» Articles » PMID: 19819098

Patient-centered Communication and Prognosis Discussions with Cancer Patients

Overview
Publisher Elsevier
Specialties Health Services
Nursing
Date 2009 Oct 13
PMID 19819098
Citations 19
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To examine physician communication associated with prognosis discussion with cancer patients.

Methods: We conducted a study of physician-patient communication using trained actors. Thirty-nine physicians, including 19 oncologists and 20 family physicians participated in the study. Actors carried two hidden digital recorders to unannounced visits. We coded recordings for eliciting and validating patient concerns, attentive voice tone, and prognosis talk.

Results: Actor adherence to role averaged 92% and the suspected detection rate was 14%. In a multiple regression, eliciting and validating patient concerns (beta=.40, C.I.=0.11-0.68) attentiveness (beta=.32, C.I.=0.06-0.58) and being an oncologist vs. a family physician (beta=.33, C.I.=0.33-1.36) accounted for 46% of the variance in prognosis communication.

Conclusion: Eliciting and validating patient concerns and attentiveness voice tone is associated with increased discussion of cancer patient prognosis as is physician specialty.

Practice Implications: Eliciting and validating patient concerns and attentive voice tone may be markers of physician willingness to discuss emotionally difficult topics. Educating physicians about mindful practice may increase their ability to collect important information and to attend to patient concerns.

Citing Articles

Examining how physician factors influence patient satisfaction during clinical consultations about cancer prognosis and pain.

Lou Z, Vivas-Valencia C, Shields C, Kong N PEC Innov. 2023; 1:100017.

PMID: 37213781 PMC: 10194410. DOI: 10.1016/j.pecinn.2022.100017.


Patient activation reduces effects of implicit bias on doctor-patient interactions.

Gainsburg I, Derricks V, Shields C, Fiscella K, Epstein R, Yu V Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022; 119(32):e2203915119.

PMID: 35914161 PMC: 9371681. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2203915119.


Is physician implicit bias associated with differences in care by patient race for metastatic cancer-related pain?.

Fiscella K, Epstein R, Griggs J, Marshall M, Shields C PLoS One. 2021; 16(10):e0257794.

PMID: 34705826 PMC: 8550362. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257794.


Surgeon Strategies to Patient-Centered Decision-making in Cancer Care: Validation and Applications of a Conceptual Model.

Kelly E, Myers B, McGee J, Hyer M, Tsilimigras D, Pawlik T J Cancer Educ. 2021; 37(6):1719-1726.

PMID: 33942256 DOI: 10.1007/s13187-021-02017-y.


Social networks of older patients with advanced cancer: Potential contributions of an integrated mixed methods network analysis.

Yousefi Nooraie R, Mohile S, Yilmaz S, Bauer J, Epstein R J Geriatr Oncol. 2020; 12(5):855-859.

PMID: 33342721 PMC: 8184572. DOI: 10.1016/j.jgo.2020.12.005.


References
1.
Epstein R, Shields C, Franks P, Meldrum S, Feldman M, Kravitz R . Exploring and validating patient concerns: relation to prescribing for depression. Ann Fam Med. 2007; 5(1):21-8. PMC: 1783912. DOI: 10.1370/afm.621. View

2.
Fiscella K, Meldrum S, Franks P, Shields C, Duberstein P, H McDaniel S . Patient trust: is it related to patient-centered behavior of primary care physicians?. Med Care. 2004; 42(11):1049-55. DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200411000-00003. View

3.
Epstein R, Franks P, Fiscella K, Shields C, Meldrum S, Kravitz R . Measuring patient-centered communication in patient-physician consultations: theoretical and practical issues. Soc Sci Med. 2005; 61(7):1516-28. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.02.001. View

4.
Epstein R . Mindful practice. JAMA. 1999; 282(9):833-9. DOI: 10.1001/jama.282.9.833. View

5.
Zapka J, Carter R, Carter C, Hennessy W, Kurent J, DesHarnais S . Care at the end of life: focus on communication and race. J Aging Health. 2006; 18(6):791-813. DOI: 10.1177/0898264306293614. View