OBJECTIVE: A Question Prompt List (QPL) is a proven, simple intervention to aid patients to be active participants in consultations with their physicians by asking questions. We aimed to further develop and test the efficacy of a targeted QPL for clinical trials (QPL-CT). METHODS: Breast, Lung and Genitourinary cancer patients who were facing a discussion about a therapeutic clinical trial completed short pre- and post-consultation questionnaires and used the QPL-CT in their discussions with their oncologists. RESULTS: 30 participants were recruited from 6 oncologists. All QPL-CT questions were selected by at least one-third of participants. Participants mostly wanted and asked questions about personal trial benefit. Oncologists provided information about personal benefit to varying degrees, thus patients did not ask some questions. Patients were still left with some unasked and unanswered questions. CONCLUSION: The QPL-CT has potential as a simple, inexpensive intervention to aid such communication. Further investigation is needed to demonstrate the efficacy of the QPL-CT in improving cancer patient outcomes. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: These preliminary finding suggest that important areas of clinical trials are overlooked in clinical consultations. The QPL-CT may be an effective method to encourage oncologists to endorse patient question asking about clinical trials and prompt patient questions.
OBJECTIVE: A Question Prompt List (QPL) is a proven, simple intervention to aid patients to be active participants in consultations with their physicians by asking questions. We aimed to further develop and test the efficacy of a targeted QPL for clinical trials (QPL-CT). METHODS: Breast, Lung and Genitourinary cancerpatients who were facing a discussion about a therapeutic clinical trial completed short pre- and post-consultation questionnaires and used the QPL-CT in their discussions with their oncologists. RESULTS: 30 participants were recruited from 6 oncologists. All QPL-CT questions were selected by at least one-third of participants. Participants mostly wanted and asked questions about personal trial benefit. Oncologists provided information about personal benefit to varying degrees, thus patients did not ask some questions. Patients were still left with some unasked and unanswered questions. CONCLUSION: The QPL-CT has potential as a simple, inexpensive intervention to aid such communication. Further investigation is needed to demonstrate the efficacy of the QPL-CT in improving cancerpatient outcomes. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: These preliminary finding suggest that important areas of clinical trials are overlooked in clinical consultations. The QPL-CT may be an effective method to encourage oncologists to endorse patient question asking about clinical trials and prompt patient questions.
Authors: J D Cheng; J Hitt; B Koczwara; K A Schulman; C B Burnett; D J Gaskin; J H Rowland; N J Meropol Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Susan Eggly; Lauren M Hamel; Tanina S Foster; Terrance L Albrecht; Robert Chapman; Felicity W K Harper; Hayley Thompson; Jennifer J Griggs; Richard Gonzalez; Lisa Berry-Bobovski; Rifky Tkatch; Michael Simon; Anthony Shields; Shirish Gadgeel; Randa Loutfi; Haythem Ali; Ira Wollner; Louis A Penner Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2016-12-27
Authors: Lauren M Hamel; Louis A Penner; Terrance L Albrecht; Elisabeth Heath; Clement K Gwede; Susan Eggly Journal: Cancer Control Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 3.302
Authors: Anita Amundsen; Bente Ervik; Phyllis Butow; Martin H N Tattersall; Svein Bergvik; Tore Sørlie; Tone Nordøy Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-08-19 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Susan Eggly; Rifky Tkatch; Louis A Penner; Lorna Mabunda; Janella Hudson; Robert Chapman; Jennifer J Griggs; Richard Brown; Terrance Albrecht Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Andrea M Denicoff; Worta McCaskill-Stevens; Stephen S Grubbs; Suanna S Bruinooge; Robert L Comis; Peggy Devine; David M Dilts; Michelle E Duff; Jean G Ford; Steven Joffe; Lidia Schapira; Kevin P Weinfurt; Margo Michaels; Derek Raghavan; Ellen S Richmond; Robin Zon; Terrance L Albrecht; Michael A Bookman; Afshin Dowlati; Rebecca A Enos; Mona N Fouad; Marjorie Good; William J Hicks; Patrick J Loehrer; Alan P Lyss; Steven N Wolff; Debra M Wujcik; Neal J Meropol Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Richard F Brown; Debbie L Cadet; Robert H Houlihan; Maria D Thomson; Emily C Pratt; Amy Sullivan; Laura A Siminoff Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Rebecca A Hazen; Stephen Zyzanski; Justin N Baker; Dennis Drotar; Eric Kodish Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2015-01-29 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Susan Eggly; Lauren M Hamel; Elisabeth Heath; Mark A Manning; Terrance L Albrecht; Ellen Barton; Mark Wojda; Tanina Foster; Michael Carducci; Dina Lansey; Ting Wang; Rehab Abdallah; Narineh Abrahamian; Seongho Kim; Nicole Senft; Louis A Penner Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2017-12-02 Impact factor: 4.430