BACKGROUND: The purpose of this investigation was to systematically examine the efficacy of providing men with prostate cancer with an audiotape of their primary treatment consultation. METHOD:Participants included 425 men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer and 15 radiation oncologists from 4 cancer centers in Canada. Patients were block randomized to one of four consultation groups: 1. Standard care control--not audio-taped; 2. Audio-taped--no audiotape given; 3. Audio-taped--patient given audiotape; and 4. Audio-taped--patient offered choice of receiving audiotape or not (4 patients declined; 94 accepted). Patient outcomes were measured at 12 weeks post-consultation: perceived degree of information provision; audiotape satisfaction and use; communication satisfaction with oncologist; mood state; and cancer-specific quality of life. RESULTS: Patients receiving the consultation audiotape reported having been provided with significantly more disease and treatment information in general (p=0.04), and more information about treatment alternatives (p=0.04) and treatment side effects (p=0.01) in particular, than patients who did not receive the audiotape. Audiotape benefit was not significantly related to patient satisfaction with communication, mood state or quality of life at 12 weeks post-consultation, and was not significantly affected by choice of receiving the audiotape. Patients rated the audiotape intervention positively, with an average score of 83.0 out of 100. CONCLUSION: Consultation audiotapes are rated highly by men with prostate cancer, and these audiotapes help to enhance their perception of having been provided with critical disease- and treatment-related information. Copyright 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this investigation was to systematically examine the efficacy of providing men with prostate cancer with an audiotape of their primary treatment consultation. METHOD:Participants included 425 men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer and 15 radiation oncologists from 4 cancer centers in Canada. Patients were block randomized to one of four consultation groups: 1. Standard care control--not audio-taped; 2. Audio-taped--no audiotape given; 3. Audio-taped--patient given audiotape; and 4. Audio-taped--patient offered choice of receiving audiotape or not (4 patients declined; 94 accepted). Patient outcomes were measured at 12 weeks post-consultation: perceived degree of information provision; audiotape satisfaction and use; communication satisfaction with oncologist; mood state; and cancer-specific quality of life. RESULTS:Patients receiving the consultation audiotape reported having been provided with significantly more disease and treatment information in general (p=0.04), and more information about treatment alternatives (p=0.04) and treatment side effects (p=0.01) in particular, than patients who did not receive the audiotape. Audiotape benefit was not significantly related to patient satisfaction with communication, mood state or quality of life at 12 weeks post-consultation, and was not significantly affected by choice of receiving the audiotape. Patients rated the audiotape intervention positively, with an average score of 83.0 out of 100. CONCLUSION: Consultation audiotapes are rated highly by men with prostate cancer, and these audiotapes help to enhance their perception of having been provided with critical disease- and treatment-related information. Copyright 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Authors: Jasvinder A Singh; Jeff A Sloan; Pamela J Atherton; Tenbroeck Smith; Thomas F Hack; Mashele M Huschka; Teresa A Rummans; Matthew M Clark; Brent Diekmann; Lesley F Degner Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: Kristina Demas Woodhouse; Katie Tremont; Anil Vachani; Marilyn M Schapira; Neha Vapiwala; Charles B Simone; Abigail T Berman Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2017-06 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Lixin Song; Christina Tyler; Margaret F Clayton; Eleanor Rodgiriguez-Rassi; Latorya Hill; Jinbing Bai; Raj Pruthi; Donald E Bailey Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2016-09-23
Authors: Michael R Gionfriddo; Aaron L Leppin; Juan P Brito; Annie Leblanc; Nilay D Shah; Victor M Montori Journal: J Comp Eff Res Date: 2013-11 Impact factor: 1.744
Authors: Roberta E Goldman; Amy Sullivan; Anthony L Back; Stewart C Alexander; Robin K Matsuyama; Stephanie J Lee Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2009-01-09