The evidence-based development of an intervention to address the information needs of adults newly diagnosed with primary brain tumours and their carers

Adults diagnosed with primary brain tumours often experience physical, cognitive and neuropsychiatric impairments and decline in quality of life. Although disease and treatment-related information is commonly provided to cancer patients and carers, newly diagnosed brain tumour patients and their carers report unmet information needs. Few interventions have been designed or proven to address these information needs. Accordingly, a three-study research program, that incorporated both qualitative and quantitative research methods, was designed to: 1) identify and select an intervention to improve the provision of information, and meet the needs of patients with a brain tumour; 2) use an evidence-based approach to establish the content, language and format for the intervention; and 3) assess the acceptability of the intervention, and the feasibility of evaluation, with newly diagnosed brain tumour patients. Study 1: Structured concept mapping techniques were undertaken with 30 health professionals, who identified strategies or items for improving care, and rated each of 42 items for importance, feasibility, and the extent to which such care was provided. Participants also provided data to interpret the relationship between items, which were translated into ‘maps’ of relationships between information and other aspects of health care using multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis. Results were discussed by participants in small groups and individual interviews to understand the ratings, and facilitators and barriers to implementation. A care coordinator was rated as the most important strategy by health professionals. Two items directly related to information provision were also seen as highly important: "information to enable the patient or carer to ask questions" and "for doctors to encourage patients to ask questions". Qualitative analyses revealed that information provision was individualised, depending on patients’ information needs and preferences, demographic variables and distress, the characteristics of health professionals who provide information, the relationship between the individual patient and health professional, and influenced by the fragmented nature of the health care system. Based on quantitative and qualitative findings, a brain tumour specific question prompt list (QPL) was chosen for development and feasibility testing. A QPL consists of a list of questions that patients and carers may want to ask their doctors. It is designed to encourage the asking of questions in the medical consultation, allowing patients to control the content, and amount of information provided by health professionals. Study 2: The initial structure and content of the brain tumour specific QPL developed was based upon thematic analyses of 1) patient materials for brain tumour patients, 2) QPLs designed for other patient populations, and 3) clinical practice guidelines for the psychosocial care of glioma patients. An iterative process of review and refinement of content was undertaken via telephone interviews with a convenience sample of 18 patients and/or carers. Successive drafts of QPLs were sent to patients and carers and changes made until no new topics or suggestions arose in four successive interviews (saturation). Once QPL content was established, readability analyses and redrafting were conducted to achieve a sixth-grade reading level. The draft QPL was also reviewed by eight health professionals, and shortened and modified based on their feedback. Professional design of the QPL was conducted and sent to patients and carers for further review. The final QPL contained questions in seven colour-coded sections: 1) diagnosis; 2) prognosis; 3) symptoms and problems; 4) treatment; 5) support; 6) after treatment finishes; and 7) the health professional team. Study 3: A feasibility study was conducted to determine the acceptability of the QPL and the appropriateness of methods, to inform a potential future randomised trial to evaluate its effectiveness. A pre-test post-test design was used with a nonrandomised control group. The control group was provided with ‘standard information’, the intervention group with ‘standard information’ plus the QPL. The primary outcome measure was acceptability of the QPL to participants. Twenty patients from four hospitals were recruited a median of 1 month (range 0-46 months) after diagnosis, and 17 completed baseline and follow-up interviews. Six participants would have preferred to receive the information booklet (standard information or QPL) at a different time, most commonly at diagnosis. Seven participants reported on the acceptability of the QPL: all said that the QPL was helpful, and that it contained questions that were useful to them; six said it made it easier to ask questions. Compared with control group participants’ ratings of ‘standard information’, QPL group participants’ views of the QPL were more positive; the QPL had been read more times, was less likely to be reported as ‘overwhelming’ to read, and was more likely to prompt participants to ask questions of their health professionals. The results from the three studies of this research program add to the body of literature on information provision for brain tumour patients. Together, these studies suggest that a QPL may be appropriate for the neuro-oncology setting and acceptable to patients. The QPL aims to assist patients to express their information needs, enabling health professionals to better provide the type and amount of information that patients need to prepare for treatment and the future. This may help health professionals meet the challenge of giving patients sufficient information, without providing ‘too much’ or ‘unnecessary’ information, or taking away hope. Future studies with rigorous designs are now needed to determine the effectiveness of the QPL.

