Reflections on communication of disease prognosis and life expectancy by patients with colorectal cancer undergoing palliative care: a qualitative study

Cultivating Relationship-Centered Care: Patient, Caregiver, and Provider Communication Preferences for and Experiences with Prognostic Conversations

Prognostic conversations present many challenges for patients, caregivers, and providers alike. Most research examining the context of prognostic conversations have used a more siloed approach to gather the range of perspectives of those involved, typically through the lens of patient-centered care. However, the mutual influence evident in prognostic conversations suggests a relationship-centered care model may be useful in cancer communication research. Similarities and differences in preferences for and experiences with prognostic conversations among oncology patients, caregivers, and providers (N = 32) were explored. Identified themes were then mapped to the principles of the relationship-centered care framework to extend our understanding of prognostic conversations and contribute to a new direction in the application of relationship-centered care. Findings suggest fewer similarities than differences, point to important discrepancies among participant perspectives, and reinforce the utility of relationship-centered care in identifying communication practices that enhance the prognostic conversation experience.

Discussing Personalized Prognosis Empowers Patients with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis to Regain Control over Their Future: A Qualitative Study

The ENCALS survival prediction model offers patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) the opportunity to receive a personalized prognosis of survival at the time of diagnosis. We explored experiences of patients with ALS, caregivers, and physicians with discussing personalized prognosis through interviews with patients and their caregivers, and in a focus group of physicians. Thematic analysis revealed four themes with seven subthemes; these were recognized by the focus group. First, tailored communication: physician’s communication style and information provision mediated emotional impact and increased satisfaction with communication. Second, personal factors: coping style, illness experiences, and information needs affected patient and caregiver coping with the prognosis. Third, emotional impact ranged from happy and reassuring to regret. Fourth, regaining control over the future: participants found it helpful in looking towards the future, and emphasized the importance of quality over quantity of life. Personalized prognosis can be discussed with minimal adverse emotional impact. How it is communicated—i.e., tailored to individual needs—is as important as what is communicated—i.e., a good or poor prognosis. Discussing personalized prognosis may help patients with ALS and their caregivers regain control over the future and facilitate planning of the future (care). For many patients, quality of life matters more than quantity of time remaining.

Discussing Prognosis with Empathy to Cancer Patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Our goal was to provide healthcare professionals (HCPs) with evidence-based data about what can be done to handle prognostic discussions with empathy.

RECENT FINDINGS

First, disclosing prognosis involves a good reason to do so and making sure that the patient will be able to process the discussion. Second, communication tips are given for the three dimensions of empathy: "establishing rapport with the patient," which should not be overlooked; the emotional dimension, which involves an accurate understanding of the patient and communication skills; and the "active/positive" dimension which is about giving hope, explaining things clearly and helping patients take control with shared decision-making and a planned future. Although communication tips are helpful, empathy training should be based more on the development of HCPs' emotional skills, in order to help them regulate their emotions and thus be more comfortable with those of patients and families. Furthermore, research into empathy toward minorities and relatives is needed.

Prognostic disclosure and quality of life in palliative care: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Prognostic disclosure is an important component of communication in palliative care. Disclosing information on poor prognosis may affect quality of life (QoL) of palliative care patients. However, the effects of prognostic disclosure on QoL across different cultures and countries are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To review the effects of prognostic disclosure on QoL of palliative care patients.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted across seven databases (AMED, CINAHL plus, Cochrane Library, Medline (via the PubMed interface), Embase, Scopus and Web of Science). All primary studies, of any design, that explored the effects of prognostic disclosure on QoL of adult palliative care patients were eligible.

RESULTS

A total of 1926 records were screened for eligibility. Twenty-five articles were included (11 cross-sectional, 10 cohort, 3 mixed methods and 1 qualitative study). Studies were conducted in 11 countries. Five studies reported the sources of prognostic disclosure, while 20 studies did not. Emotional QoL was the most reported domain among the studies. The effects of prognostic disclosure on emotional aspects, overall QoL and other domains, including symptoms, physical functions, role functions, social functions and cognitive functions, were inconsistent.

CONCLUSIONS

The effects of prognostic disclosure on QoL across cultures and countries are inconsistent. Cultural differences are not sufficient to explain the effects. Future research is needed to explore the association between prognostic disclosure and QoL, and develop tools to support clinicians to share prognostic information in the most sensitive and supportive way.

