Lixin Song1, Christina Tyler2, Margaret F Clayton3, Eleanor Rodgiriguez-Rassi4, Latorya Hill4, Jinbing Bai4, Raj Pruthi5, Donald E Bailey6. 1. School of Nursing, University of North Carolina (UNC), Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, UNC, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. Electronic address: lsong@unc.edu. 2. School of Nursing, University of North Carolina (UNC), Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Office of Human Research Ethics (OHRE), UNC, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 3. College of Nursing, University of Utah, UT, USA. 4. School of Nursing, University of North Carolina (UNC), Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 5. School of Medicine Department of Urology, UNC, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 6. School of Nursing, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effects of a decision aid on improving patients' and family members' information giving and question asking during consultations for prostate cancer treatment decision-making. METHODS: This study is a secondary analysis of archived audio-recorded real-time consultation visits with participants from a randomized clinical trial. Participants were randomly assigned into three groups: TD-intervention targeted patient-only; TS-intervention targeted patients and family members; and control-a handout on staying healthy during treatment. We conducted content analysis using a researcher-developed communication coding system. Using SAS 9.3, we conducted Chi-square/Fisher's exact test to examine whether information giving and question asking among patients and family members varied by groups when discussing different content/topics. RESULTS: Compared with those in the TS and control groups, significantly higher percentages of participants in the TD group demonstrated information giving in discussing topics about diagnosis, treatment options, risks and benefits, and preferences; and engaged in question asking when discussing diagnosis, watchful waiting/active surveillance, risks and benefits, and preferences for treatment impacts. CONCLUSION: Information support and communication skills training for patients were effective in improving communication during treatment decision-making consultations. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Providing information about prostate cancer and communication skills training empower patients and their family members.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effects of a decision aid on improving patients' and family members' information giving and question asking during consultations for prostate cancer treatment decision-making. METHODS: This study is a secondary analysis of archived audio-recorded real-time consultation visits with participants from a randomized clinical trial. Participants were randomly assigned into three groups: TD-intervention targeted patient-only; TS-intervention targeted patients and family members; and control-a handout on staying healthy during treatment. We conducted content analysis using a researcher-developed communication coding system. Using SAS 9.3, we conducted Chi-square/Fisher's exact test to examine whether information giving and question asking among patients and family members varied by groups when discussing different content/topics. RESULTS: Compared with those in the TS and control groups, significantly higher percentages of participants in the TD group demonstrated information giving in discussing topics about diagnosis, treatment options, risks and benefits, and preferences; and engaged in question asking when discussing diagnosis, watchful waiting/active surveillance, risks and benefits, and preferences for treatment impacts. CONCLUSION: Information support and communication skills training for patients were effective in improving communication during treatment decision-making consultations. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Providing information about prostate cancer and communication skills training empower patients and their family members.
Authors: Kathryn L Taylor; Kimberly M Davis; Tara Lamond; Randi M Williams; Marc D Schwartz; William Lawrence; Shibao Feng; Susan Brink; Amy Birney; John Lynch; James Regan; Anatoly Dritschilo Journal: Behav Med Date: 2010 Oct-Dec Impact factor: 3.104
Authors: Philippe D Violette; Thomas Agoritsas; Paul Alexander; Jarno Riikonen; Henrikki Santti; Arnav Agarwal; Neera Bhatnagar; Philipp Dahm; Victor Montori; Gordon H Guyatt; Kari A O Tikkinen Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2015-03-12 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Merle H Mishel; Barbara B Germino; Lin Lin; Raj S Pruthi; Eric M Wallen; Jaime Crandell; Diane Blyler Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2009-10-09
Authors: Otis L Owens; Robin M Estrada; Kim Johnson; Micheal Cogdell; Daniel B Fried; Lucy Gansauer; Simon Kim Journal: Ethn Health Date: 2019-04-15 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: G E Collée; B J van der Wilk; J J B van Lanschot; J J Busschbach; L Timmermans; S M Lagarde; L W Kranenburg Journal: Curr Oncol Rep Date: 2020-07-28 Impact factor: 5.075
Authors: Jonathan S Berg; Jeannette T Bensen; Brooke S Staley; Laura V Milko; Margaret Waltz; Ida Griesemer; Lonna Mollison; Tracey L Grant; Laura Farnan; Myra Roche; Angelo Navas; Alexandra Lightfoot; Ann Katherine M Foreman; Julianne M O'Daniel; Suzanne C O'Neill; Feng-Chang Lin; Tamara S Roman; Alicia Brandt; Bradford C Powell; Christine Rini Journal: Trials Date: 2021-06-14 Impact factor: 2.279