointments. Addressing the challenges of tele-oncology is necessary to improve the patient experience.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the challenges and support needs of adults aged 75 and older during and after treatment for a blood cancer to aid targeted supportive resource development. METHODS: Adults aged 75 and older with a blood cancer participated in in-depth, semi-structured interviews about challenges and unmet support needs. Participants recruited through The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society were (1) in treatment or previously in treatment for a blood cancer at age 75 or older and (2) living in the United States or its territories. A thematic analysis was conducted with findings compared between 2 groups: (1) chronic -living with a chronic blood cancer; (2) acute -living with an acute blood cancer or both an acute and chronic blood cancer. RESULTS: Participants (n = 50) ranged from 75 to 91 years old. Both groups described similar experiences and identified 5 challenges and support needs: (1) socioemotional impact, (2) activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs/iADLs), (3) uncertainty management, (4) treatment-related stressors, and (5) COVID-19-related strain. Properties for these themes illustrate challenges and support needs, with some differences between groups. For instance, those living with a chronic blood cancer highlighted financial strain with treatment-related stressors, while those with an acute blood cancer focused more on iADLs. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Findings inform an agenda for targeted resource development for older adults with a blood cancer nearing the end of the life span. Results demonstrate the need for supportive services and family communication interventions to help patients manage iADLs and navigate socioemotional needs and challenges.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Adult child caregivers of parents with cancer may face challenges when communicating with the patient and other family members, communicating during clinical interactions, and navigating web-based information seeking. OBJECTIVE: We developed and pilot-tested the Healthy Communication Practice program for adult child caregivers of parents with a blood cancer, which aims to help participants learn and implement communication skills central to caregiving. We assessed the feasibility and acceptability of the training. METHODS: Eligible participants completed a preprogram survey. We assessed the feasibility of participants completing the intervention in the allotted time. Participants had 2 weeks to complete the 2-part, 90-minute online program and completed a postprogram survey that included program evaluation items and the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) using a 1-5 rating scale (5=strongly agree). RESULTS: Of 50 caregivers who initially expressed interest, 34 consented, and 30 completed the program and both surveys (88% completion rate). Caregivers had a mean age of 45.07 (SD 11.96) years and provided care for parents who had a mean age of 73.31 (SD 9.38) years. Caregivers were primarily daughters (n=22, 73%). Overall, scores on the AIM scale were high (mean 4.48, SD 0.67). Specifically, caregivers felt the content met their communication needs (mean 4.58, SD 0.62) and their own needs as a caregiver of a parent with a blood cancer (mean 4.39, SD 0.72). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of the Healthy Communication Practice program, which aims to enhance family and clinical communication skills among caregivers of a parent with a blood cancer. Future studies will examine the efficacy of the program and its impact on both caregiver and patient communication and health outcomes.
