Complex conversations in a healthcare setting: experiences from an interprofessional workshop on clinician-patient communication skills.

BACKGROUND: Communication is pivotal to the effective care and treatment of patients in our health care systems. Despite this understanding, clinicians are not sufficiently educated to confidently conduct complex discussions with patients. Communication skills workshops have been shown to be an effective educational format to improve clinician skills. However, despite the increasing interprofessional focus within modern medicine, there have been few studies looking at interprofessional communication workshops. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted to assess how an interprofessional communication skills workshop affected the communication skills of clinicians at a tertiary health service. Pre- and post-workshop surveys were undertaken by participants, followed by focus group interviews eight-weeks post workshop. RESULTS: Clinicians were able to incorporate learnt communication skills into their daily practice. This was associated with an improvement in confidence of clinicians in having complex discussions, in addition to a reduction in the burden of having complex discussions. Participants responded positively to the interdisciplinary format, reporting benefits from the learning experience that translated into daily practice. CONCLUSION: Clinicians' communication skills in conducting complex clinician-patient conversations can be improved by participation in interprofessional communication skills workshops. We identified that the interprofessional aspect of the workshops not only improved interprofessional understanding and relationships, but also developed increased self-awareness during complex discussions, and reduced the sense of burden felt by clinicians.

Bridging the gap: a pre-post feasibility study of embedding exercise therapy into a co-located cancer unit.

PURPOSE: To establish the feasibility of embedding a flexible, exercise-based rehabilitation program into a cancer treatment unit to allow cancer survivors early exercise support. METHOD: A pre-post study was conducted using Bowen's Framework to describe key domains of feasibility: demand (referrals), acceptability (uptake, attendance, satisfaction), implementation (resources), practicality (adverse events, costs) and limited-efficacy (function, quality of life, self-efficacy). Participants were medically stable, adult cancer survivors receiving curative or palliative treatment for cancer at the health service. Participants completed an 8-week home or hospital-based exercise program. Data were analysed descriptively. Standardised mean differences (Hedge's g) and mean differences were calculated to determine effect size and clinical significance. RESULTS: The exercise-based rehabilitation service received 155 referrals over 6 months. Of those eligible, 73/119 (61%) commenced. Participants opting for twice-weekly, hospital-based exercise attended 9/16 (56%) sessions. Participants reported high satisfaction and there were no major adverse events. The program utilised existing resources, with the predominant cost being staff. The average health service cost per participant was AUD $1,104. Participants made clinically significant gains in function (6-min walk distance; + 73 m, 95% confidence interval 49 to 96) and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30 Global quality of life; + 8 units, 95% confidence interval 3 to 13). CONCLUSION: Implementation of exercise-based rehabilitation in a co-located cancer unit was safe and feasible. Access, patient and staff education and establishing funding streams are important implementation considerations. Implications for cancer survivors Access to exercise in a cancer unit provides opportunity for early intervention to optimise function during treatment.

A model of cancer survivorship care within a community health setting: the Good Life Cancer Survivorship program.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to establish and evaluate the referral pathway from a hospital-based oncology service to a multidisciplinary community-based health service supporting survivors to engage in self-management. METHOD: The evaluation involved understanding patterns of health service utilisation and health professionals' perspectives on the implementation of the community-based model of survivorship care, the Good Life Cancer Survivorship (GLCS) program. Survivors referred to GLCS were undergoing or had completed cancer treatment and unable to participate in intensive ambulatory oncology rehabilitation. Health service utilisation was tracked over 5 months, and the perspectives of health professionals referring to and involved in the GLCS program were recorded using semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: The oncology service made 25 referrals. The most accessed services at Carrington Health were physiotherapy with 18 appointments, followed by psychology (12) and dietitian services (11). Four themes emerged from the interviews: (1) Allied health services are relevant to people with cancer; (2) Education and information needs; (3) Communication gaps; (4) A one-stop multidisciplinary and holistic care model. CONCLUSION: This project demonstrated that community health may be a valid setting to support cancer survivors in managing their health. Supporting ongoing awareness, education and understanding of services across both community and acute care settings will foster care coordination and strengthen referral pathways. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Accessing appropriate community-based allied health services can support cancer survivors in developing self-management skills to manage their own health and improve their health outcomes and wellbeing in the survivorship phase.