The Cost-Effectiveness of Adjunctive Lifestyle Interventions for the Management of Cancer: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: There is a paucity of papers synthesizing the cost-effectiveness (CE) of lifestyle interventions to support cancer patients, and the synthesis papers available have used analytic methods that do not permit easy comparison between studies. We therefore evaluated the CE of adjunctive lifestyle interventions compared with usual care. METHODS: A systematic literature search of Scopus, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library databases was conducted from database inception until June 2021. Eligible studies were economic evaluations from randomised controlled trials or modelled economic evaluations that recruited subjects with a confirmed diagnosis of cancer and were allocated to a lifestyle intervention as an adjunct or supportive treatment, or usual care. Studies were excluded if there was no cost-effectiveness analysis or if costs were identified but not related back to measures of effectiveness. CE of the included interventions was recalculated, adjusting for key differences (with respect to absolute resource costs and timing) between the broad range of study settings and a common 'target' setting. All CE data were converted into incremental net monetary benefit using a common cost-effectiveness threshold to facilitate comparison. The quality of the studies was evaluated for risk of bias using the ECOBIAS check list. RESULTS: Nine studies were included in our review. Seven studies investigated the benefits of physical exercise in combination with cancer treatment and two studies investigated the combination of exercise and psychosocial counselling alongside cancer treatment. Six studies with an exercise intervention reported larger quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains compared with usual care and when cost per QALY gained was considered, three of the interventions were cost effective. One of the two interventions combining exercise with psychosocial counselling was cost effective. All studies were considered of good quality but all had some limitations. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence to support the cost effectiveness of lifestyle interventions in patients with cancer is mixed with four of the nine interventions found to be cost effective and two remaining cost effective when uncertainty was taken into account. Sensitivity analysis showed the influence of the CE threshold on the results, highlighting the importance of selecting a CE threshold that is appropriate to the setting. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42020185376.

Definitions and use of the teach-back method in healthcare consultations with patients: A systematic review and thematic synthesis.

OBJECTIVE: To review and synthesise definitions of the teach-back method in the literature. The second aim is to synthesise the barriers, facilitators and perceptions of teach-back use in healthcare consultations with patients. METHODS: A systematic review and thematic synthesis following Braun and Clarke's method. RESULTS: The primary search found 1429 citations and the secondary search added 221 citations. Screening identified 66 citations eligible for data extraction. We contrasted and synthesised operational definitions of the teach-back method. The synthesis generated seven themes related to healthcare provider (HCP) and patient perceptions of teach-back (effectiveness, stigma and time-related perceptions), the universal application of teach-back, patient health outcomes and healthcare provider training. DISCUSSION: Operational definitions of the teach-back method varied in the literature and contained implied steps. HCPs and patient perceptions of teach-back operated as both enablers and barriers to its use. HCPs training programs for the teach-back method were identified as beneficial for altering HCPs perceptions about the method and increased its use with patients. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Standardising operational definitions of the teach-back method can support replicability of research and enhance HCPs communication skills training programs. HCPs training on teach-back use can support the increased use of the technique with broader patient populations.

Developing a Taxonomy of Communication Techniques and Aids Used By Healthcare Providers During Patient Consultations: Protocol for a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is no available standardized taxonomy of defined communication techniques and aids used by healthcare providers during patient consultations. It is challenging to identify communication techniques that contribute to effective healthcare provider and patient consultations and to replicate communication interventions in research. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to describe a protocol for the development and pilot of a taxonomy of communication techniques and aids used by healthcare providers during patient consultations. METHODS: A systematic review will be completed to identify eligible studies. Extracted techniques and aids will be organized into a preliminary taxonomy by a multidisciplinary team. The preliminary taxonomy will be piloted by two groups: research assistants trained in taxonomy application and healthcare providers and healthcare professional students not trained in taxonomy use. The pilot will use custom developed video footage of health provider and patient interactions. Interrater validity and interview feedback will be used to inform a Delphi panel of multidisciplinary healthcare providers and patient experts when they convene to finalize the preliminary taxonomy. RESULTS: This study was funded in November 2017 by the Monash University Interdisciplinary Research Seed Funding Scheme. Data collection commenced in March 2018, and data analysis is in progress. We expect the results to be published in 2021. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first known attempt to develop a defined and standardized taxonomy of communication techniques and aids used by healthcare providers in patient consultations. The findings will be used to inform future research by providing a detailed taxonomy of healthcare providers' communication techniques and standardized definitions. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/16801.