The Effect of Communication Skills Training for Generalist Palliative Care Providers on Patient-Reported Outcomes and Clinician Behaviors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This textbook integrates clinical wisdom with empirical findings, drawing upon the history of communication science, providing a comprehensive curriculum for applied communication skills training for specialist oncologists, surgeons, nurses, psychosocial care providers and other members of the multidisciplinary team. This new edition presents a curriculum for nurses, which discusses needs of pre-registration to advanced trainees, including the ‘SAGE & THYME’ training programme, chronic disease, responding to depressed patients, the last hours and days of life, family care, facilitation training, and e-learning. The core curriculum ranges from breaking bad news, discussing risk and prognosis, achieving shared treatment decisions, responding to difficult emotions, dealing with denial, communicating with relatives and conducting a family meeting, helping patients cope with survivorship, deal with recurrence, transition to palliative care, and talk openly about death and dying. Modules offer guidelines about key skills, essential tasks, effective strategies, and scenarios for training sessions with simulated patients. The communication science section covers the history and models of communication skills training, the art of facilitating skill development, ethics, gender, power, the internet, audio-recording significant consultations, decision aides, and shared treatment decisions, medical student training, and enhancing patient participation in consultations. Specialty issues are explored, including enrolling in clinical trials, working in teams, discussing genetic risk, reconstructive and salvage surgery, among many other important issues. Variations in clinical disciplines are also discussed, including chapters for social workers, radiologists, surgical oncologists, medical and radiation oncologists, palliative medicine, pastoral care, pharmacy, paediatrics, and the elderly.

Download Full-text

Correction to: Robotic‑arm assisted total knee arthroplasty is associated with improved accuracy and patient reported outcomes: a systematic review and meta‑analysis

Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy ◽

10.1007/s00167-021-06522-x ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Junren Zhang ◽

Wofhatwa Solomon Ndou ◽

Nathan Ng ◽

Paul Gaston ◽

Philip M. Simpson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Total Knee Arthroplasty ◽

Knee Arthroplasty ◽

Patient Reported Outcomes ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Robotic Arm ◽

Patient Reported ◽

Total Knee ◽

Improved Accuracy

A correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06522-x

Download Full-text

AB0116 THE EFFECTS OF DISEASE MODIFYING ANTI-RHEUMATIC DRUGS ON PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOMES; PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND NETWORK META-ANALYSIS

Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases ◽

10.1136/annrheumdis-2021-eular.1578 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽

pp. 1087.1-1087

Author(s):

M. Van den Dikkenberg, Msc ◽

N. Luurssen-Masurel ◽

M. Kuijper ◽

M. R. Kok ◽

P. De Jong ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Patient Reported Outcomes ◽

Treatment Effects ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Activity Limitations ◽

Definitive Answer ◽

Preliminary Results ◽

Patient Reported ◽

Standard Set ◽

Disease Modifying

Background:The need to involve patient reported outcomes (PROs) in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) increases, since PROs quantify patient relevant outcomes. Although PROs have been incorporated in the core-outcome sets in clinical trials, knowledge about the treatment effects on these PROs is scarce. Therefore, we performed a systematic review on the effects of disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), of any type, on relevant PRO domains mentioned in the ICHOM standard set. This might support rheumatologists and RA patients during treatment decisions.Objectives:To get insight in the treatment effects of DMARDs of any type on three PRO domains that matter to patients (pain, activity limitations and fatigue).Methods:A systematic review was performed in Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane and Google Scholar. Included were all studies that were published before August 2019 and showed DMARD treatment effects in RA on PROs that are part of the ICHOM standard set. Three Bayesian network meta-analyses were performed for the PRO domains pain, activity limitations and fatigue. Preliminary results of DMARDs (in)directly compared to placebo were visualized by forest plots using R.Results:The search strategy yielded n=5974 articles. After selection was performed by 2 independent researchers, n=70 individual articles representing n=53 studies were extracted, over the three PRO domains; pain (n=31), activity limitations (n=41) and fatigue (n=21). In all RCTs, PROs were only reported as secondary or tertiary endpoints. In figure 1, we show the effects on PROs for any type of DMARD investigated compared to placebo. Overall, DMARDs show a greater reduction in pain (standardized mean difference (SMD); -0.97 – -0.22) and most of them in activity limitations (SMD; -0.81 – 0.56). In fatigue, this clear direction is lacking (SMD; -0.86 – 3.5). csDMARDs and anti-TNF seem to perform slightly, but nog significantly, worse than other bDMARDs and tsDMARDs in the first two domains.Conclusion:Within in this systematic review we report a reduction for DMARDs of any type on the domains of pain and activity limitations compared to placebo. However, results are still preliminary and should be interpreted with care. A more comprehensive network analysis might give a more definitive answer which DMARD performs best.Figure 1.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

