Fostering Patient Choice Awareness and Presenting Treatment Options Neutrally: A Randomized Trial to Assess the Effect on Perceived Room for Involvement in Decision Making.

PURPOSE: Shared decision making calls for clinician communication strategies that aim to foster choice awareness and to present treatment options neutrally, such as by not showing a preference. Evidence for the effectiveness of these communication strategies to enhance patient involvement in treatment decision making is lacking. We tested the effects of 2 strategies in an online randomized video-vignettes experiment. METHODS: We developed disease-specific video vignettes for rheumatic disease, cancer, and kidney disease showcasing a physician presenting 2 treatment options. We tested the strategies in a 2 (choice awareness communication present/absent) by 2 (physician preference communication present/absent) randomized between-subjects design. We asked patients and disease-naïve participants to view 1 video vignette while imagining being the patient and to report perceived room for involvement (primary outcome), understanding of treatment information, treatment preference, satisfaction with the consultation, and trust in the physician (secondary outcomes). Differences across experimental conditions were assessed using 2-way analyses of variance. RESULTS: A total of 324 patients and 360 disease-naïve respondents participated (mean age, 52 ± 14.7 y, 54% female, 56% lower educated, mean health literacy, 12 ± 2.1 on a 3-15 scale). The results showed that choice awareness communication had a positive (Mpresent = 5.2 v. Mabsent = 5.0, P = 0.042, η2partial = 0.006) and physician preference communication had no (Mpresent = 5.0 v. Mabsent = 5.1, P = 0.144, η2partial = 0.003) significant effect on perceived room for involvement in decision making. Physician preference communication steered patients toward preferring that treatment option (Mpresent = 4.7 v. Mabsent = 5.3, P = 0.006, η2partial = 0.011). The strategies had no significant effect on understanding, satisfaction, or trust. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first experimental evidence for a small effect of fostering choice awareness and no effect of physician preference on perceived room to participate in decision making. Physician preference steered patients toward preferring that option.

Cancer patients' needs for support in expressing instrumental concerns and emotions.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of our study was to provide an overview of intervention guidelines on how to address patients' practical needs for support in expressing instrumental concerns and emotions regarding medical, psychosocial and practical topics. METHODS: Six focus groups of cancer patients and survivors (N = 39) were organised. An interview guide was created that consisted of three topics: (a) concerns, (b) needs for support, and (c) a Concern Prompt List. Using the framework method, the transcripts were coded and analysed in Atlas T.I. RESULTS: Patients prefer to receive practical and emotional support, help with preparation, prompts/cues, instructions on how to perform the behaviour (i.e., express their concerns or emotions), feedback, a different structure for the consultation and tailoring. Most of these techniques should preferably be delivered via interpersonal communication. Needs sometimes differ for instrumental concerns and emotions. Only some needs for support were exclusively related to instrumental concerns or emotions. The typical needs for support were not solely linked to the medical, psychosocial and practical topics. CONCLUSION: Different needs to express instrumental concerns and emotions throughout the disease trajectory are categorised. These needs provide input for developing interventions to support concern expression.

The effects of persuasive messages on cancer patients' attitudes, norms and intention to express concerns.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether the use of persuasive messages in which cancer patients' attitudes and perceived social norms were either simultaneously or exclusively targeted can positively change patients' attitudes, perceived social norms and the intention to express concerns in consultations. METHODS: Two online experiments were conducted. The first experiment had a pre-test and post-test measurements design with 4 conditions (attitudes message, social norms message, combined message, control message). The second experiment had a pre-test and post-test measurements design with 2 conditions (message and no message group). RESULTS: The results of the first study showed small positive changes for patients who could potentially change, but there were no differences in effects between conditions. A second study was conducted to determine whether these effects could be attributed to exposure to the message or to the pre-test questionnaire. There were no differences between the conditions. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that paying attention to the expression of concerns by patients might increase patients' intention to express further concerns. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Providers might be able to support patients' in their sharing of concerns through simple communication strategies such as explicitly mentioning that the expression of concerns is possible during a consultation.

Understanding the interplay of cancer patients' instrumental concerns and emotions.

