BACKGROUND:Cancer patients and their oncologists often report differing perceptions of consultation discussions and discordant expectations regarding treatment outcomes. CONNECT, a computer-based communication aid, was developed to improve communication between patients and oncologists. METHODS: CONNECT includes assessment of patient values, goals, and communication preferences; patient communication skills training; and a preconsultation physician summary report. CONNECT was tested in a 3-arm, prospective, randomized clinical trial. Prior to the initial medical oncology consultation, adult patients with advanced cancer were randomized to the following arms: 1) control; 2) CONNECT with physician summary; or 3) CONNECT without physician summary. Outcomes were assessed with postconsultation surveys. RESULTS: Of 743 patients randomized, 629 completed postconsultation surveys. Patients in the intervention arms (versus control) felt that the CONNECT program made treatment decisions easier to reach (P = .003) and helped them to be more satisfied with these decisions (P < .001). In addition, patients in the intervention arms reported higher levels of satisfaction with physician communication format (P = .026) and discussion regarding support services (P = .029) and quality of life concerns (P = .042). The physician summary did not impact outcomes. Patients with higher levels of education and poorer physical functioning experienced greater benefit from CONNECT. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective randomized clinical trial demonstrates that computer-based communication skills training can positively affect patient satisfaction with communication and decision-making. Measurable patient characteristics may be used to identify subgroups most likely to benefit from an intervention such as CONNECT.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Cancerpatients and their oncologists often report differing perceptions of consultation discussions and discordant expectations regarding treatment outcomes. CONNECT, a computer-based communication aid, was developed to improve communication between patients and oncologists. METHODS: CONNECT includes assessment of patient values, goals, and communication preferences; patient communication skills training; and a preconsultation physician summary report. CONNECT was tested in a 3-arm, prospective, randomized clinical trial. Prior to the initial medical oncology consultation, adult patients with advanced cancer were randomized to the following arms: 1) control; 2) CONNECT with physician summary; or 3) CONNECT without physician summary. Outcomes were assessed with postconsultation surveys. RESULTS: Of 743 patients randomized, 629 completed postconsultation surveys. Patients in the intervention arms (versus control) felt that the CONNECT program made treatment decisions easier to reach (P = .003) and helped them to be more satisfied with these decisions (P < .001). In addition, patients in the intervention arms reported higher levels of satisfaction with physician communication format (P = .026) and discussion regarding support services (P = .029) and quality of life concerns (P = .042). The physician summary did not impact outcomes. Patients with higher levels of education and poorer physical functioning experienced greater benefit from CONNECT. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective randomized clinical trial demonstrates that computer-based communication skills training can positively affect patient satisfaction with communication and decision-making. Measurable patient characteristics may be used to identify subgroups most likely to benefit from an intervention such as CONNECT.
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: Neal J Meropol; Kevin P Weinfurt; Caroline B Burnett; Andrew Balshem; Al B Benson; Liana Castel; Sandra Corbett; Michael Diefenbach; Darrell Gaskin; Yun Li; Sharon Manne; John Marshall; Julia H Rowland; Elyse Slater; Daniel P Sulmasy; David Van Echo; Shakira Washington; Kevin A Schulman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-07-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: C Adrian Austin; Dinushika Mohottige; Rebecca L Sudore; Alexander K Smith; Laura C Hanson Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Thomas A D'Agostino; Thomas M Atkinson; Lauren E Latella; Madeline Rogers; Dana Morrissey; Antonio P DeRosa; Patricia A Parker Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2017-02-16
Authors: Teresa L Hagan; Susan M Cohen; Margaret Q Rosenzweig; Kristin Zorn; Clement A Stone; Heidi S Donovan Journal: J Adv Nurs Date: 2017-12-11 Impact factor: 3.187
Authors: Inge Spronk; Maartje C Meijers; Marianne J Heins; Anneke L Francke; Glyn Elwyn; Anne van Lindert; Sandra van Dulmen; Liesbeth M van Vliet Journal: Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) Date: 2019-05-08 Impact factor: 2.328
Authors: Inge Spronk; Jako S Burgers; François G Schellevis; Liesbeth M van Vliet; Joke C Korevaar Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2018-05-11 Impact factor: 3.234