Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinician-patient communication about cancer treatment misinformation: The Misinformation Response Model.
Mullis, M Devyn; Fisher, Carla L; Johnson, Skyler B; Liu, Tianshi; Amin, Tithi B; Rogers, Sherise; DeGruccio, Kennan; Bylund, Carma L.
Afiliação
  • Mullis MD; Department of Health Outcomes & Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, 2004 Mowry Road, Gainesville, FL 32610, United States of America.
  • Fisher CL; Department of Health Outcomes & Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, 2004 Mowry Road, Gainesville, FL 32610, United States of America.
  • Johnson SB; Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, University of Utah, 30 N 19000 E, Salt Lake City, UT 84132, United States of America.
  • Liu T; Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, 1600 SW Archer Road, Gainesville, FL 32610, United States of America.
  • Amin TB; Department of Health Outcomes & Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, 2004 Mowry Road, Gainesville, FL 32610, United States of America.
  • Rogers S; Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, 1600 SW Archer Road, Gainesville, FL 32610, United States of America.
  • DeGruccio K; Department of Health Outcomes & Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, 2004 Mowry Road, Gainesville, FL 32610, United States of America.
  • Bylund CL; Department of Health Outcomes & Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, 2004 Mowry Road, Gainesville, FL 32610, United States of America.
PEC Innov ; 5: 100319, 2024 Dec 15.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39101055
ABSTRACT

Objective:

Cancer treatment misinformation (CTM) is pervasive and impacts patient health outcomes. Cancer clinicians play an essential role in addressing CTM. We previously identified four self-reported responses that characterize the communication process clinicians engage in to address CTM. Clinicians 1) work to understand the misinformation; 2) correct the misinformation through education; 3) advise about future online searches; and 4) preserve the clinician-patient relationship. We sought to confirm and expand on the model we developed by observing cancer clinicians' communication while addressing CTM with a standardized patient (SP).

Methods:

17 cancer clinicians were audio recorded in a SP encounter, in which a breast cancer SP asked three questions based on CTM. We thematically analyzed transcriptions of the recordings.

Results:

Clinicians used four responses with associated strategies and skills to address CTM in a standardized clinical encounter, confirming the previously developed model. The four responses were (1) work to understand the misinformation; (2) correct the misinformation through education; (3) advise about future online searches; and (4) preserve the clinician-patient relationship. This observational approach allowed us to refine strategies within each response and identify communication skills clinicians enact to address CTM.

Conclusion:

These findings provide a strong foundation for the Misinformation Response Model for cancer clinicians. Future research should examine which components of the model are most effective in improving patient outcomes. Innovation This is the first study observing clinicians' communication through simulated practice with SPs about CTM.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: PEC Innov Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos País de publicação: Holanda

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: PEC Innov Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos País de publicação: Holanda