OBJECTIVE: 1) to assess patients' descriptions of concerns, and 2) to inform a conceptual framework in which the impact of the nature of concerns on doctor-patient communication is specified. METHODS: Six focus groups were conducted with 39 cancer patients and survivors. In these focus groups participants were asked to describe their concerns during and after their illness. RESULTS: Concerns were described as instrumental concerns (e.g., receiving insufficient information) and emotions (e.g., sadness). Patients frequently explained their concerns as an interplay of instrumental concerns and emotions. Examples of the interplay were "receiving incorrect information" and "frustration", and "difficulties with searching, finding and judging of information" and "fear". CONCLUSION: Instrumental concerns need to be taken into account in the operationalization of concerns in research. Based on the interplay, the conceptual framework suggests that patients can express instrumental concerns as emotions and emotions as instrumental concerns. Consequently, providers can respond with instrumental and emotional communication when patients express an interplay of concerns. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The results of this study can be used to support providers in recognizing concerns that are expressed by patients in consultations.

Promoting End-of-Life Discussions in Advanced Cancer: Effects of Patient Coaching and Question Prompt Lists.

Purpose To build on results of a cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a combined patient-oncologist intervention to improve communication in advanced cancer, we conducted a post hoc analysis of the patient intervention component, a previsit patient coaching session that used a question prompt list (QPL). We hypothesized that intervention-group participants would bring up more QPL-related topics, particularly prognosis-related topics, during the subsequent oncologist visit. Patients and Methods This cluster RCT with 170 patients who had advanced nonhematologic cancer (and their caregivers) recruited from practices of 24 participating oncologists in western New York. Intervention-group oncologists (n = 12) received individualized communication training; up to 10 of their patients (n = 84) received a previsit individualized communication coaching session that incorporated a QPL. Control-group oncologists (n = 12) and patients (n = 86) received no interventions. Topics of interest identified by patients during the coaching session were summarized from coaching notes; one office visit after the coaching session was audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by using linear regression modeling for group differences. Results Compared with controls, more than twice as many intervention-group participants brought up QPL-related topics during their office visits (70.2% v 32.6%; P < .001). Patients in the intervention group were nearly three times more likely to ask about prognosis (16.7% v 5.8%; P =.03). Of 262 topics of interest identified during coaching, 158 (60.3%) were QPL related; 20 (12.7%) addressed prognosis. Overall, patients in the intervention group brought up 82.4% of topics of interest during the office visit. Conclusion A combined coaching and QPL intervention was effective to help patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers identify and bring up topics of concern, including prognosis, during their subsequent oncologist visits. Considering that most patients are misinformed about prognosis, more intensive steps are needed to better promote such discussions.

Unraveling the Determinants of Cancer Patients' Intention to Express Concerns.

Little is known about the behavioral determinants that underlie cancer patients' intention to express concerns during a consultation. This information can be relevant to developing effective interventions for cancer patients. In this study, the integrative model of behavioral prediction (IMBP) is used as a framework to unravel the determinants of patients' intention to express concerns. The objectives of this study are to examine which of the IMBP determinants (attitude, perceived social norm, and/or self-efficacy) are significantly related to intention and what content of these determinants can be targeted to effect a change in patients' intention. An online survey based on the IMBP determinants was distributed. A total of 236 cancer patients and cancer survivors participated. The results of the survey showed that patients' attitudes and perceived social norm were the most important determinants of their intention to express concerns. The largest change in patients' intention might be achieved by targeting the affective attitude, referring to the extent to which patients believe that expressing concerns is (un)pleasant, and the social norm, referring to the extent to which patients feel (un)supported by significant others in expressing concerns.

Theory of planned behavior and adherence in chronic illness: a meta-analysis.

Social-cognitive models such as the theory of planned behavior have demonstrated efficacy in predicting behavior, but few studies have examined the theory as a predictor of treatment adherence in chronic illness. We tested the efficacy of the theory for predicting adherence to treatment in chronic illness across multiple studies. A database search identified 27 studies, meeting inclusion criteria. Averaged intercorrelations among theory variables were computed corrected for sampling error using random-effects meta-analysis. Path-analysis using the meta-analytically derived correlations was used to test theory hypotheses and effects of moderators. The theory explained 33 and 9 % of the variance in intention and adherence behavior respectively. Theoretically consistent patterns of effects among the attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control, intention and behavior constructs were found with small-to-medium effect sizes. Effect sizes were invariant across behavior and measurement type. Although results support theory predictions, effect sizes were small, particularly for the intention-behavior relationship.

The characteristics and effectiveness of Question Prompt List interventions in oncology: a systematic review of the literature.

