scholarly journals PS2-26: Measuring Patient-Centered Communication in Cancer Care: A Systematic Approach

2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 143-143
Author(s):  
L. McCormack ◽  
K. Treiman ◽  
M. Olmsted ◽  
D. Rupert ◽  
N. Arora
2011 ◽  
Vol 72 (7) ◽  
pp. 1085-1095 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren A. McCormack ◽  
Katherine Treiman ◽  
Douglas Rupert ◽  
Pamela Williams-Piehota ◽  
Eric Nadler ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 196 (5) ◽  
pp. 1383-1389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Mossanen ◽  
Liam C. Macleod ◽  
Alice Chu ◽  
Jonathan L. Wright ◽  
Bruce Dalkin ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 791-798
Author(s):  
David W. Kissane ◽  
Carma L. Bylund

Evidence is growing that communication skills training can help clinicians to become more empathic and use open questions in a patient-centered manner. More work is needed to see these gains translate into improved patient outcomes. A core curriculum has matured as a conventional component of training in cancer care. Strong evidence supports the use of question prompt lists, decision aids, and audio recording of important consultations for later review by the patient and family. Gains are being made with communication challenges such as discussing internet-derived information. Patient training about optimizing their communication has started to complete the reciprocal interaction.


2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (11) ◽  
pp. 1723-1733
Author(s):  
Kerri‐Anne R. Mitchell ◽  
Kelly J. Brassil ◽  
Serena A. Rodriguez ◽  
Edward Tsai ◽  
Kayo Fujimoto ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosemarie Slevin Perocchia ◽  
Julie Keany Hodorowski ◽  
Laurie A. Williams ◽  
Julie Kornfeld ◽  
Nydia Lassalle Davis ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea L Hartzler ◽  
Jason P Izard ◽  
Bruce L Dalkin ◽  
Sean P Mikles ◽  
John L Gore

Abstract Objective Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a valued source of health information, but prior work focuses largely on data capture without guidance on visual displays that promote effective PRO use in patient-centered care. We engaged patients, providers, and design experts in human-centered design of “PRO dashboards” that illustrate trends in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) reported by patients following prostate cancer treatment. Materials and Methods We designed and assessed the feasibility of integrating dashboards into care in 3 steps: (1) capture PRO needs of patients and providers through focus groups and interviews; (2) iteratively build and refine a prototype dashboard; and (3) pilot test dashboards with patients and their provider during follow-up care. Results Focus groups ( n = 60 patients) prioritized needs for dashboards that compared longitudinal trends in patients’ HRQOL with “men like me.” Of the candidate dashboard designs, 50 patients and 50 providers rated pictographs less helpful than bar charts, line graphs, or tables ( P < .001) and preferred bar charts and line graphs most. Given these needs and the design recommendations from our Patient Advisory Board ( n = 7) and design experts ( n = 7), we built and refined a prototype that charts patients’ HRQOL compared with age- and treatment-matched patients in personalized dashboards. Pilot testing dashboard use ( n = 12 patients) improved compliance with quality indicators for prostate cancer care ( P < .01). Conclusion PRO dashboards are a promising approach for integrating patient-generated data into prostate cancer care. Informed by human-centered design principles, this work establishes guidance on dashboard content, tailoring, and clinical use that patients and providers find meaningful.


Author(s):  
Breanne Hobden ◽  
Heidi Turon ◽  
Amy Waller ◽  
Mariko Carey ◽  
Anthony Proietto ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Ray D. Page ◽  
Lee N. Newcomer ◽  
John D. Sprandio ◽  
Barbara L. McAneny

In recent years, the cost of providing quality cancer care has been subject to an epic escalation causing concerns on the verge of a health care crisis. Innovative patient-management models in oncology based on patient-centered medical home (PCMH) principles, coupled with alternative payments to traditional fee for service (FFS), such as bundled and episodes payment are now showing evidence of effectiveness. These efforts have the potential to bend the cost curve while also improving quality of care and patient satisfaction. However, going forward with FFS alternatives, there are several performance-based payment options with an array of financial risks and rewards. Most novel payment options convey a greater financial risk and accountability on the provider. Therefore, the oncology medical home (OMH) can be a way to mitigate some financial risks by sharing savings with the payer through better global care of the patient, proactively preventing complications, emergency department (ED) visits, and hospitalizations. However, much of the medical home infrastructure that is required to reduced total costs of cancer care comes as an added expense to the provider. As best-of-practice quality standards are being elucidated and refined, we are now at a juncture where payers, providers, policymakers, and other stakeholders should work in concert to expand and implement the OMH framework into the variety of oncology practice environments to better equip them to assimilate into the new payment reform configurations of the future.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document