Chemotherapy patient perception regarding communication with the healthcare staff
| Data(s) |
14/06/2016
|
|---|---|
| Resumo |
Purpose: To qualitatively explore the communication between healthcare professionals and oncology patients based on the perception of patients undergoing chemotherapy.Method: Qualitative and exploratory design. Participants were 14 adult patients undergoing chemotherapy at different stages of the disease. A socio-demographic and clinical data form was utilized along with semi-structured interviews. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and content analysis was performed. Two independent judges evaluated the interview content in regards to emerging categories and obtained a Kappa index of 0.834.Results: Three categories emerged from the data: 1) Technical communication without emotional support, in which the information provided is composed of strictly technical information regarding the diagnosis, treatment and/or prognosis; 2) Technical communication, in which the information provided is oriented towards the technical aspects of the patient’s physical condition, while also providing psychological support for the patients’ subjective needs; and 3) Insufficient technical communication, win which there are gaps in the information provided causing confusion and suffering to the patient.Conclusions: Communication with emotional support contributes to greater satisfaction of chemotherapy patients. Practical implications: the results provide elements for the training of healthcare professionals regarding the importance of the emotional support that can be offered to cancer patients during their treatment. Objetivo: explorar cualitativamente la comunicación entre profesionales sanitarios y pacientes con cáncer a partir de la percepción de los pacientes en tratamiento de quimioterapia.Método: diseño cualitativo y exploratorio. Participantes fueron 14 pacientes adultos con cáncer en quimioterapia en diferentes fases de la enfermedad. Los instrumentos utilizados fueron un protocolo de dato sociodemográficos y clínicos y una entrevista semi-estructurada. Las entrevistas fueron grabadas, transcritas, y fue realizado análisis de contenido. Dos jueces independientes evaluaron el contenido de las entrevistas a partir de las categorías que aparecieron, y fue calculado el índice Kappa de 0,834.Resultados: Tres categorías fueron creadas a partir de los datos: 1) Comunicación técnica sin apoyo emocional, cuando la información dada es compuesta de forma estricta a las informaciones técnicas del diagnóstico, tratamiento y/o pronóstico; 2) Comunicación técnica, cuando la información está orientada a los aspectos técnicos de la condición física del paciente, mientras también es ofrecido apoyo emocional de acuerdo con las necesidades de los pacientes; y 3) Comunicación técnica insuficiente, cuando hay problemas en la información ofrecida y que causa confusión y sufrimiento al paciente.Conclusiones: comunicación con apoyo emocional contribuye para aumentar la satisfacción de pacientes en quimioterapia. Implicaciones practicas: los resultados fornecen elementos para la capacitación de profesionales sanitarios relacionados a la importancia del apoyo emocional que puede ser ofrecido a pacientes con cáncer durante su tratamiento. |
| Formato |
application/pdf |
| Identificador |
http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/PSIC/article/view/52493 10.5209/rev_PSIC.2016.v13.n1.52493 |
| Publicador |
Asociación de Psicooncología de Madrid |
| Relação |
http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/PSIC/article/view/52493/48299 /*ref*/Arbabi M, Rozdar A, Taher M, Shirzad M, Arjmand M, Ansari S2, Mohammadi MR. Patients’ preference to hear cancer diagno¬sis. Iran J Psychiatry 2014;9:1:8-13. /*ref*/Brundage MD, Feldman-Stewart D, Tishelman C. How do interventions de signed to improve provider-patient com¬munication work? Illustrative applica¬tions of a framework for communication. Acta Oncologica 2010; 49:136-43. Doi: 10.3109/02841860903483684. /*ref*/Caprara A, Rodrigues J. Asymmetric doc¬tor-patient relationship: rethinking the therapeutic Bond. Ciência & Saúde Cole¬tiva, 2004;9:139-46. Doi: 10.1590/S1413-81232004000100014. /*ref*/Castro EK, Barreto SMM. Oncology medi¬cal criteria for psychologycal referral in palliative care. Psicologia: Ciência e Profis¬são 2015;35:69-82. DOI: 10.1590/1982-3703000202013. /*ref*/Cavalcanti, D.R., 2005. Critical illness (cancer) diagnosis communication. Telling to the patient who, when, how and why? Pan-American Family Medicine Clinics. 