OBJECTIVE: Question Prompt Lists (QPLs) have been used extensively in the oncology setting to improve communication, psychological and/or cognitive outcomes. In this systematic review, the objectives were to (a) examine the methodological quality of QPL interventions, (b) review the effectiveness of QPL interventions on communication, psychological and/or cognitive outcomes of cancer patients, (c) gain more insight into the characteristics of QPL interventions (e.g., the number and content of questions, and the mode of delivery) and (d) explore whether the effectiveness of QPL interventions might be explained by their characteristics. METHOD: A systematic literature search was conducted in PsycINFO, Medline, CINAHL and CENTRAL. Empirical studies that investigated the use and effectiveness of QPL interventions in an oncology setting were included. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane method. RESULTS: Sixteen articles met the inclusion criteria. Results indicated evidence for the effectiveness of QPL interventions in enhancing patient participation (i.e., question asking). Furthermore, there was evidence that QPL interventions can influence psychological outcomes (i.e., anxiety at follow-up) and cognitive outcomes (i.e., recall of information). The majority of QPL interventions were given to patients before their consultation in hardcopy. In most studies, QPLs were combined with other intervention components. It is suggested that characteristics of a QPL intervention (i.e., the number of questions on a QPL and provider training) can influence its effectiveness. CONCLUSION: Question Prompt List interventions are effective in improving communication, psychological and cognitive outcomes of cancer patients.

Patients' reports of barriers to expressing concerns during cancer consultations.

OBJECTIVE: To identify cancer patients' most influential barriers to expressing concerns during cancer consultations in a new manner by examining patients' reports of perceived barriers and perceived occurrence of barriers in consultations. METHODS: Two online focus groups (N=16) and an online survey (N=236) were conducted among cancer patients and cancer survivors. The online focus groups and survey were used to examine two elements of patients' barriers, i.e., patients' reports of perceived barriers and perceived occurrence of barriers in consultations. Composite scores of these two elements were calculated to determine influential barriers. RESULTS: Results showed that the most influential barriers were related to providers' behavior (e.g., providers do not explicitly invite patients to express concerns) and the environment where the consultation takes place (e.g., perceived lack of time). CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicate that influential barriers to expressing concerns are barriers that patients cannot overcome themselves (i.e., they are related to providers' behavior or the environment of the consultation). A collaborative approach between researchers, providers and policy makers is needed to overcome these barriers. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The results of this study can be used to develop strategies to overcome barriers to patients expressing concerns.

Advanced cancer patients' and caregivers' use of a Question Prompt List.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to provide insight into how advanced cancer patients and their caregivers use a Question Prompt List (QPL) during a consultation and for preparation for future consultations. METHODS: Audiotaped consultations and follow-up phone calls of 28 advanced cancer patients were coded and content analyzed. Questions asked and concerns expressed in consultations were coded for initiator, content, inclusion in the QPL and exact wording. Patients' reported and future use of the QPL were coded from the phone calls. RESULTS: The majority of patients reported that they used the QPL. Questions asked by patients and caregivers predominately coincided with questions from the prognosis section of the QPL. Questions were rarely asked literally from the QPL, instead questions were tailored to patients' own circumstances. CONCLUSION: QPLs are useful to stimulate discussion on prognosis among advanced cancer patients and caregivers. Patients tailored questions from the QPL to their own circumstances which may suggest high involvement and engagement. The development of more specific tailored communication interventions for advanced cancer patients is warranted. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Implementation of QPLs in the advanced cancer setting may be beneficial for patients, caregivers and healthcare providers to facilitate discussion of topics such as prognosis.

Can the common-sense model predict adherence in chronically ill patients? A meta-analysis.

The aim of this meta-analysis was to explore whether mental representations, derived from the common-sense model of illness representations (CSM), were able to predict adherence in chronically ill patients. Electronic databases were searched for studies that used the CSM and measured adherence behaviour in chronically ill patients. Correlations from the included articles were meta-analysed using a random-size effect model. A moderation analysis was conducted for the type of adherence behaviour. The effect sizes for the different mental representations and adherence constructs ranged from -0.02 to 0.12. Further analyses showed that the relationship between the mental representations and adherence did not differ by the type of adherence behaviour. The low-effect sizes indicate that the relationships between the different mental representations of the CSM and adherence are very weak. Therefore, the CSM may not be the most appropriate model to use in predictive studies of adherence.