Does training oncologists to have goals of care discussions increase and improve the quality of GoC discussions with advanced cancer patients?

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6597-6597
Author(s):  
Nina A. Bickell ◽  
Kerin B. Adelson ◽  
Jason Parker Gonsky ◽  
Jenny J. Lin ◽  
Sofya Pintova ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (34_suppl) ◽  
pp. 19-19
Author(s):  
Cardinale B. Smith ◽  
Sofya Pintova ◽  
Kerin B. Adelson ◽  
Jason Parker Gonsky ◽  
Natalia Egorova ◽  
...  

19 Background: Studies show minority patients have inadequate discussions about treatment, prognosis, and goals of care (GoC) which translate into substandard treatment, worse quality of life, and poorer survival than whites. However, there is a paucity of data on the quality of communication among minority patients with advanced cancer. We studied factors impacting the oncologists’ time spent during GoC discussion visits with their minority and non-minority patients. Methods: At community, academic, municipal, and rural hospitals, we recruited and randomized solid tumor oncologists and their newly diagnosed advanced cancer patients with <2-year prognosis to participate in a RCT, testing a coaching model of communication skills training. Patients were surveyed after post-imaging visits. These visits were audiotaped and median encounter time recorded. We define GoC discussions as patients report that their doctor talked about preferences for cancer treatment and clarified things most important to them given their illness. Comparisons were made using non-parametric tests. We used mix-effect models for risk adjustment. Results: For 22 randomized oncologists in the study,142 post-imaging encounters were audiotaped. Of these, 38% were non-Hispanic White, 32% non-Hispanic Black and 19% Hispanic. The median face to face time oncologists spent during a GoC encounter with an advanced cancer minority patient was 12 minutes compared to 17 minutes for non-minorities (p=0.002). Median encounter times varied between the four sites, ranging from 10 minutes to 18 minutes, p=0.009. For visits that took place after progression of disease, duration of visit was 18 minutes versus 13 minutes if there were no progression, p=0.007. After controlling for clustering of the patients within the hospitals and progression of disease, time spent with minority patients remained less than with non-minority patients (15 min vs. 18 min, p=0.02). Conclusions: Oncologists' time spent conducting GoC conversations with minority cancer patients is significantly less than with non-minority patients. Evaluating factors that contribute to this disparity is critically important to ensure minority patients receive high-quality cancer care. Clinical trial information: NCT02374255.


2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gemma Cramarossa ◽  
Liang Zeng ◽  
Liying Zhang ◽  
Ling-Ming Tseng ◽  
Ming-Feng Hou ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donemico Fuoco ◽  
Jonathan di Tomasso ◽  
Caroline Boulos ◽  
Robert D Kilgour ◽  
Jose A Morais ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanna Sommer ◽  
Christopher Chung ◽  
Dagmar M. Haller ◽  
Sophie Pautex

Abstract Background: Patients suffering from advanced cancer often loose contact with their primary care physician (PCP) during oncologic treatment and palliative care is introduced very late.The aim of this pilot study was to test the feasibility and procedures for a randomized trial of an intervention to teach PCPs a palliative care approach and communication skills to improve advanced cancer patients’ quality of life. Methods: Observational pilot study in 5 steps. 1) Recruitment of PCPs. 2) Intervention: training on palliative care competencies and communication skills addressing end-of-life issues.3) Recruitment of advanced cancer patients by PCPs. 4) Patients follow-up by PCPs, and assessment of their quality of life by a research assistant 5) Feedback from PCPs using a semi-structured focus group and three individual interviews with qualitative deductive theme analysis.Results: 8 PCPs were trained. PCPs failed to recruit patients for fear of imposing additional loads on their patients. PCPs changed their approach of advanced cancer patients. They became more conscious of their role and responsibility during oncologic treatments and felt empowered to take a more active role picking up patient’s cues and addressing advance directives. They developed interprofessional collaborations for advance care planning. Overall, they discovered the role to help patients to make decisions for a better end-of-life.Conclusions: PCPs failed to recruit advanced cancer patients, but reported a change in paradigm about palliative care. They moved from a focus on helping patients to die better, to a new role helping patients to define the conditions for a better end-of-life.Trial registration : The ethics committee of the canton of Geneva approved the study (2018-00077 Pilot Study) in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki


2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 817-828 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geok Ling Lee ◽  
Mandy Yen Ling Ow ◽  
Ramaswamy Akhileswaran ◽  
Grace Su Yin Pang ◽  
Gilbert Kam Tong Fan ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (10) ◽  
pp. 2783-2791 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Schur ◽  
Alexandra Ebert-Vogel ◽  
Michaela Amering ◽  
Eva Katharina Masel ◽  
Marie Neubauer ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 199-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A Echteld ◽  
Lia van Zuylen ◽  
Marjolein Bannink ◽  
Erica Witkamp ◽  
Carin CD Van der Rijt

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document