Margaret L Schwarze1, Anne Buffington1, Jennifer L Tucholka1, Bret Hanlon2, Paul J Rathouz3, Nicholas Marka1, Lauren J Taylor1, Christopher J Zimmermann1, Anna Kata4, Nathan D Baggett1, Daniel A Fox5, Andrea E Schmick6, Ana Berlin7,8, Nina E Glass9, Anne C Mosenthal9, Emily Finlayson10, Zara Cooper11, Karen J Brasel12. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison. 2. Department of Biostatistics & Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison. 3. Department of Population Health, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin. 4. Division of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco. 5. School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois. 6. Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison. 7. Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York. 8. Adult Palliative Medicine Service, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York. 9. Department of Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark. 10. Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco. 11. Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 12. Department of Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland.
Abstract
Importance: Poor preoperative communication can have serious consequences, including unwanted treatment and postoperative conflict. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of a question prompt list (QPL) intervention vs usual care on patient engagement and well-being among older patients considering major surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial used a stepped-wedge design to randomly assign patients to a QPL intervention (n = 223) or usual care (n = 223) based on the timing of their visit with 1 of 40 surgeons at 5 US study sites. Patients were 60 years or older with at least 1 comorbidity and an oncologic or vascular (cardiac, neurosurgical, or peripheral vascular) problem that could be treated with major surgery. Family members were also enrolled (n = 263). The study dates were June 2016 to November 2018. Data analysis was by intent-to-treat. Interventions: A brochure of 11 questions to ask a surgeon developed by patient and family stakeholders plus an endorsement letter from the surgeon were sent to patients before their outpatient visit. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary patient engagement outcomes included the number and type of questions asked during the surgical visit and patient-reported Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions scale assessed after the surgical visit. Primary well-being outcomes included (1) the difference between patient's Measure Yourself Concerns and Well-being (MYCaW) scores reported after surgery and scores reported after the surgical visit and (2) treatment-associated regret at 6 to 8 weeks after surgery. Results: Of 1319 patients eligible for participation, 223 were randomized to theQPL intervention and 223 to usual care. Among 446 patients, the mean (SD) age was 71.8 (7.1) years, and 249 (55.8%) were male. On intent-to-treat analysis, there was no significant difference between the QPL intervention and usual care for all patient-reported primary outcomes. The difference in MYCaW scores for family members was greater in usual care (effect estimate, 1.51; 95% CI, 0.28-2.74; P = .008). When the QPL intervention group was restricted to patients with clear evidence they reviewed the QPL, a nonsignificant increase in the effect size was observed for questions about options (odds ratio, 1.88; 95% CI, 0.81-4.35; P = .16), expectations (odds ratio, 1.59; 95% CI, 0.67-3.80; P = .29), and risks (odds ratio, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.04-5.59; P = .04) (nominal α = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this study were null related to primary patient engagement and well-being outcomes. Changing patient-physician communication may be difficult without addressing clinician communication directly. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02623335.
RCT Entities:
Importance: Poor preoperative communication can have serious consequences, including unwanted treatment and postoperative conflict. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of a question prompt list (QPL) intervention vs usual care on patient engagement and well-being among older patients considering major surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial used a stepped-wedge design to randomly assign patients to a QPL intervention (n = 223) or usual care (n = 223) based on the timing of their visit with 1 of 40 surgeons at 5 US study sites. Patients were 60 years or older with at least 1 comorbidity and an oncologic or vascular (cardiac, neurosurgical, or peripheral vascular) problem that could be treated with major surgery. Family members were also enrolled (n = 263). The study dates were June 2016 to November 2018. Data analysis was by intent-to-treat. Interventions: A brochure of 11 questions to ask a surgeon developed by patient and family stakeholders plus an endorsement letter from the surgeon were sent to patients before their outpatient visit. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary patient engagement outcomes included the number and type of questions asked during the surgical visit and patient-reported Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions scale assessed after the surgical visit. Primary well-being outcomes included (1) the difference between patient's Measure Yourself Concerns and Well-being (MYCaW) scores reported after surgery and scores reported after the surgical visit and (2) treatment-associated regret at 6 to 8 weeks after surgery. Results: Of 1319 patients eligible for participation, 223 were randomized to the QPL intervention and 223 to usual care. Among 446 patients, the mean (SD) age was 71.8 (7.1) years, and 249 (55.8%) were male. On intent-to-treat analysis, there was no significant difference between the QPL intervention and usual care for all patient-reported primary outcomes. The difference in MYCaW scores for family members was greater in usual care (effect estimate, 1.51; 95% CI, 0.28-2.74; P = .008). When the QPL intervention group was restricted to patients with clear evidence they reviewed the QPL, a nonsignificant increase in the effect size was observed for questions about options (odds ratio, 1.88; 95% CI, 0.81-4.35; P = .16), expectations (odds ratio, 1.59; 95% CI, 0.67-3.80; P = .29), and risks (odds ratio, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.04-5.59; P = .04) (nominal α = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this study were null related to primary patient engagement and well-being outcomes. Changing patient-physician communication may be difficult without addressing clinician communication directly. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02623335.
Authors: Nathan D Baggett; Kathryn Schulz; Anne Buffington; Nicholas Marka; Bret M Hanlon; Christopher Zimmermann; Jennifer Tucholka; Dan Fox; Justin T Clapp; Robert M Arnold; Margaret L Schwarze Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2022-05-01 Impact factor: 16.681
Authors: Jessica Gacki-Smith; Brianna R Kuramitsu; Max Downey; Karen B Vanterpool; Michelle J Nordstrom; Michelle Luken; Tiffany Riggleman; Withney Altema; Shannon Fichter; Carisa M Cooney; Greg A Dumanian; Sally E Jensen; Gerald Brandacher; Scott Tintle; Macey Levan; Elisa J Gordon Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2022-09-05
Authors: Simone Augustinus; Iris W J M van Goor; Johannes Berkhof; Lois A Daamen; Bas Groot Koerkamp; Tara M Mackay; I Q Molenaar; Hjalmar C van Santvoort; Helena M Verkooijen; Peter M van de Ven; Marc G Besselink Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2022-07-22 Impact factor: 13.787
Authors: Elle L Kalbfell; Anne Buffington; Anna Kata; Karen J Brasel; Anne C Mosenthal; Zara Cooper; Emily Finlayson; Margaret L Schwarze Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2021-06-15 Impact factor: 3.125