Prognostic Awareness, Disease and Palliative Understanding Among Caregivers of Patients With Dementia

BACKGROUND

Persons with dementia (PwD) often have significant cognitive deficits and functional limitations, requiring substantial caregiver assistance. Given the high symptom burden and terminal nature of dementia, good prognostic awareness and integration of palliative care (PC) is needed.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate prognostic awareness, disease, and PC understanding among caregivers of PwD and to assess for improvements in routine care.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study of 2 cohorts at a single-academic medical center. Surveys were mailed to 200 caregivers of PwD in 2012 (cohort 1). Surveys were sent to new subset of caregivers of PwD (n = 80) in 2018 (cohort 2) to assess trends over time.

RESULTS

A total of 154 of caregivers completed the survey (response rate 55%). Compared to 2012, a higher proportion of caregivers in 2018 reported having conversations about prognosis with PwD's physicians (25% in 2012 vs 45% in 2018; P = .027). However, a large percentage (43% in 2012 and 40% in 2018) of caregivers reported no understanding of the PwD's prognosis. Despite most stating dementia was not curable, only 39% in 2012 and 52% in 2018 (P = .015) understood that dementia was a terminal disease. In addition, only 32% in 2012 and 40% in 2018 (P = .39) felt that they were knowledgeable about PC.

CONCLUSIONS

Prognostic discussions between caregivers of PwD and the PwD's physicians may be occurring more often; however, a high percentage of caregivers report a poor understanding about the terminal nature of dementia and the role of PC.

Chemotherapy Near the End of Life in Onco-Hematological Adult Patients

OBJECTIVE

The use of chemotherapy near the end of life is not advisable. There are scarce data in Europe but shows signs of aggressiveness. We designed this study to analyze the proportion of onco-hematological patients receiving chemotherapy within their last 2 weeks of life as well as starting a new chemotherapy regimen in the 30 days prior to death.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study was conducted in a tertiary hospital. Adults who died of an onco-hematological neoplasia while hospitalized between April 2017 and March 2018 were included. We assessed the use of chemotherapy over the course of the last 14 days of life, defined as the administration of at least one dose of chemotherapy. We also examined the proportion of patients starting a new chemotherapy regimen in the last 30 days of life.

RESULTS

A total of 298 inpatients died in the Hematology and Oncology units. During the last 14 days, 28.2% (n = 11) of hematological and 26.3% (n = 68) of oncological patients received chemotherapy; the overall rate was 26.5% (n = 79). Furthermore, the proportion of patients starting a new chemotherapy regimen in the last 30 days of life was high (20.5% and 20.8%, respectively). Female gender (odds ratio [OR] = 1.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.18-3.35) and age <45 (OR = 2.68, 95% CI = 1.05-6.88) were associated with higher rates of chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

The proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy in the last 14 days of life was high, as well as the proportion of patients starting a new regimen in their last 30 days. This was indicative of excessive aggressiveness at the end-of-life care.

Prognosticating for Adult Patients With Advanced Incurable Cancer: a Needed Oncologist Skill

Patients with advanced cancer and their families commonly seek information about prognosis to aid decision-making in medical (e.g. surrounding treatment), psychological (e.g. saying goodbye), and social (e.g. getting affairs in order) domains. Oncologists therefore have a responsibility to identify and address these requests by formulating and sensitively communicating information about prognosis. Current evidence suggests that clinician predictions are correlated with actual survival but tend to be overestimations. In an attempt to cultivate prognostic skills, it is recommended that clinicians practice formulating and recording subjective estimates of prognosis in advanced cancer patient’s medical notes. When possible, a multi-professional prognostic estimate should be sought as these may be more accurate than individual predictions alone. Clinicians may consider auditing the accuracy of their predictions periodically and using feedback from this process to improve their prognostic skills.

Clinicians may also consider using validated prognostic tools to complement their clinical judgements. However, there is currently only limited evidence about the comparative accuracy of different prognostic tools or the extent to which these measures are superior to clinical judgement. Oncologists and palliative care physicians should ensure that they receive adequate training in advanced communication skills, which builds upon their pre-existing skills, to sensitively deliver information on prognosis. In particular, clinicians should acknowledge their own prognostic uncertainty and should emphasise the supportive care that can continue to be provided after stopping cancer-directed therapies.