1. Available from: http://www.inca.gov.br/rbc/n_55/v02/pdf/07_artigo4.pdf /*ref*/Coyle N, Sculco L. Communication and the patient/ohysician relationship: A phenomenological inquiry. J Support Oncol 2003;1:206-15. Doi: 10.1093/jmp/12.3.219 /*ref*/Dean M, Street RL. A 3-stage model of patient-centered communication for ad¬dressing cancer patients’ emotional dis¬tress. Patient Educ Couns 2014;94:143-8. Doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.09.025 /*ref*/Deledda G, Moretti F, Rimondini M, Zim¬mermann C. How patients want their doc¬tor to communicate. A literature review on primary care patients’ perspective. Pa¬tient Educ Couns 2013;90:297-306. Doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.05.005 /*ref*/Ekwall E, Ternestedt BM, Sorbe B, Grane¬heim UH.. Patients’ perceptions of com¬munication with the health care team during chemotherapy for the first recur¬rence of ovarian cancer. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2011;15:53-58. Doi:10.1016/j.ejon.2010.06.001 /*ref*/Emold C, Schneider N, Meller I, Yagil Y. Communication skills, working envi¬ronment and burnout among oncology nurses.Eur J Oncol Nurs 2011; 15:358-63. Doi:10.1016/j.ejon.2010.08.001 /*ref*/Epstein RM, Franks P, Fiscella K, Shields CG, Meldrum SC, Kravitz RL, Duberstein PR. Measuring patient-centered communi¬cation in Patient–Physician consultations: Theoretical and practical issues. Soc Sci Med 2005; 61:1516–28. Doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.02.001 /*ref*/Epstein RM, Peters E. Beyond informa¬tion: exploring patients’ preferences. JAMA 2009; 302:2:195-7. Doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.984. /*ref*/Fleissig A, Jenkins V, Catt S, Fallowfield L. Multidisciplinary teams in cancer care: Are they effective in the UK? Lancet On¬col 2006;7:935-43. Doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(06)70940-8 /*ref*/Fontanella BJB, Ricas J, Turato ER. Saturation sampling in qualitative health research: the¬oretical contributions. Cadernos de Saúde Pública 2008;24:17-27. Doi:10.1590/S0102-311X2008000100003. /*ref*/Geovanini, F., Braz, M., 2013. Ethical conflicts in communicating bad news in oncology. Rev. Bioét 21:455-62. [Acess: 5 sep 2014] Available from: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=361533263010 /*ref*/Gomes, C.H.R., Silva, P.V., Mota, F. F., 2009. Cancer diagnosis communication: analysis of the physician behavior. Revista Brasileira de Cancerologia. 55:139-143. Available from: http://www.inca.gov.br/rbc/n_55/v02/pdf/07_artigo4.pdf Acess: 3 june 2014 /*ref*/Goodwin PJ, Bruera E, Stockler M. Pain in patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol 2014;32: 1637-9. Doi: 10.1200/JCO.2014.55.3818 /*ref*/Ha JF, Longnecker N. Doctor-patient com¬munication: A review. Ochsner J 2010; 10:1:38-43. /*ref*/HackTF,Degner LF, Parker PA. The com¬munication goals and needs of can¬cer patients: a review. Psychooncology 2005;14:831-45. Doi:10.1002/pon.968 /*ref*/Hagerty RG, Butow PN, Ellis PA, Lobb EA, Pendlebury S, Leighl N, et al. Can¬cer patient preferences for communica¬tion of prognosis in the metastatic setting. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:9. Doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.04.095 /*ref*/Hounsgaard L, Augustussen M, Møller H, Bradley SK, Møller S.. Women’s perspec¬tives on illness when being screened for cervical cancer. Int J Circumpolar Health 2013;72. Doi: 10.3402/ijch.v72i0.21089 /*ref*/Krupat E, Rosenkranz SL, Yeager CM, Bar¬nard K, Putnam SM, Inui TS. The practice orientations of physicians and patients: The effect of doctor–patientcongruence on sat¬isfaction. Patient Educ Couns 2000; 39:49-59. Doi:0.1016/S0738-3991(99)00090-7 /*ref*/Lamb B, Green JS, Vincent C, Sevdalis N. Decision making in surgical oncology. Sur Oncol 2011; 20:163-8. Doi: 10.1016/j.su¬ronc.2010.07.007 /*ref*/Laville C, Dionne J. La construction des savoirs: manuel de methodologie en sciences. ARTMED. Brazil, RS, Porto Alegre,1999 /*ref*/Lino CA, Augusto KL, Oliveira RAS, Fei¬tosa LB, Caprara A. Using the spikes protocol to teach skills in breaking bad news. Revista Brasileira de Educação Mé¬dica 2011;35:52-7. Doi:10.1590/S0100-55022011000100008. /*ref*/Lopez, C.A.C., Ruiz, V.A.C., 2011. Emo¬tional impact of the diagnosis of digestive cancer. Psic Saúde Doenças 12, 298-303. Available from: http://www.redalyc.org/ar¬ticulo.oa?id=36222527010 /*ref*/Mccarthy B. Patients’ perceptions of how healthcare providers communicate with them and their families following a diag¬nosis of colorectal cancer and undergo¬ing chemotherapy treatment. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2014;18:5:452-8. Doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2014.05.004 /*ref*/Mello-Santos, C., Silva, G.M., 2008. Reac¬tion adjustment in oncology. In: Themes in Psicooncologia. Summus Editorial. Brazil, São Paulo. /*ref*/Moore P, Gómez G, Kurtz S, Vargas A. Doctor patient communication: Which skills are effective? Rev Med Chile, 2010;138:1047-54. DOI:10.4067/S0034-98872010000800016. /*ref*/Ong LM, Visser MR, Lammes FB, de Haes JC. Doctor–Patient communication and cancer patients’ quality of life and satisfac¬tion. Patient Educ Couns 2000;41:145-56. Doi:0.1016/S0738-3991(99)00108-1 /*ref*/Otani, M.A.P., 2013. Communication between health professional and patient: perceptions of women with breast can¬cer. Campinas, SP. 221, 2013. [Acess: 5 sep 2014] Available from: http://www.bibliotecadigital.unicamp.br/document/?code=000904000 /*ref*/Perroca MG, Gaidzinski RR. Assessing the interrater reliability of an instrument for classifying patients – kappa quotient. Rev. Esc. Enferm. USP 2003;37:1. DOI:10.1590/S0080-62342003000100009. /*ref*/Pinheiro UMS. Bad news in oncology: the communication pathway in the perspec¬tive of physicians and nurses. Brazil, RS, Santa Maria. 