Quality and readability of information materials for people with brain tumours and their families

Written information is commonly used to inform patients about their disease and treatment, but must be evidence-based and understandable to be useful. This study assessed the quality of the content and the readability of information brochures for people affected by brain tumours. We randomly selected 18 publicly available brochures. Brochures were assessed by criteria to assess the quality of content using the DISCERN instrument. Readability was tested using three commonly used formulas, which yield the reading grade level required to comprehend the brochure (sixth grade level recommended). The mean overall DISCERN score was 3.17 out of a maximum of 5 (moderate quality); only one achieved a rating greater than 4 (high quality). Only one brochure met the sixth grade readability criteria. Although brochures may have accurate content, few satisfied all of the recommended criteria to evaluate their content. Existing brochures need to be critically reviewed and simplified, consumer-focused brochures produced.

Systematic review of interventions to improve the provision of information for adults with primary brain tumours and their caregivers

Background: Adults with primary brain tumors and their caregivers have significant information needs. This review assessed the effect of interventions to improve information provision for adult primary brain tumor patients and/or their caregivers. Methods: We included randomized or nonrandomized trials testing educational interventions that had outcomes of information provision, knowledge, understanding, recall, or satisfaction with the intervention, for adults diagnosed with primary brain tumors and/or their family or caregivers. PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Reviews databases were searched for studies published between 1980 and June 2014. Results: Two randomized controlled, one non-randomized controlled, and 10 single group pre-post trials enrolled more than 411 participants. Five group, four practice/process change and four individual interventions assessed satisfaction (12 studies), knowledge (four studies) or information provision (2 studies). Nine studies reported high rates of satisfaction. Three studies showed statistically significant improvements over time in knowledge and two showed greater information was provided to intervention than control group participants, although statistical testing was not performed. Discussion: The trials assessed intermediate outcomes such as satisfaction, and only 4/13 reported on knowledge improvements. Few trials had a randomized controlled design and risk of bias was either evident or could not be assessed in most domains.

It’s okay to ask : development and pilot testing of a question prompt list for patients with brain tumours

Background: Previous research identified that primary brain tumour patients have significant psychological morbidity and unmet needs, particularly the need for more information and support. However, the utility of strategies to improve information provision in this setting is unknown. This study involved the development and piloting of a brain tumour specific question prompt list (QPL). A QPL is a list of questions patients may find useful to ask their health professionals, and is designed to facilitate communication and information exchange. Methods: Thematic analysis of QPLs developed for other chronic diseases and brain tumour specific patient resources informed a draft QPL. Subsequent refinement of the QPL involved an iterative process of interviews and review with 12 recently diagnosed patients and six caregivers. Final revisions were made following readability analyses and review by health professionals. Piloting of the QPL is underway using a non-randomised control group trial with patients undergoing treatment for a primary brain tumour in Brisbane, Queensland. Following baseline interviews, consenting participants are provided with the QPL or standard information materials. Follow-up interviews four to 6 weeks later allow assessment of the acceptability of the QPL, how it is used by patients, impact on information needs, and feasibility of recruitment, implementation and outcome assessment. Results: The final QPL was determined to be readable at the sixth grade level. It contains seven sections: diagnosis, prognosis, symptoms and changes, the health professional team, support, treatment and management, and post-treatment concerns. At this time, fourteen participants have been recruited for the pilot, and data collection completed for eleven. Data collection and preliminary analysis are expected to be completed by and presented at the conference. Conclusions: If acceptable to participants, the QPL may encourage patients, doctors and nurses to communicate more effectively, reducing unmet information needs and ultimately improving psychological wellbeing.

Health professionals’ perspectives on information provision for patients with brain tumours and their families

A significant number of patients diagnosed with primary brain tumours report unmet information needs. Using concept mapping methodology, this study aimed to identify strategies for improving information provision, and to describe factors that health professionals understood to influence their provision of information to patients with brain tumours and their families. Concept mapping is a mixed methods approach that uses statistical methods to represent participants’ perceived relationships between elements as conceptual maps. These maps, and results of associated data collection and analyses, are used to extract concepts involved in information provision to these patients. Thirty health professionals working across a range of neuro-oncology roles and settings participated in the concept mapping process. Participants rated a care coordinator as the most important strategy for improving brain tumour care, with psychological support as a whole rated as the most important element of care. Five major themes were identified as facilitating information provision: health professionals’ communication skills, style and attitudes; patients’ needs and preferences; perceptions of patients’ need for protection and initiative; rapport and continuity between patients and health professionals; and the nature of the health care system. Overall, health professionals conceptualised information provision as ‘individualised’, dependent on these interconnected personal and environmental factors.

