Elizabeth Palmer Kelly1, Julia McGee2, Samilia Obeng-Gyasi3, Chelsea Herbert4, Rosevine Azap3, Alizeh Abbas3, Timothy M Pawlik5. 1. Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA. 2. The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA. 3. Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA. 4. Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, Athens, OH, USA. 5. Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA. Tim.Pawlik@osumc.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We sought to examine and categorize the current evidence on patient-physician relationships among marginalized patient populations within the context of cancer care using a systemic scoping review approach. METHODS: Web-based discovery services (e.g., Google Scholar) and discipline-specific databases (e.g., PubMed) were queried for articles on the patient-physician relationship among marginalized cancer patients. The marginalized populations of interest included (1) race and ethnicity, (2) gender, (3) sexual orientation and gender identity, (4) age, (5) disability, (6) socioeconomic status, and (7) geography (rural/urban). Study screening and data extraction were facilitated through the Covidence software platform. RESULTS: Of the 397 screened studies, 37 met study criteria-most articles utilized quantitative methodologies (n = 28). The majority of studies focused on racial and ethnic cancer disparities (n = 27) with breast cancer (n = 20) as the most common cancer site. Trust and satisfaction with the provider were the most prevalent issues cited in the patient-physician relationship. Differences in patient-physician communication practices and quality were also frequently discussed. Overall, studies highlighted the need for increased culturally congruent care among providers. CONCLUSION: Results from this review suggest marginalized cancer patients face significant barriers in establishing culturally and linguistically congruent patient-physician relationships. Future studies should focus on the intersectionality of multiple marginalized identities and optimization of the patient-physician relationship.
PURPOSE: We sought to examine and categorize the current evidence on patient-physician relationships among marginalized patient populations within the context of cancer care using a systemic scoping review approach. METHODS: Web-based discovery services (e.g., Google Scholar) and discipline-specific databases (e.g., PubMed) were queried for articles on the patient-physician relationship among marginalized cancerpatients. The marginalized populations of interest included (1) race and ethnicity, (2) gender, (3) sexual orientation and gender identity, (4) age, (5) disability, (6) socioeconomic status, and (7) geography (rural/urban). Study screening and data extraction were facilitated through the Covidence software platform. RESULTS: Of the 397 screened studies, 37 met study criteria-most articles utilized quantitative methodologies (n = 28). The majority of studies focused on racial and ethnic cancer disparities (n = 27) with breast cancer (n = 20) as the most common cancer site. Trust and satisfaction with the provider were the most prevalent issues cited in the patient-physician relationship. Differences in patient-physician communication practices and quality were also frequently discussed. Overall, studies highlighted the need for increased culturally congruent care among providers. CONCLUSION: Results from this review suggest marginalized cancerpatients face significant barriers in establishing culturally and linguistically congruent patient-physician relationships. Future studies should focus on the intersectionality of multiple marginalized identities and optimization of the patient-physician relationship.
Authors: Megan Winner; Ana Wilson; Sean Ronnekleiv-Kelly; Thomas J Smith; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2016-09-08 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Carol E DeSantis; Kimberly D Miller; Ann Goding Sauer; Ahmedin Jemal; Rebecca L Siegel Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2019-02-14 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Jennifer P Wisdom; Marjorie G McGee; Willi Horner-Johnson; Yvonne L Michael; Elizabeth Adams; Michelle Berlin Journal: Soc Work Public Health Date: 2010-05
Authors: Jessica L Krok-Schoen; Jennifer DeSalvo; Dori Klemanski; Christian Stephens; Anne M Noonan; Seuli Brill; Maryam B Lustberg Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-05-22 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Albert J Farias; India J Ornelas; Sarah D Hohl; Steven B Zeliadt; Ryan N Hansen; Christopher I Li; Beti Thompson Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-08-24 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Mai T Pham; Andrijana Rajić; Judy D Greig; Jan M Sargeant; Andrew Papadopoulos; Scott A McEwen Journal: Res Synth Methods Date: 2014-07-24 Impact factor: 5.273
Authors: Wayne R Lawrence; Jennifer K McGee-Avila; Jacqueline B Vo; Qianlai Luo; Yingxi Chen; Maki Inoue-Choi; Amy Berrington de González; Neal D Freedman; Meredith S Shiels Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2022-08-01 Impact factor: 33.006
Authors: Peter A Newman; Luke Reid; Suchon Tepjan; Sophia Fantus; Kate Allan; Thabani Nyoni; Adrian Guta; Charmaine C Williams Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-03-31 Impact factor: 3.240