2012 [Acess: 5 sep 2014] Available from: http://coral.ufsm.br/pp-genf/Dissertacao%20Ursula%20Pinheiro.pdf /*ref*/Prouty CD, Mazor KM, Greene SM, Ro¬blin DW, Firneno CL, Lemay CA, et al. Providers’ perceptions of communication breakdowns in cancer care. J Gen Intern Med 2014; 29:8:1122-30. Doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-2769-1. /*ref*/Ruhstaller T, Roe H, Thurlimann B, Nicoll JJ. The multidisciplinary meeting: An in¬dispensable aid to communication be¬tween different specialities. Eur J Can¬cer 2006; 42:2459-62. Doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2006.03.034 /*ref*/Schofield PEP, Butow PN, Thompson JF, Tattersall MH, Beeney LJ, Dunn SM. Psy¬chological responses of patients receiv¬ing a diagnosis of cancer. Ann Oncol 2003;14:48-56. Doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdg010 /*ref*/Schramm, F.R. 2001. Bioethics and Com¬munication in Oncology. 47, 25-32. [Acess: 5 sep 2014]. Available from: http://www.inca.gov.br/rbc/n_47/v01/pdf/artigo1.pdf /*ref*/Shepherd HL, Tattersall MHN, Butow PN. The context influences doctors’ support of shared decision making in cancer care. Br J Cancer 2007; 97:6-13. Doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603841 /*ref*/Silva, V.C.E., 2005. The impact of the can¬cer diagnosis disclosure in the patients’ perception. Master’s Dissertation – Uni¬versity of São Paulo at Ribeirão Preto College of Nursing. Brazil. 218. Avail¬able from: http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/22/22132/tde-11052005-112949/pt-br.php Skea ZC, Maclennan SJ, Entwistle VA, N’dow J. Communicating good care: A qualitative study of what people with urological cancer value in interactions with health care providers. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2014; 18:1:35-40. Doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2013.09.009. /*ref*/Song L, Bensen JT, Zimmer C, Sleath B, Blackard B, Fontham E, et al. Patient-health care provider communication among pa¬tients with newly diagnosed prostate can¬cer: Findings from a population-based sur¬vey. Patient Educ Couns 2013;91:79-84. Doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.12.002 /*ref*/Thorne S, Oliffe JL, Stajduhar KI. Com¬municating shared decision making: Cancer patient perspectives. Patient Educ Couns 2013; 90:3:291-6. Doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.02.018 /*ref*/Tongue JR, Epps HR, Forese LL. Commu¬nication Skills for Patient-Centered Care. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87:652 -658 /*ref*/Venetis MK, Robinson JD, Turkiewicz KL, Allen M. An evidence base for patient-centered cancer care: A meta-analysis of studies of observed communication between cancer specialists and their pa¬tients. Patient Educ Couns 2009;77:379-83. Doi:10.1016/j.pec.2009.09.015. |
| Direitos |
La revista Psicooncología, para fomentar el intercambio global del conocimiento, facilita el acceso sin restricciones a sus contenidos desde el momento de su publicación en la presente edición electrónica, y por eso es una revista de acceso abierto. Los originales publicados en esta revista son propiedad de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid y es obligatorio citar su procedencia en cualquier reproducción total o parcial. Todos los contenidos se distribuyen bajo una licencia de uso y distribución Creative Commons Reconocimiento 4.0 (CC BY 4.0). Esta circunstancia ha de hacerse constar expresamente de esta forma cuando sea necesario. Puede consultar la versión informativa y el texto legal de la licencia.La revista Psicooncología no cobra por tasas por envío de trabajos, ni tampoco cuotas por la publicación de sus artículos. LICENCE OF USE: The full text articles included on the Scientific Journals of the Complutense website are open access and the property of their authors and/or publishers. Therefore, any reproduction, distribution, public communication and/or total or partial transformation requires their express and written consent. Links to the full text of the articles on the Scientific Journals of the Complutense website should be to the official URL of the Complutense University of Madrid. |
| Fonte |
Psicooncología; Vol 13, No 1 (2016); 139-150 |
| Palavras-Chave | #Oncology; communication; health provider-patient relationship. #Oncología; comunicación; relación profesional sanitario-paciente. |
| Tipo |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article Artículo revisado por pares info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