Download Full-text

Development and evaluation of a CBT-based communication skills training for perinatal loss care providers

Journal of Japan Academy of Midwifery ◽

10.3418/jjam.30.4 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 30 (1) ◽

pp. 4-16

Author(s):

Akiko HIRUTA ◽

Shigeko HORIUCHI ◽

Keiko ISHII ◽

Shoko Gilbert HORIUCHI

Keyword(s):

Communication Skills ◽

Skills Training ◽

Perinatal Loss ◽

Communication Skills Training ◽

Care Providers

Download Full-text

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Endoscopic Appearance of Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology ◽

10.1016/j.cgh.2018.06.015 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 17 (3) ◽

pp. 411-418.e3 ◽

Cited By ~ 17

Author(s):

Neeraj Narula ◽

Abdul-Aziz Alshahrani ◽

Yuhong Yuan ◽

Walter Reinisch ◽

Jean-Frederic Colombel

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Ulcerative Colitis ◽

Patient Reported Outcomes ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Endoscopic Appearance ◽

Patient Reported

Download Full-text

Generic Patient-Reported Outcomes and Outcome Measures: A Systematic Review Study Protocol

10.1101/2021.05.28.21257980 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Yuki Seidler ◽

Erika Mosor ◽

Margaret R Andrews ◽

Carolina Watson ◽

Nick Bott ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Patient Reported Outcomes ◽

Outcome Measurement ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Patient Reported Outcome ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Screening Process ◽

Patient Reported

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are an essential part of health outcome measurement and vital to patient-centricity and valued-based care. Several international consortia have developed core outcome sets and many of them include PROs. PROs are measured by patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). PROs and PROMs can be generic or specific to certain diseases or conditions. While the characteristics of generic PROs and PROMs are well recognised as widely relevant and applicable across different domains, diseases and conditions, there is a lack of knowledge on the types of PROs measured by generic PROMs. We also do not know in which disease areas generic PROs and PROMs are commonly used. To date, there has been no systematic review solely focusing on generic PROMs, what they measure and their areas of application. Objectives: This systematic review will identify core PROs measured by generic PROMs used in adult populations and the areas in which they are applied. Methods: We will conduct a systematic review of reviews. The screening process and the reporting will comply with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) 2020 Statement. We will use four databases, Medline [PubMed], CINHAL [Ebsco], Cochrane [Cochrane Library], and PsycINFO [Ovid], and reports from international consortia. Inclusion criteria are systematic reviews, meta-analysis or patient-reported outcome sets developed by international consortia reporting on generic PROMs in adult populations. Articles primarily focusing on patient-reported experience measures (PREMs), children or adolescents, or those not written in English will be excluded. Risk of bias will be assessed by checking if the included articles comply with established guidelines for systematic reviews such as the PRISMA statement. We will extract generic PROMs and PROs measured by these PROMs, and the areas applied from the selected articles and reports. Extracted data and information will be quantitatively and qualitatively synthesised without statistical interference. The quality of the synthesised evidences will be assessed by clarifying the strengths, limitations and possible biases in our review.

Download Full-text