A J Applebaum1, K Buda1, M Kryza-Lacombe2, J J Buthorn3, R Walker4, K M Shaffer1, T A D'Agostino1, E L Diamond3,5. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 2. San Diego Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology, San Diego State University/University of California, San Diego, CA, USA. 3. Department of Neurology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 4. Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs, NY, USA. 5. Center for Research on End of Life Care, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Malignant glioma (MG) is a devastating neuro-oncologic disease with almost invariably poor prognosis, yet many families facing malignant glioma have poor prognostic awareness (PA), or the awareness of the patient's incurable disease and shortened life expectancy. Accurate PA is associated with favorable medical outcomes at end-of-life for patients and psychosocial outcomes for informal caregivers (ICs) through bereavement. To date, however, no study has specifically examined PA among MG ICs and the information they receive that shapes their awareness. METHODS: Thirty-two ICs of patients with malignant glioma completed a semi-structured assessment of their awareness of the incurability and life expectancy of their loved one's illness, and to understand their sources of prognostic information and preferences for communication of prognostic information. RESULTS: Twenty-two (69%) ICs had full PA-awareness of the incurability of malignant glioma and accurate estimates of their loved ones' life expectancy. Twenty-three (72%) felt that prognostic information was extremely or very important to possess, and 16 (50%) desired more prognostic information. The majority of ICs received prognostic information from physicians and the Internet. Qualitative analyses revealed that many ICs had difficulty navigating medical encounters in which they concurrently wanted to elicit prognostic information from physicians and protect patients from such information. CONCLUSIONS: Accurate and timely PA is necessary for ICs to serve as critical members of health care teams. Interventions are needed to foster ICs' skills in navigating prognostic communication with patients and health care providers and thereby improve their ability to advocate for their loved one's wishes.
OBJECTIVE:Malignant glioma (MG) is a devastating neuro-oncologic disease with almost invariably poor prognosis, yet many families facing malignant glioma have poor prognostic awareness (PA), or the awareness of the patient's incurable disease and shortened life expectancy. Accurate PA is associated with favorable medical outcomes at end-of-life for patients and psychosocial outcomes for informal caregivers (ICs) through bereavement. To date, however, no study has specifically examined PA among MG ICs and the information they receive that shapes their awareness. METHODS: Thirty-two ICs of patients with malignant glioma completed a semi-structured assessment of their awareness of the incurability and life expectancy of their loved one's illness, and to understand their sources of prognostic information and preferences for communication of prognostic information. RESULTS: Twenty-two (69%) ICs had full PA-awareness of the incurability of malignant glioma and accurate estimates of their loved ones' life expectancy. Twenty-three (72%) felt that prognostic information was extremely or very important to possess, and 16 (50%) desired more prognostic information. The majority of ICs received prognostic information from physicians and the Internet. Qualitative analyses revealed that many ICs had difficulty navigating medical encounters in which they concurrently wanted to elicit prognostic information from physicians and protect patients from such information. CONCLUSIONS: Accurate and timely PA is necessary for ICs to serve as critical members of health care teams. Interventions are needed to foster ICs' skills in navigating prognostic communication with patients and health care providers and thereby improve their ability to advocate for their loved one's wishes.
Authors: Megan Johnson Shen; Robert C Dyson; Thomas A D'Agostino; Jamie S Ostroff; Maura N Dickler; Alexandra S Heerdt; Carma L Bylund Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2015-01-28 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Young Ho Yun; Yong Chol Kwon; Myung Kyung Lee; Woo Jin Lee; Kyung Hae Jung; Young Rok Do; Samyong Kim; Dae Seog Heo; Jong Soo Choi; Sang Yoon Park Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-03-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Alaka Ray; Susan D Block; Robert J Friedlander; Baohui Zhang; Paul K Maciejewski; Holly G Prigerson Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Dong Wook Shin; Juhee Cho; So Young Kim; Ik Joo Chung; Sam Soo Kim; Hyung Kook Yang; Eunmi Ahn; Bo Ram Park; Hongwan Seo; Jong-Hyock Park Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2014-08-07 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Wendy G Lichtenthal; Matthew Nilsson; Baohui Zhang; Elizabeth D Trice; David W Kissane; William Breitbart; Holly G Prigerson Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: José L Díaz; Pilar Barreto; José M Gallego; Javier Barbero; Ramón Bayés; Juan A Barcia Journal: Acta Neurochir (Wien) Date: 2009-02-18 Impact factor: 2.216
Authors: Akanksha Sharma; Briant Fruth; Celina Barrera; Hannah N Farfour; Maciej M Mrugala; Mark K Edwin; Jeff A Sloan; Alyx B Porter Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2021-01-23 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Deborah A Forst; Kit Quain; Sophia L Landay; Maya Anand; Emilia Kaslow-Zieve; Michelle M Mesa; Jamie M Jacobs; Jorg Dietrich; Michael W Parsons; Nora Horick; Joseph A Greer; Tracy T Batchelor; Vicki A Jackson; Areej El-Jawahri; Jennifer S Temel Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2020-04-17
Authors: Tamryn F Gray; Deborah Forst; Ryan D Nipp; Joseph A Greer; Jennifer S Temel; Areej El-Jawahri Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2020-09-30 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: N C A van der Velden; M B A van der Kleij; V Lehmann; E M A Smets; J M L Stouthard; I Henselmans; M A Hillen Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-05-26 Impact factor: 3.390