Search

Background: Care teams are increasingly expected to attend to the needs of patient's personal caregivers (e.g., family members). Improving communication among oncologists, patients with advanced cancer, and their personal caregivers might enhance caregivers' experiences of end-of-life (EoL) cancer care and bereavement outcomes. Objective: To explore the effects of the Values and Options in Cancer Care intervention on caregivers' experiences of EoL care and bereavement outcomes. Design: We developed a brief behavioral intervention to improve communication among oncologists, patients with advanced cancer, and their personal caregivers. The intervention was designed to help patients/caregivers ask questions, express concerns, and help oncologists respond effectively. We randomly assigned oncologists (and their patients/caregivers) to the intervention or usual care. Setting/Subjects: Medical oncologists in NY and CA; patients/personal caregivers with advanced cancer. Measurements: Two months after the patient's death, caregivers completed three instruments assessing their experiences of EoL care. Seven months after the patient's death, caregivers completed the Prolonged Grief Disorder-13 (PG-13; primary prespecified outcome), the Purpose-in-Life scale, and scales assessing mental health function, depression, and anxiety. Results: The intervention did not significantly improve caregivers' scores on the PG-13 (p = 0.21), mental health function, depression, or anxiety, but it did improve purpose-in-life scores (p = 0.018). Cohen's d (95% confidence interval) for all three experiences of EoL care outcomes were promising, ranging from 0.22 (−0.19 to 0.63) to 0.39 (−0.07 to 0.86) although none was statistically significant. Conclusion: Preliminary findings show promise that scalable interventions in cancer care settings may improve caregiver experiences with cancer care and some bereavement outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study which examines the reasons of individuals not to disclose depression to their primary care physician. The study conducted a follow-up telephone survey which asked about reasons for nondisclosure of depressive symptoms in 1,054 adults in California. Results reveal that concern that physician would recommend antidepressants is the most frequent reason for not disclosing depression in which an intervention should be developed to encourage patient to disclose symptoms.

Context: Discordance in prognostic understanding between caregivers of adults with advanced cancer and the oncologist may shape caregivers' views of the oncologist and bereavement outcomes.Objectives: We examined prospective associations of caregiver-oncologist discordance with caregiver-oncologist therapeutic alliance and caregiver anxiety after patient death.Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of data collected in a cluster randomized controlled trial from August 2012 to June 2014 in Western New York and California. At enrollment, caregivers and oncologists used a seven-point scale to rate their beliefs about the patient's curability and living two years or more: 100%, about 90%, about 75%, about 50 of 50, about 25%, about 10%, and 0%. Discordance was defined as a difference of two points or more. Outcomes at seven months after patient death included caregiver-oncologist therapeutic alliance (The Human Connection scale, modified into five items) and caregiver anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7). We conducted multivariable linear regression models to assess the independent associations of discordance with alliance and anxiety.Results: We included 97 caregivers (mean age 63) and 38 oncologists; 41% of caregiver-oncologist dyads had discordant beliefs about the patient's curability, and 63% of caregiver-oncologist dyads had discordant beliefs about living two years or more. On multivariate analysis, discordance in beliefs about curability was associated with lower anxiety (β = -2.20; SE 0.77; P = 0.005). Discordance in beliefs about length of life was associated with a weaker alliance (β = -5.87; SE = 2.56; P = 0.02).Conclusion: A better understanding of how caregivers understand and come to terms with poor prognoses will guide interventions to improve cancer care delivery and outcomes of cancer treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Some research has suggested that discussion of prognosis can disrupt the patient-physician relationship. This study assessed whether physician discussion of prognosis is associated with detrimental changes in measures of the strength of the patient-physician relationship. Methods This was a longitudinal cohort study of 265 adult patients with advanced cancer who visited 38 oncologists within community- and hospital-based cancer clinics in Western New York and Northern California. Prognostic discussion was assessed by coding transcribed audio-recorded visits using the Prognostic and Treatment Choices (PTCC) scale and by patient survey at 3 months after the clinic visit. Changes in the strength of the patient-physician relationship were computed as differences in patient responses to The Human Connection and the Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions scales from baseline to 2 to 7 days and 3 months after the clinic visit. Results Prognostic discussion was not associated with a temporal decline in either measure. Indeed, a one-unit increase in PTCC during the audio-recorded visit was associated with improvement in The Human Connection scale at 2 to 7 days after the visit (parameter estimate, 0.10; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.23) and 3 months after the visit (parameter estimate, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.35) relative to baseline. Standardized effect sizes (SES) associated with an increase of two standard deviations in the PTCC at each time point were consistent with small beneficial effects (SES, 0.14 [95% CI, -0.02 to 0.29] at 2 to 7 days; SES, 0.24 [95% CI, 0.02 to 0.45] at 3 months), and lower bounds of CIs indicated that substantial detrimental effects of prognostic discussion were unlikely. Conclusion Prognostic discussion is not intrinsically harmful to the patient-physician relationship and may even strengthen the therapeutic alliance between patients and oncologists.

Background: Family and friends may help patients seek out and engage in depression care. However, patients' social networks can also undermine depression treatment and recovery. In an effort to improve depression care in primary care settings, we sought to identify, categorize, and alert primary care clinicians to depression-related messages that patients hear from friends and family that patients perceive as unhelpful or detrimental., Methods: We conducted 15 focus groups in 3 cities. Participants (n = 116) with a personal history or knowledge of depression responded to open-ended questions about depression, including self-perceived barriers to care-seeking. Focus group conversations were audio-recorded and analyzed using iterative qualitative analysis., Results: Four themes emerged related to negatively-received depression messages delivered by family and friends. Specifically, participants perceived these messages as making them feel labeled, judged, lectured to, and rejected by family and friends when discussing depression. Some participants also expressed their interpretation of their families' motivations for delivering the messages and described how hearing these messages affected depression care., Conclusions: The richness of our results reflects the complexity of communication within depression sufferers' social networks around this stigmatized issue. To leverage patients' social support networks effectively in depression care, primary care clinicians should be aware of both the potentially beneficial and detrimental aspects of social support. Specifically, clinicians should consider using open-ended queries into patients' experiences with discussing depression with family and friends as an initial step in the process. An open-ended approach may avoid future emotional trauma or stigmatization and assist patients in overcoming self-imposed barriers to depression discussion, symptom disclosure, treatment adherence and follow-up care.