CONTEXT: Patient prognostic understanding is improved by oncologists' discussions of life expectancy. Most patients deem it important to discuss prognosis with their oncologists, but a minority of cancer patients within months of death report that they had such a discussion with their oncologist. OBJECTIVES: To query stakeholders about their perspectives on the clinical approach and utility of an Oncolo-GIST manualized communication intervention, designed to enhance oncologists' ability to convey the gist of prognostic information simply, clearly, and effectively in the setting of progressing solid tumors and limited life expectancy. METHODS: We obtained and analyzed feedback on the intervention from solid tumor oncology clinicians and bereaved family caregivers, soliciting opinions on the clinical approach taken in the videos, acceptability and likely impact of the instructions, and specific phrases recommended in the manual. RESULTS: Twenty stakeholders (9 clinicians, 11 caregivers) participated. All agreed that oncologists should broach prognosis with patients, balancing honesty and sensitivity. Participants also advocated for oncologists to involve interprofessional team members (e.g., nurses, social workers) when serious mental health concerns arose. After the research team's discussion of the stakeholder feedback, the manual was modified to include or exclude preferred language and approaches. CONCLUSION: The Oncolo-GIST intervention was characterized as simple and potentially effective at conveying prognoses to advanced cancer patients. Future research should determine if this approach to medical communication, which distills the essence of prognostic messages clearly and simply, is associated with improvements in patients' prognostic understanding.
CONTEXT: Patient prognostic understanding is improved by oncologists' discussions of life expectancy. Most patients deem it important to discuss prognosis with their oncologists, but a minority of cancer patients within months of death report that they had such a discussion with their oncologist. OBJECTIVES: To query stakeholders about their perspectives on the clinical approach and utility of an Oncolo-GIST manualized communication intervention, designed to enhance oncologists' ability to convey the gist of prognostic information simply, clearly, and effectively in the setting of progressing solid tumors and limited life expectancy. METHODS: We obtained and analyzed feedback on the intervention from solid tumor oncology clinicians and bereaved family caregivers, soliciting opinions on the clinical approach taken in the videos, acceptability and likely impact of the instructions, and specific phrases recommended in the manual. RESULTS: Twenty stakeholders (9 clinicians, 11 caregivers) participated. All agreed that oncologists should broach prognosis with patients, balancing honesty and sensitivity. Participants also advocated for oncologists to involve interprofessional team members (e.g., nurses, social workers) when serious mental health concerns arose. After the research team's discussion of the stakeholder feedback, the manual was modified to include or exclude preferred language and approaches. CONCLUSION: The Oncolo-GIST intervention was characterized as simple and potentially effective at conveying prognoses to advanced cancer patients. Future research should determine if this approach to medical communication, which distills the essence of prognostic messages clearly and simply, is associated with improvements in patients' prognostic understanding.
Authors: Andrew S Epstein; Eileen M O'Reilly; Elyse Shuk; William Breitbart; Maheen A Shah; Michele Ly; Rachel Tayler; Angelo E Volandes Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2016-06-07 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Sarguni Singh; Dagoberto Cortez; Douglas Maynard; James F Cleary; Lori DuBenske; Toby C Campbell Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2017-01-17 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Belinda E Kiely; Andrew J Martin; Martin H N Tattersall; Anna K Nowak; David Goldstein; Nicholas R C Wilcken; David K Wyld; Ehtesham A Abdi; Amanda Glasgow; Philip J Beale; Michael Jefford; Paul A Glare; Martin R Stockler Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-09-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Carolyn Schwartz; Inga Lennes; Bernard Hammes; Carrie Lapham; Wayne Bottner; Yunsheng Ma Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Heather M Derry; Andrew S Epstein; Wendy G Lichtenthal; Holly G Prigerson Journal: Expert Rev Anticancer Ther Date: 2019-08-10 Impact factor: 4.512
Authors: Rachelle Bernacki; Mathilde Hutchings; Judith Vick; Grant Smith; Joanna Paladino; Stuart Lipsitz; Atul A Gawande; Susan D Block Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2015-10-06 Impact factor: 2.692