Cargando…
Communication with patients with limited prognosis—an integrative mixed-methods evaluation study
PURPOSE: Oncological societies advocate the continuity of care, specialized communication, and early integration of palliative care. To comply with these recommendations, an interprofessional, longitudinally-structured communication concept, the Milestone Communication Approach (MCA), was previously...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9780125/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36547732 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07474-9 |
_version_ | 1784856777458712576 |
---|---|
author | Siegle, Anja Unsöld, Laura Deis, Nicole Krug, Katja Bossert, Jasmin Krisam, Johannes Jung, Corinna Jünger, Jana Wensing, Michel Thomas, Michael Villalobos, Matthias |
author_facet | Siegle, Anja Unsöld, Laura Deis, Nicole Krug, Katja Bossert, Jasmin Krisam, Johannes Jung, Corinna Jünger, Jana Wensing, Michel Thomas, Michael Villalobos, Matthias |
author_sort | Siegle, Anja |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Oncological societies advocate the continuity of care, specialized communication, and early integration of palliative care. To comply with these recommendations, an interprofessional, longitudinally-structured communication concept, the Milestone Communication Approach (MCA), was previously developed, implemented, and evaluated. Our research question is: what are possible explanations from the patient perspective for prognosis and advance care planning being rarely a topic and for finding no differences between MCA and control groups concerning distress, quality of life, and mood? METHODS: A pragmatic epistemological stance guided the study. A mixed-methods design was chosen including a pragmatic randomized trial (n = 171), qualitative interviews with patients (n = 13) and caregivers (n = 12), and a content analysis (133 milestone conversations, 54 follow-up calls). Data analysis involved the pillar integration process. RESULTS: Two pillar themes emerged: 1 “approaching prognosis and advance care planning”; 2 “living with a life-threatening illness”. Information on prognosis seemed to be offered, but patients’ reactions were diverse. Some patients have to deal with having advanced lung cancer while nonetheless feeling healthy and seem not to be ready for prognostic information. All patients seemed to struggle to preserve their quality of life and keep distress under control. CONCLUSION: Attending to patients’ questions, worries and needs early in a disease trajectory seems key to helping patients adjust to living with lung cancer. If necessary clinicians should name their predicament: having to inform about prognosis versus respecting the patients wish to avoid it. Research should support better understanding of patients not wishing for prognostic information to successfully improve communication strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration: German Clinical Trial Register No. DRKS00013649, registration date 12/22/2017, (https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00013649) and No. DRKS00013469, registration date 12/22/2017, (https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00013469). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9780125 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97801252022-12-24 Communication with patients with limited prognosis—an integrative mixed-methods evaluation study Siegle, Anja Unsöld, Laura Deis, Nicole Krug, Katja Bossert, Jasmin Krisam, Johannes Jung, Corinna Jünger, Jana Wensing, Michel Thomas, Michael Villalobos, Matthias Support Care Cancer Research PURPOSE: Oncological societies advocate the continuity of care, specialized communication, and early integration of palliative care. To comply with these recommendations, an interprofessional, longitudinally-structured communication concept, the Milestone Communication Approach (MCA), was previously developed, implemented, and evaluated. Our research question is: what are possible explanations from the patient perspective for prognosis and advance care planning being rarely a topic and for finding no differences between MCA and control groups concerning distress, quality of life, and mood? METHODS: A pragmatic epistemological stance guided the study. A mixed-methods design was chosen including a pragmatic randomized trial (n = 171), qualitative interviews with patients (n = 13) and caregivers (n = 12), and a content analysis (133 milestone conversations, 54 follow-up calls). Data analysis involved the pillar integration process. RESULTS: Two pillar themes emerged: 1 “approaching prognosis and advance care planning”; 2 “living with a life-threatening illness”. Information on prognosis seemed to be offered, but patients’ reactions were diverse. Some patients have to deal with having advanced lung cancer while nonetheless feeling healthy and seem not to be ready for prognostic information. All patients seemed to struggle to preserve their quality of life and keep distress under control. CONCLUSION: Attending to patients’ questions, worries and needs early in a disease trajectory seems key to helping patients adjust to living with lung cancer. If necessary clinicians should name their predicament: having to inform about prognosis versus respecting the patients wish to avoid it. Research should support better understanding of patients not wishing for prognostic information to successfully improve communication strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration: German Clinical Trial Register No. DRKS00013649, registration date 12/22/2017, (https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00013649) and No. DRKS00013469, registration date 12/22/2017, (https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00013469). Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-12-22 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9780125/ /pubmed/36547732 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07474-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Research Siegle, Anja Unsöld, Laura Deis, Nicole Krug, Katja Bossert, Jasmin Krisam, Johannes Jung, Corinna Jünger, Jana Wensing, Michel Thomas, Michael Villalobos, Matthias Communication with patients with limited prognosis—an integrative mixed-methods evaluation study |
title | Communication with patients with limited prognosis—an integrative mixed-methods evaluation study |
title_full | Communication with patients with limited prognosis—an integrative mixed-methods evaluation study |
title_fullStr | Communication with patients with limited prognosis—an integrative mixed-methods evaluation study |
title_full_unstemmed | Communication with patients with limited prognosis—an integrative mixed-methods evaluation study |
title_short | Communication with patients with limited prognosis—an integrative mixed-methods evaluation study |
title_sort | communication with patients with limited prognosis—an integrative mixed-methods evaluation study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9780125/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36547732 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07474-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT siegleanja communicationwithpatientswithlimitedprognosisanintegrativemixedmethodsevaluationstudy AT unsoldlaura communicationwithpatientswithlimitedprognosisanintegrativemixedmethodsevaluationstudy AT deisnicole communicationwithpatientswithlimitedprognosisanintegrativemixedmethodsevaluationstudy AT krugkatja communicationwithpatientswithlimitedprognosisanintegrativemixedmethodsevaluationstudy AT bossertjasmin communicationwithpatientswithlimitedprognosisanintegrativemixedmethodsevaluationstudy AT krisamjohannes communicationwithpatientswithlimitedprognosisanintegrativemixedmethodsevaluationstudy AT jungcorinna communicationwithpatientswithlimitedprognosisanintegrativemixedmethodsevaluationstudy AT jungerjana communicationwithpatientswithlimitedprognosisanintegrativemixedmethodsevaluationstudy AT wensingmichel communicationwithpatientswithlimitedprognosisanintegrativemixedmethodsevaluationstudy AT thomasmichael communicationwithpatientswithlimitedprognosisanintegrativemixedmethodsevaluationstudy AT villalobosmatthias communicationwithpatientswithlimitedprognosisanintegrativemixedmethodsevaluationstudy |