Development and evaluation of a program to improve clinician and patient communication during a telehealth consultation : C.R.I.S.P. Telehealth

Introduction: The delivery of health care in the 21st century will look like no other in the past. The fast paced technological advances that are being made will need to transition from the information age into clinical practice. The phenomenon of e-Health is the over-arching form of information technology and telehealth is one arm of that phenomenon. The uptake of telehealth both in Australia and overseas, has changed the face of health service delivery to many rural and remote communities for the better, removing what is known as the tyranny of distance. Many studies have evaluated the satisfaction and cost-benefit analysis of telehealth across the organisational aspects as well as the various adaptations of clinical pathways and this is the predominant focus of most studies published to date. However, whilst comments have been made by many researchers about the need to improve and attend to the communication and relationship building aspects of telehealth no studies have examined this further. The aim of this study was to identify the patient and clinician experiences, concerns, behaviours and perceptions of the telehealth interaction and develop a training tool to assist these clinicians to improve their interaction skills. Methods: A mixed methods design combining quantitative (survey analysis and data coding) and qualitative (interview analysis) approaches was adopted. This study utilised four phases to firstly qualitatively explore the needs of clients (patients) and clinicians within a telehealth consultation then designed, developed, piloted and quantitatively and qualitatively evaluated the telehealth communication training program. Qualitative data was collected and analysed during Phase 1 of this study to describe and define the missing 'communication and rapport building' aspects within telehealth. This data was then utilised to develop a self-paced communication training program that enhanced clinicians existing skills, which comprised of Phase 2 of this study to develop the interactive program. Phase 3 included evaluating the training program with 26 clinicians and results were recorded pre and post training, whilst phase 4 was the pilot for future recommendations of this training program using a patient group within a Queensland Health setting at two rural hospitals. Results: Comparisons of pre and post training data on 1) Effective communication styles, 2) Involvement in communication training package, 3) satisfaction pre and post training, and 4) health outcomes pre and post training indicated that there were differences between pre and post training in relation to effective communication style, increased satisfaction and no difference in health outcomes between pre and post training for this patient group. The post training results revealed over half of the participants (N= 17, 65%) were more responsive to non-verbal cues and were better able to reflect and respond to looks of anxiousness and confusion from a 'patient' within a telehealth consultation. It was also found that during post training evaluations, clinicians had enhanced their therapeutic communication with greater detail to their own body postures, eye contact and presentation. There was greater time spent looking at the 'patient' with an increase of 35 second intervals of direct eye contact and less time spent looking down at paperwork which decreased by 20 seconds. Overall 73% of the clinicians were satisfied with the training program and 61% strongly agreed that they recognised areas of their communication that needed improving during a telehealth consultation. For the patient group there was significant difference post training in rapport with a mean score from 42 (SD = 28, n = 27) to 48 (SD = 5.9, n = 24). For communication comfort of the patient group there was a significant difference between the pre and post training scores t(10) = 27.9, p = .002, which meant that overall the patients felt less inhibited whilst talking to the clinicians and more understood. Conclusion: The aim of this study was to explore the characteristics of good patient-clinician communication and unmet training needs for telehealth consultations. The study developed a training program that was specific for telehealth consultations and not dependent on a 'trainer' to deliver the content. In light of the existing literature this is a first of its kind and a valuable contribution to the research on this topic. It was found that the training program was effective in improving the clinician's communication style and increased the satisfaction of patient's within an e-health environment. This study has identified some historical myths that telehealth cannot be part of empathic patient centred care due to its technology tag.

