Andrea C Enzinger1, Jennifer K Wind2, Elizabeth Frank3, Nadine J McCleary4, Laura Porter5, Heather Cushing6, Caroline Abbott7, Christine Cronin2, Peter C Enzinger4, Neal J Meropol8, Deborah Schrag9. 1. McGraw Patterson Center for Population Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: andrea_enzinger@dfci.harvard.edu. 2. McGraw Patterson Center for Population Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Susan F. Smith Center for Women's Cancers, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Colon Cancer Alliance, Washington, DC, USA. 6. Department of Nursing, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. 7. Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA. 8. Division of Hematology and Oncology, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA. 9. McGraw Patterson Center for Population Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Patients often anticipate cure from palliative chemotherapy. Better resources are needed to convey its risks and benefits. We describe the stakeholder-driven development and acceptability testing of a prototype video and companion booklet supporting informed consent (IC) for a common palliative chemotherapy regimen. METHODS: Our multidisciplinary team (researchers, advocates, clinicians) employed a multistep process of content development, production, critical evaluation, and iterative revisions. Patient/clinician stakeholders were engaged throughout using stakeholder advisory panels, featuring their voices within the intervention, conducting surveys and qualitative interviews. A national panel of 57 patient advocates, and 25 oncologists from nine US practices critiqued the intervention and rated its clarity, accuracy, balance, tone, and utility. Participants also reported satisfaction with existing chemotherapy IC materials. RESULTS: Few oncologists (5/25, 20%) or advocates (10/22, 45%) were satisfied with existing IC materials. In contrast, most rated our intervention highly, with 89-96% agreeing it would be useful and promote informed decisions. Patient voices were considered a key strength. Every oncologist indicated they would use the intervention regularly. CONCLUSION: Our intervention was acceptable to advocates and oncologists. A randomized trial is evaluating its impact on the chemotherapy IC process. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Stakeholder-driven methods can be valuable for developing patient educational interventions.
OBJECTIVE:Patients often anticipate cure from palliative chemotherapy. Better resources are needed to convey its risks and benefits. We describe the stakeholder-driven development and acceptability testing of a prototype video and companion booklet supporting informed consent (IC) for a common palliative chemotherapy regimen. METHODS: Our multidisciplinary team (researchers, advocates, clinicians) employed a multistep process of content development, production, critical evaluation, and iterative revisions. Patient/clinician stakeholders were engaged throughout using stakeholder advisory panels, featuring their voices within the intervention, conducting surveys and qualitative interviews. A national panel of 57 patient advocates, and 25 oncologists from nine US practices critiqued the intervention and rated its clarity, accuracy, balance, tone, and utility. Participants also reported satisfaction with existing chemotherapy IC materials. RESULTS: Few oncologists (5/25, 20%) or advocates (10/22, 45%) were satisfied with existing IC materials. In contrast, most rated our intervention highly, with 89-96% agreeing it would be useful and promote informed decisions. Patient voices were considered a key strength. Every oncologist indicated they would use the intervention regularly. CONCLUSION: Our intervention was acceptable to advocates and oncologists. A randomized trial is evaluating its impact on the chemotherapy IC process. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Stakeholder-driven methods can be valuable for developing patient educational interventions.
Authors: Areej El-Jawahri; Lara Traeger; Elyse R Park; Joseph A Greer; William F Pirl; Inga T Lennes; Vicki A Jackson; Emily R Gallagher; Jennifer S Temel Journal: Cancer Date: 2013-10-10 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Jennifer S Temel; Joseph A Greer; Sonal Admane; Emily R Gallagher; Vicki A Jackson; Thomas J Lynch; Inga T Lennes; Connie M Dahlin; William F Pirl Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-05-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Amédé Gogovor; Regina Visca; Claudine Auger; Lucie Bouvrette-Leblanc; Iphigenia Symeonidis; Lise Poissant; Mark A Ware; Yoram Shir; Natacha Viens; Sara Ahmed Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2016-10-04 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: Jennifer W Mack; Anne Walling; Sydney Dy; Anna Liza M Antonio; John Adams; Nancy L Keating; Diana Tisnado Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-02-11 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Jane C Weeks; Paul J Catalano; Angel Cronin; Matthew D Finkelman; Jennifer W Mack; Nancy L Keating; Deborah Schrag Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-10-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Linda Fleisher; Dominique G Ruggieri; Suzanne M Miller; Sharon Manne; Terrance Albrecht; Joanne Buzaglo; Michael A Collins; Michael Katz; Tyler G Kinzy; Tasnuva Liu; Cheri Manning; Ellen Specker Charap; Jennifer Millard; Dawn M Miller; David Poole; Stephanie Raivitch; Nancy Roach; Eric A Ross; Neal J Meropol Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2014-04-21
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: Sarah Barger; Sean D Sullivan; Ari Bell-Brown; Brad Bott; Anne Marie Ciccarella; John Golenski; Mark Gorman; Judy Johnson; Karma Kreizenbeck; Florence Kurttila; Ginny Mason; Jamie Myers; Carole Seigel; James L Wade; Guneet Walia; Kate Watabayashi; Gary H Lyman; Scott D Ramsey Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2019-06-11 Impact factor: 4.615