The complexity of physician-patient communication and its impact in non-medical fields. A surgical oncology approach

Divergent perspectives: A cross-sectional study unveiling disparities in cancer patients' and oncology nurses' perceptions on communication and empathy

PURPOSE

To examine the relationship between cancer patients' perceptions and oncology nurses' self-assessments of communication skills and empathy, and investigate the influence of patients' factors on these perceptions.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study used a paired sampling approach (1:2 ratio) with 168 oncology nurses and 336 cancer patients. It assessed patients' perceptions and nurses' self-assessments of nurse-expressed communication and empathy. The study examined the relationship with patients' demographic (age, gender, education level, occupational status, and marital status), clinical (length of hospital stay and physical functional status), and psychosocial factors (religious beliefs and presence of family caregiver).

RESULTS

Patients reported moderate levels of communication (Mean [M] = 54.73, Standard deviation [SD] = 8.97) and empathy (M = 21.94, SD = 6.93). No significant correlation was found between patients' and nurses' perceptions of communication (r = -.041, p = .362) and empathy (r = -.014, p = .419). Lower patient-perceived communication and empathy were associated with higher education level, poor physical functional status, longer hospital stays (>15 days), being unmarried, and absence of family caregivers (only in communication perception) (all p < .05).

CONCLUSION

Cancer patients' and oncology nurses' perceptions of communication and empathy were not significantly correlated. Length of hospital stay, physical functional status, marital status, presence of family caregivers, and education level significantly influenced patients' perceptions. Future interventions should focus on vulnerable groups and adapting to patients' changing needs during extended hospital stays.

Electronic health record-integrated questionnaires in colorectal surgery patients as a new standard: Could preoperative bowel function be used to predict postoperative patient-reported outcomes?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Patient-reported bowel function has been previously shown to correlate with quality of life and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after colorectal surgery. We examined the relationship between preoperative patient-reported bowel function and postoperative symptom reporting using an electronic health record-integrated symptom management (eSyM).

METHODS

Patients who underwent major abdominal surgery for colorectal cancer at a single institution were included. Preoperative bowel function was assessed prospectively using the validated colorectal functional outcome (COREFO) questionnaire. Patients with electronic portal access received automated eSyM questionnaires after discharge. Logistic regression was used to analyze the association between COREFO scores and eSyM use.

RESULTS

169 patients underwent surgery between April 2020 and June 2022 (median age 64, 46.7% female). 148 completed COREFO questionnaires preoperatively; 54 (36.5%) had scores ≥15. Of the 108 patients with portal access, 67.6% used eSyM postoperatively. Among users, 72.3% (47/73) reported severe symptoms. Those with COREFO scores ≥15 were more likely to use eSyM (80.0% vs. 62.7%) though this difference was not significant (p = 0.079).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that eSyM utilization regardless of preoperative baseline bowel function was high in this cohort of colorectal surgery patients. This suggests that electronically captured PROs is an effective way for patients to communicate symptoms to their care teams in a postsurgical setting.

Psychometric validation of the Chinese versions of the quality of communication questionnaires for cancer patients and their family caregivers

BACKGROUND

Given the lack of valid and reliable instruments for evaluating the quality of communication between physicians and cancer patients and their family caregivers in China, this study translated and culturally adapted the Quality of Communication questionnaires for cancer patients (QOC-P) and their family caregivers (QOC-F) for use in the Chinese context and evaluated their psychometric properties.

METHODS

The QOC-P and QOC-F were translated following an adapted version of Brislin's translation model and culturally adapted according to a Delphi expert panel. We pretested and refined the Chinese versions of the QOC-P and QOC-F among 16 dyads of patients and their family caregivers. Subsequently, we administered the questionnaires to 228 dyads of patients and their family caregivers who were recruited from six tertiary hospitals. The content validity, construct validity, convergent validity, and reliability of the QOC-P and QOC-F were examined.

RESULTS

Through exploratory factor analysis, The QOC-P and QOC-F were divided into two dimensions: general communication and end-of-life communication. The Cronbach's coefficients ranged from 0.905 to 0.907 for the two subscales of the QOC-P and from 0.908 to 0.953 for the two subscales of the QOC-F. The two-week test-retest reliability was acceptable for both the QOC-P and QOC-F, with intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.993 and 0.991, respectively. The scale content validity index (QOC-P: 0.857, QOC-F: 1.0) and split-half reliability (QOC-P: 0.833, QOC-F: 0.935) were satisfactory. There was a negative correlation with anxiety and depression for both the QOC-P (r = -0.233 & -0.241, p < 0.001) and QOC-F (r = -0.464 & -0.420, p<0.001). The QOC-P showed a negative correlation with decision regret (r = -0.445, p<0.001) and a positive correlation with shared decision-making (r = 0.525, p<0.001), as hypothesized.

CONCLUSION

The QOC-P and QOC-F show acceptable psychometric properties for evaluating the quality of communication between physicians and cancer patients and their family caregivers in both clinical and research contexts. Future studies should use more diverse and inclusive samples to test the structure of the Chinese version of the QOC-P and QOC-F with confirmatory factor analysis.

Communication to adult patients undergoing cancer care by non-specialist nurses: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Little is known regarding how non-specialist nurses communicate with patients living with cancer when the patients are receiving care outside of their cancer units/teams. This scoping review aims to identify, examine and report on the currently available evidence about communication by non-specialist nurses when caring for adults living with cancer outside of their cancer care unit/teams.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A scoping review following the JBI methodology for scoping reviews will be conducted. We will search for empirical studies that meet the inclusion criteria in six databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus and PsycINFO). Handsearching in references of included articles will be performed to find additional articles. The population of interest will be non-specialist nurses. Three concepts will be explored, namely (1) all adult patients living with cancer, (2) a focus on three stages of the cancer continuum of care (cancer diagnosis, treatment and survivorship) and (3) a focus on communication between non-specialist nurses and patients living with cancer. We will include studies describing all healthcare settings outside patients' specialised cancer units or oncology teams. After article selection, two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts and perform a full-text article review, risk of bias assessments and data extraction. A third reviewer will resolve all disagreements. A narrative summary will provide an overview of how the results relate to the research aims and questions. The included articles will be limited to English and published between 2012 and 2023.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethical approval is required since we will use publicly available empirical research sources. This review will provide current research on communication by non-specialist nurses with patients with a cancer diagnosis outside of an oncology setting, evidence that will support effective communication. As such, we aim to disseminate the findings in academic conferences and peer-reviewed journals.