Development and piloting of a brain tumour-specific question prompt list

The objective of this research was to develop a question prompt list aimed at increasing question asking and reducing the unmet information needs of adults with primary brain tumours, and to pilot the question prompt list to determine its suitability for the intended population. Thematic analysis of existing resources was used to create a draft which was refined via interviews with 12 brain tumour patients and six relatives, readability testing and review by health professionals. A non-randomised before–after pilot study with 20 brain tumour patients was used to assess the acceptability and usefulness of the question prompt list, compared with a ‘standard brochure’, and the feasibility of evaluation strategies. The question prompt list developed covered seven main topics (diagnosis, prognosis, symptoms and changes, treatment, support, after treatment finishes and the health professional team). Pilot study participants provided with the question prompt list agreed that it was helpful (7/7), contained questions that were useful to them (7/7) and prompted them to ask their medical oncologist questions (5/7). The question prompt list is acceptable to patients and contains questions relevant to them. Research is now needed to assess its effectiveness in increasing question asking and reducing unmet information needs.

Systematic review of interventions to improve the provision of information for adults with primary brain tumors and their caregivers

Background: Adults with primary brain tumors and their caregivers have significant information needs. This review assessed the effect of interventions to improve information provision for adult primary brain tumor patients and/or their caregivers. Methods: We included randomized or nonrandomized trials testing educational interventions that had outcomes of information provision, knowledge, understanding, recall, or satisfaction with the intervention, for adults diagnosed with primary brain tumors and/or their family or caregivers. PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Reviews databases were searched for studies published between 1980 and June 2014. Results: Two randomized controlled, one non-randomized controlled, and 10 single group pre-post trials enrolled more than 411 participants. Five group, four practice/process change and four individual interventions assessed satisfaction (12 studies), knowledge (four studies) or information provision (2 studies). Nine studies reported high rates of satisfaction. Three studies showed statistically significant improvements over time in knowledge and two showed greater information was provided to intervention than control group participants, although statistical testing was not performed. Discussion: The trials assessed intermediate outcomes such as satisfaction, and only 4/13 reported on knowledge improvements. Few trials had a randomized controlled design and risk of bias was either evident or could not be assessed in most domains.

Information interventions for orienting patients and their carers to cancer care facilities

Background: Cancer patients experience distress and anxiety related to their diagnosis, treatment and the unfamiliar cancer centre. Strategies with the aim of orienting patients to a cancer care facility may improve patient outcomes. Although meeting patients' information needs at different stages is important, there is little agreement about the type of information and the timing for information to be given. Orientation interventions aim to address information needs at the start of a person's experience with a cancer care facility. The extent of any benefit of these interventions is unknown. Objectives: To assess the effects of information interventions which orient patients and their carers/family to a cancer care facility, and to the services available in the facility. Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2); MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1966 to Jun 2011), EMBASE (Ovid SP) (1966 to Jun 2011), CINAHL (EBSCO) (1982 to Jun 2011), PsycINFO (OvidSP) (1966 to Jun 2011), review articles and reference lists of relevant articles. We contacted principal investigators and experts in the field. Selection Criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs and quasi-RCTs evaluating the effects of information interventions that orient patients and their carers/family to a cancer care facility. Data collection and analysis: Results of searches were reviewed against the pre-determined criteria for inclusion by two review authors. The primary outcomes were knowledge and understanding; health status and wellbeing, evaluation of care, and harms. Secondary outcomes were communication, skills acquisition, behavioural outcomes, service delivery, and health professional outcomes. We pooled results of RCTs using mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Main results: We included four RCTs involving 610 participants. All four trials aimed to investigate the effects of orientation programs for cancer patients to a cancer facility. There was high risk of bias across studies. Findings from two of the RCTs demonstrated significant benefits of the orientation intervention in relation to levels of distress (mean difference (MD) -8.96 (95% confidence interval (CI) -11.79 to -6.13), but non-significant benefits in relation to state anxiety levels (MD -9.77 (95% CI -24.96 to 5.41). Other outcomes for participants were generally positive (e.g. more knowledgeable about the cancer centre and cancer therapy, better coping abilities). No harms or adverse effects were measured or reported by any of the included studies. There were insufficient data on the other outcomes of interest. Authors conclusion: This review has demonstrated the feasibility and some potential benefits of orientation interventions. There was a low level of evidence suggesting that orientation interventions can reduce distress in patients. However, most of the other outcomes remain inconclusive (patient knowledge recall/ satisfaction). The majority of studies were subject to high risk of bias, and were likely to be insufficiently powered. Further well conducted and powered RCTs are required to provide evidence for determining the most appropriate intensity, nature, mode and resources for such interventions. Patient and carer-focused outcomes should be included.

