HELP - Heidelberg decision aid for lung cancer patients: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM), which increases the patient's well-being, adherence, and success of treatment, is becoming increasingly important in medicine and especially in oncology. To empower patients to participate more actively in consultations with their physicians decision aids have been developed. In non-curative settings, such as the treatment of advanced lung cancer, decisions differ substantially from the curative setting, as uncertain gains in terms of survival outcomes and quality of life have to be weighed against the severe side effects of treatment regimens. There is still a lack of tools developed and implemented for such specific settings in cancer therapy that support shared decision-making. The aim of our study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the HELP decision aid. METHODS: The HELP-study is designed as a randomized, controlled, open monocenter trial with two parallel groups. The intervention consists of the use of the HELP decision aid brochure, accompanied by a decision coaching session. The primary endpoint is clarity of personal attitude as operationalized by the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) after the decision coaching. Randomization will be performed as stratified block randomization according to the characteristic of preferred decision-making at baseline with a 1:1 allocation. The participants in the control group get usual care, i.e., the doctor-patient conversation takes place without preliminary coaching and deliberation about their preferences and goals. DISCUSSION: Developing decision aids (DA) for (lung) cancer patients with limited prognosis should empower patients to address these aspects and include information about "Best Supportive Care" as a treatment option. Using and implementing the decision aid HELP can not only give patients the possibility to include their personal wishes and values in the decision-making process, but also raise the awareness of shared decision-making itself among these patients and their physicians. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trial Register DRKS00028023. Registered on 8 February 2022.

Communication with patients with limited prognosis-an integrative mixed-methods evaluation study.

PURPOSE: Oncological societies advocate the continuity of care, specialized communication, and early integration of palliative care. To comply with these recommendations, an interprofessional, longitudinally-structured communication concept, the Milestone Communication Approach (MCA), was previously developed, implemented, and evaluated. Our research question is: what are possible explanations from the patient perspective for prognosis and advance care planning being rarely a topic and for finding no differences between MCA and control groups concerning distress, quality of life, and mood? METHODS: A pragmatic epistemological stance guided the study. A mixed-methods design was chosen including a pragmatic randomized trial (n = 171), qualitative interviews with patients (n = 13) and caregivers (n = 12), and a content analysis (133 milestone conversations, 54 follow-up calls). Data analysis involved the pillar integration process. RESULTS: Two pillar themes emerged: 1 "approaching prognosis and advance care planning"; 2 "living with a life-threatening illness". Information on prognosis seemed to be offered, but patients' reactions were diverse. Some patients have to deal with having advanced lung cancer while nonetheless feeling healthy and seem not to be ready for prognostic information. All patients seemed to struggle to preserve their quality of life and keep distress under control. CONCLUSION: Attending to patients' questions, worries and needs early in a disease trajectory seems key to helping patients adjust to living with lung cancer. If necessary clinicians should name their predicament: having to inform about prognosis versus respecting the patients wish to avoid it. Research should support better understanding of patients not wishing for prognostic information to successfully improve communication strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration: German Clinical Trial Register No. DRKS00013649, registration date 12/22/2017, ( https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00013649 ) and No. DRKS00013469, registration date 12/22/2017, ( https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00013469 ).

Factors related to implementation of an interprofessional communication concept in thoracic oncology: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: An innovative patient-centred interprofessional communication concept with advanced lung cancer patients (Heidelberg Milestone Communication Approach, MCA) has been developed and implemented. Role changes and interprofessional communication are challenging in a busy outpatient oncology service. The aim of the study was to present attitudes to interprofessional collaboration of professions in thoracic oncology during the implementation of MCA and to explore factors and experiences healthcare team members associate with its implementation. METHODS: In a longitudinal study, 3 of the 4 subscales of the validated German translation of the University of the West of England Interprofessional Questionnaire (UWE-IP-D) were collected prior to implementation of MCA (t0) with follow-up data collections at 4 months (t1), 10 months (t2) and 17 months (t3). Descriptive analysis included calculating subscale sum scores and categorizing each subscale into positive, neutral and negative attitudes. Interviews and focus groups on implementation and interprofessional collaboration in the context of MCA were conducted with healthcare staff. The topics were analysed deductively, guided by the Professional Interactions factor of the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases (TICD) framework. RESULTS: The survey with 87 staff (44 nurses, 13 physicians, 12 psycho-social staff, 7 therapists, and 11 others) participating at least once found heterogeneous attitudes. 'Communication and Teamwork' and 'Interprofessional Relationships' were characterized by primarily positive attitudes. Neutral attitudes to 'Interprofessional Interaction' were indicated by the majority of respondents. There were no differences between collection times. Fifteen staff members participated in the interviews and focus groups. The main interprofessional interaction factors associated with implementation concerned the knowledge of the MCA and the impact of the intervention on team roles, on information sharing and on transfer processes between wards. Adaptive processes led to a shift in the perception of responsibilities and interprofessional collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: Positive experiences and potential shortfalls in the implementation were observed. Future introductions of interprofessional communication concepts require further activities which should address the attitudes of healthcare professionals towards interprofessional care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS00013469 / Date of registration: 22/12/2017.

