Literature DB >> 17265785

Communicating about chemotherapy-induced anemia.

Brad Davidson1, Diane Blum, David Cella, Heidi Hamilton, Lillian Nail, Roger Waltzman.   

Abstract

Many validated instruments exist for determining the impact of chemotherapy-induced anemia and related fatigue on patient quality of life, but few studies analyze how healthcare providers actually discuss these subjects with patients. The authors share their study results on patterns of communication between participating patients and their physicians and allied health professionals. Letters of invitation were mailed to over 1,000 community-based oncologists, 15 of whom met the criteria and agreed to participate in this study on a first-enrolled basis until sufficient participation was ensured. In total, 36 of their patients were audio- and/or video-recorded during their regularly scheduled visits. Post-visit interviews were conducted separately with patients and participating healthcare professionals. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using sociolinguistic techniques. Although 52% of visit time was spent discussing side effects and symptoms, most discussions of anemia and fatigue lacked specificity necessary to determine their true impact on patients' lives. Physician inquiries regarding fatigue also tended to be too brief to elicit patients' chief concerns. Vocabulary used to discuss anemia and related fatigue was variable and imprecise, and no fatigue assessment instrument was used or referenced in any visit. Community-based oncologists are encouraged to modify their vocabulary and consider incorporating a validated fatigue instrument, either within or before the consultation, to improve the quality of such communication.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17265785

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Support Oncol        ISSN: 1544-6794


  6 in total

1.  Consumer health concepts that do not map to the UMLS: where do they fit?

Authors:  Alla Keselman; Catherine Arnott Smith; Guy Divita; Hyeoneui Kim; Allen C Browne; Gondy Leroy; Qing Zeng-Treitler
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2008-04-24       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  In-office discussions of migraine: results from the American Migraine Communication Study.

Authors:  Richard B Lipton; Steven R Hahn; Roger K Cady; Jan Lewis Brandes; Suzanne E Simons; Philip A Bain; Meaghan R Nelson
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-05-06       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Cancer-related fatigue: clinical practice versus practice guidelines.

Authors:  Doranne L Hilarius; Paul H Kloeg; Elsken van der Wall; Manon Komen; Chad M Gundy; Neil K Aaronson
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2010-03-19       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  Communication Between Physicians and Patients with Ulcerative Colitis: Reflections and Insights from a Qualitative Study of In-Office Patient-Physician Visits.

Authors:  David T Rubin; Marla C Dubinsky; Steve Martino; Kathleen A Hewett; Julian Panés
Journal:  Inflamm Bowel Dis       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 5.325

5.  Physician-patient communication about overactive bladder: Results of an observational sociolinguistic study.

Authors:  Steven R Hahn; Pamela Bradt; Kathleen A Hewett; Daniel B Ng
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-15       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Clinician and cancer patient views on patient participation in treatment decision-making: a quantitative and qualitative exploration.

Authors:  A H Pieterse; M C M Baas-Thijssen; C A M Marijnen; A M Stiggelbout
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2008-09-16       Impact factor: 7.640

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.