Understanding requirements of novel healthcare information systems for management of advanced prostate cancer

Effective management of chronic diseases is a global health priority. A healthcare information system offers opportunities to address challenges of chronic disease management. However, the requirements of health information systems are often not well understood. The accuracy of requirements has a direct impact on the successful design and implementation of a health information system. Our research describes methods used to understand the requirements of health information systems for advanced prostate cancer management. The research conducted a survey to identify heterogeneous sources of clinical records. Our research showed that the General Practitioner was the common source of patient's clinical records (41%) followed by the Urologist (14%) and other clinicians (14%). Our research describes a method to identify diverse data sources and proposes a novel patient journey browser prototype that integrates disparate data sources.

Grunt language versus accent : the perceived communication barriers between international medical graduates and patients in Central Wheatbelt catchments

Due to the chronic shortages of GPs in Australian rural and remote regions, considerable numbers of international medical graduates (IMG) have been recruited. IMG experience many difficulties when relocating to Australia with one of the most significant being effective GP-patient communication. Given that this is essential for effective consultation it can have a substantial impact on health care. A purposive sample of seven practising GPs (five IMG, two Australian-trained doctors (ATD)) was interviewed using a semistructured face-to-face interviewing technique. GPs from Nigeria, Egypt, United Kingdom, India, Singapore and Australia participated. Interviews were transcribed and then coded. The authors used qualitative thematic analysis of interview transcripts to identify common themes. IMG-patient communication barriers were considered significant in the Wheatbelt region as identified by both IMG and ATD. ATD indicated they were aware of IMG-patient communication issues resulting in subsequent consults with patients to explain results and diagnoses. Significantly, a lack of communication between ATD and IMG also emerged, creating a further barrier to effective communication. Analysis of the data generated several important findings that rural GP networks should consider when integrating new IMG into the community. Addressing the challenges related to cross-cultural differences should be a priority, in order to enable effective communication. More open communication between ATD and IMG about GP-patient communication barriers and education programs around GP-patient communication would help both GP and patient satisfaction.

Soliciting additional concerns in the primary care consultation and the utility of a brief communication intervention to aid solicitation: A qualitative study

Objective To investigate the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) on the practice of soliciting additional concerns (ACs) and the acceptability and utility of two brief interventions (prompts) designed to aid the solicitation. Methods Eighteen GPs participating in a feasibility randomised controlled trial were interviewed. Interviews were semi-structured and audio-recorded. Data were analysed using a Framework Approach. Results Participants perceived eliciting ACs as important for: reducing the need for multiple visits, identifying serious illness early, and increasing patient and GP satisfaction. GPs found the prompts easy to use and some continued their use after the study had ended to aid time management. Others noted similarities between the intervention and their usual practice. Nevertheless, soliciting ACs in every consultation was not unanimously supported. Conclusion The prompts were acceptable to GPs within a trial context, but there was disagreement as to whether ACs should be solicited routinely. Some GPs considered the intervention to aid their prioritisation efficiency within consultations. Practice implications Some GPs will find prompts which encourage ACs to be solicited early in the consultation enable them to better organise priorities and manage time-limited consultations more effectively.

Antibiotics overuse in children with upper respiratory tract infections in Saudi Arabia : risk factors and potential interventions

Background: Antibiotics misuse is currently one of the major public health issues worldwide. This misuse can lead to the development of bacterial resistance, increasing the burden of chronic diseases, rising costs of health services, and the development of side effects. Several factors may influence this pattern of overuse. Objectives:This article will review the pertinent factors contributing to the overuse of antibiotics worldwide, and to assess the intervention strategies to limit this overuse. Methods: studies about antibiotics use in children were reviewed from several electronic databases, such as MEDLINE and Pubmed. Results: Factors contributing to the overuse of antibiotics could include psychosocial factors, such as behaviors and attitudes (e.g. self-medication, over-the-counter medication, or patients/parents pressure), and demographic factors, such as socio-economic status and education level. Several intervention strategies were reported to be effective in reducing the overuse of antibiotics, such as health education, doctor-patient communication, and policies change. Multifaceted interventions were found to be the most effective in reducing the antibiotics overuse.