[Heidelberg Milestones Communication (HeiMeKOM) - Experiences, Best Practice Examples and Recommendations from the Final Symposium on January 30 and 31 in 2020]. / Heidelberger Meilenstein Kommunikation (HeiMeKOM) ­ Erfahrungen, Best Practice Beispiele und Empfehlungen aus dem Abschluss-Symposium am 30./31. Januar 2020.

The National Cancer Plan emphasises the importance of medical communication and calls for its integration into medical education and training. In this context, the Milestone Communication Approach meets the communicative challenges in dealing with lung cancer patients. Interprofessional tandems, consisting of doctors and nurses, conduct structured conversations at defined moments with patients and their relatives. The concept aims at shared decision making, continuity in the care of lung cancer patients and the early integration of palliative care. During the symposium on the Heidelberg Milestone Communication in January 2020, recommendations on the care situation of lung cancer patients in advanced stages were developed. In addition, the further adaptability of HeiMeKOM to other settings and hospitals and to other diseases was discussed as well as the possibility of implementing such a concept in standard care. This article presents the experiences, best practice examples and recommendations discussed during the symposium in order to enable their extrapolation to other similarly oriented projects. The long-term goal is to transfer the milestone concept to other hospital, primarily certified lung cancer centers, and to ensure permanent funding. For further dissemination of the concept and, above all, to have it established in standard care, health policy awareness and support are required in addition to the integration of the concept in competence catalogues of continuing medical and nursing education.

Impact of molecular alterations on quality of life and prognostic understanding over time in patients with incurable lung cancer: a multicenter, longitudinal, prospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to investigate changes over time in quality of life (QoL) in incurable lung cancer patients and the impact of determinants like molecular alterations (MA). METHODS: In a prospective, longitudinal, multicentric study, we assessed QoL, symptom burden, psychological distress, unmet needs, and prognostic understanding of patients diagnosed with incurable lung cancer at the time of the diagnosis (T0) and after 3 (T1), 6 (T2) and 12 months (T3) using validated questionnaires like FACT-L, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Distress Thermometer (DT), PHQ-4, SCNS-SF-34, and SEIQoL. RESULTS: Two hundred seventeen patients were enrolled, 22 (10%) with reported MA. QoL scores improved over time, with a significant trend for DT, PHQ-4, and SCNS-SF-34. Significant determinants for stable or improving scores over time were survival > 6 months, performance status at the time of diagnosis, and presence of MA. Patients with MA showed better QoL scores (FACT-L at T1 104.4 vs 86.3; at T2 107.5 vs 90.0; at T3 100.9 vs 92.8) and lower psychological distress (NCCN DT at T1 3.3 vs 5; at T2 2.7 vs 4.5; at T3 3.7 vs 4.5; PHQ-4 at T1 2.3 vs 4.1; at T2 1.7 vs 3.6; at T3 2.2 vs 3.6), but also a worsening of the scores at 1 year and a higher percentage of inaccurate prognostic understanding (27 vs 17%) compared to patients without MA. CONCLUSION: Patients with tumors harboring MA are at risk of QoL deterioration during the course of the disease. Physicians should adapt their communication strategies in order to maintain or improve QoL.

Effects of an Interprofessional Communication Approach on Support Needs, Quality of Life, and Mood of Patients with Advanced Lung Cancer: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: To address the support needs of newly diagnosed patients with lung cancer with limited prognosis, the Milestone Communication Approach (MCA) was developed and implemented. The main elements of the MCA are situation-specific conversations along the disease trajectory conducted by an interprofessional tandem of physician and nurse. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effects of MCA on addressing support needs, quality of life, and mood as compared with standard oncological care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A randomized trial was conducted with baseline assessment and follow-up assessments at 3, 6, and 9 months in outpatients with newly diagnosed lung cancer stage IV at a German thoracic oncology hospital. The primary outcome was the Health System and Information Needs subscale of the Short Form Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS-SF34-G) at 3-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the other subscales of the SCNS-SF34-G, the Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life, the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy lung module, the Patient Health Questionnaire for Depression and Anxiety, and the Distress Thermometer. RESULTS: At baseline, 174 patients were randomized, of whom 102 patients (MCA: n = 52; standard care: n = 50) provided data at 3-month follow-up. Patients of the MCA group reported lower information needs at 3-month follow-up (mean ± SD, 33.4 ± 27.5; standard care, 43.1 ± 29.9; p = .033). No effects were found for secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: MCA lowered patient-reported information needs but did not have other effects. MCA contributed to tailored communication because an adequate level of information and orientation set the basis for patient-centered care. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: By addressing relevant issues at predefined times, the Milestone Communication Approach provides individual patient-centered care facilitating the timely integration of palliative care for patients with a limited prognosis. The needs of patients with lung cancer must be assessed and addressed throughout the disease trajectory. Although specific topics may be relevant for all patients, such as information about the disease and associated health care, situations of individual patients and their families must be considered. Additionally, using the short form of the Supportive Care Needs Survey in clinical practice to identify patients' problems might support individually targeted communication and preference-sensitive care.