Triadic agreement about advanced cancer treatment decisions: Perceptions among patients, families, and oncologists.

OBJECTIVES: When patients make cancer treatment decisions, they consider the needs and preferences of family caregivers and clinicians. We examined how much all three triad members agreed about goals of treatment and caregivers' influence on decision-making. METHODS: We surveyed 70 triads of patients, caregivers, and oncologists who had recently made an advanced cancer treatment decision. We assessed each triad member's perception of the goal of treatment and the caregiver's influence on the decision. Participants also completed scales related to decisional conflict, satisfaction, and regret. RESULTS: In only 28/70 triads (40%), all three agreed on the goal of treatment with the most common goal being to live longer (n = 22). Whereas patients and caregivers tended to think the goal was to cure or live longer, oncologists were less optimistic. In only 22 triads (31%), all three agreed on how much influence the caregiver had on decision-making. Oncologists tended to underestimate caregiver influence. Patients and caregivers had low decisional conflict (M=15.40, SD=4.51; M=17.09, SD=6.34, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Advanced cancer treatment decision-making occurs amid incomplete understanding among patients, caregivers, and oncologists. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Confirming agreement about goals of care and influence on treatment decision-making may increase the likelihood of goal-concordant care throughout the illness trajectory.

Reminder letter, tailored stepped-care, and self-choice comparison for repeat mammography.

BACKGROUND: The main benefits of mammography come from regular on-schedule screening. However, few studies have examined interventions to achieve repeat screening. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants were women aged 50 to 74, recruited through one setting in Rhode Island and another in North Carolina. Participants had a mammogram already scheduled at recruitment, and had to keep that appointment in order to be eligible for the repeat mammography intervention. A total of 1614 women were in the intervention sample. DESIGN: A four-group randomized design was used: Group 1, a simple reminder letter; Group 2, a 2-month, tailored, stepped intervention delivered 2 months after the completed mammogram; Group 3, a 10-month, tailored, stepped intervention delivered 2 months before the repeat mammogram was due; and Group 4, self-choice of one of the above three strategies. INTERVENTION: The intervention took place between June 1996 and May 1997. The reminder letter and two levels of the stepped intervention were delivered by mail. The third level of the stepped strategy was a counselor telephone call. Groups 2 and 3 were identical, except for timing. OUTCOME MEASURE: Obtaining the next due mammogram within 15 months, based on clinic records. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences among the four groups, both in the total sample and at the two sites separately. CONCLUSIONS: On average, a simple reminder may be as effective as more complex strategies for women with a prior on-schedule exam. However, attention is still needed to identify women at risk of lapsing from screening. Some women may require more-intensive interventions.

Factors associated with patient-recalled smoking cessation advice in a low-income clinic.

It is recommended that providers advise cessation to their patients who smoke. However, patients' reports of cessation advice indicate disparities based on patients' race, gender, age, and smoking level. Providers' reports do not corroborate these disparities. We investigated whether smokers who receive their care in a community health center recalled their providers advising them to quit smoking when their providers documented such advice. We examined 219 patient-provider dyads to assess factors associated with lack of agreement between providers' documentation and patient recall. Patients were asked to recall any provider advice to quit smoking in the post 2 years. After every visit, providers completed a form to record the content of the visit. Most of the patients were African American, married, and uninsured. Sixty-eight percent of the dyads agreed in their documentation/recall. Patient race was the only factor associated with lack of agreement; African-American patients were more likely than white patients to provide discrepant reports. Although this study can not disentangle the racial difference in patient-provider recall/documentation, results may indicate an important area in which health disparities exist. Future studies should address the dynamics of patient-provider communication about smoking cessation, especially in populations that include ethnically diverse patients.