The Use of Brief Mindfulness Interventions in the Context of Perioperative Care.

The purpose of this review was to synthesize and categorize the literature on the use of brief mindfulness interventions for both patients and physicians across the spectrum of perioperative care. Web-based discovery services and discipline-specific databases were queried. Brief mindfulness interventions were defined as sessions lasting 30 min or less on any single occasion, with a total practice accumulation not exceeding 100 min per week, and a duration of up to 4 weeks. Study screening and data extraction were facilitated through the Covidence software platform. After screening 1047 potential studies, 201 articles were identified based on initial abstract and title screening; 10 studies ultimately met inclusion criteria. All ten studies were published between 2019 and 2023; most (n = 9) reports focused on patients (total joint arthroplasty, n = 3; stereotactic breast biopsy, n = 2; minimally invasive foregut surgery, n = 1; septorhinoplasty, n = 1; cardiac surgery, n = 1; and other/multiple procedures, n = 1); one studied investigated mindfulness interventions among surgeons. The duration of the interventions varied (3 min to 29 min). The most common issue that the mindfulness intervention aimed to address was pain (n = 6), followed by narcotic use (n = 3), anxiety (n = 2), delirium (n = 1), or patient satisfaction (n = 1). While most studies included a small sample size and had inconclusive results, brief mindfulness interventions were noted to impact various health-related outcomes, including mental health outcomes, anxiety, and pain perception. Mindfulness interventions may be a scalable, low-cost, time-limited intervention that has the potential to optimize well-being and surgical outcomes broadly construed.

Assessing the Impact of Provider Training and Perceived Barriers on the Provision of Spiritual Care: a Mixed Methods Study.

The current study evaluated formal training around spiritual care for healthcare providers and the relationships between that training, perceived barriers to spiritual care, and frequency of inquiry around spiritual topics. A mixed methods explanatory sequential design was used. Quantitative methods included an online survey administered to providers at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center. Main and interactive effects of formal training and barriers to spiritual care on frequency of inquiry around spiritual topics were assessed with two-way ANOVA. Qualitative follow-up explored provider strategies to engage spiritual topics. Among 340 quantitative participants, most were female (82.1%) or White (82.6%) with over one-half identifying as religious (57.5%). The majority were nurses (64.7%) and less than 10% of all providers (n = 26) indicated formal training around spiritual care. There were main effects on frequency of inquiry around spiritual topics for providers who indicated "personal discomfort" as a barrier (p < 0.001), but not formal training (p = 0.526). Providers who indicated "personal discomfort" as a barrier inquired about spirituality less frequently, regardless of receiving formal training (M = 8.0, SD = 1.41) or not (M = 8.76, SD = 2.96). There were no interactive effects between training and "may offend patients" or "personal discomfort" (p = 0.258 and 0.125, respectively). Qualitative analysis revealed four strategies with direct and indirect approaches: (1) permission-giving, (2) self-awareness/use-of-self, (3) formal assessment, and (4) informal assessment. Training for providers should emphasize self-awareness to address intrapersonal barriers to improve the frequency and quality of spiritual care for cancer patients.

Surgeon Strategies to Patient-Centered Decision-making in Cancer Care: Validation and Applications of a Conceptual Model.

We sought to construct and validate a model of cancer surgeon approaches to patient-centered decision-making (PCDM) and compare applications of that model relative to surgical specialties. Ten PCDM strategies were assessed using a cross-sectional survey administered online to 295 board-certified cancer surgeons. Structural equation modeling was used to empirically validate and compare approaches to PCDM. Within the full sample, 7 strategies comprised a latent construct labeled, "physical & emotional accessibility," associated with surgeon approaches to PCDM (ß = 0.37, p < .05). Three individual strategies were included: "expectations (Q4)" (ß = 0.52, p < .05), "decision preferences (Q5) (ß = 0.47, p < .05), and "access medical information (Q3)" (ß = 0.75). Surgical specialties for subgroup analysis were classified as general/other (67.6%) or hepato-pancreato-biliary and upper gastrointestinal (HPB/UGI) (34.2%). For general/other surgeons, 7 individual strategies composed the model of surgeon approaches to PCDM, with "time (Q6) (ß = 0.70, p < .001) and "therapeutic relationship building (Q9)" (ß = 0.69, p < .001) being the strongest predictors. The HPB/UGI model included 2 latent constructs labeled "physical accessibility" (ß = 0.72, p < .05) and "creating a decision-making dialogue" (ß = 0.62) as well as the individual strategy, "effective communication (Q8)" (ß = 0.51, p < .05). Although models of surgeon PCDM varied, there were 4 overlapping strategies, including effective communication. Tailoring models of PCDM may improve surgeon uptake and thus, overall patient satisfaction with their cancer care.

Marginalized patient identities and the patient-physician relationship in the cancer care context: a systematic scoping review.

PURPOSE: We sought to examine and categorize the current evidence on patient-physician relationships among marginalized patient populations within the context of cancer care using a systemic scoping review approach. METHODS: Web-based discovery services (e.g., Google Scholar) and discipline-specific databases (e.g., PubMed) were queried for articles on the patient-physician relationship among marginalized cancer patients. The marginalized populations of interest included (1) race and ethnicity, (2) gender, (3) sexual orientation and gender identity, (4) age, (5) disability, (6) socioeconomic status, and (7) geography (rural/urban). Study screening and data extraction were facilitated through the Covidence software platform. RESULTS: Of the 397 screened studies, 37 met study criteria-most articles utilized quantitative methodologies (n = 28). The majority of studies focused on racial and ethnic cancer disparities (n = 27) with breast cancer (n = 20) as the most common cancer site. Trust and satisfaction with the provider were the most prevalent issues cited in the patient-physician relationship. Differences in patient-physician communication practices and quality were also frequently discussed. Overall, studies highlighted the need for increased culturally congruent care among providers. CONCLUSION: Results from this review suggest marginalized cancer patients face significant barriers in establishing culturally and linguistically congruent patient-physician relationships. Future studies should focus on the intersectionality of multiple marginalized identities and optimization of the patient-physician relationship.

Do Religious/Spiritual Preferences and Needs of Cancer Patients Vary Based on Clinical- and Treatment-Level Factors?

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to characterize the religion and spiritual (R&S) needs of patients who undergo cancer-directed surgery. In addition, we seek to examine how R&S needs vary based on R&S identity and clinical and surgical treatment characteristics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was administered to potential participants who were recruited through outpatient clinics and online. Respondent desires for R&S resources and engagement with the healthcare team  around R&S topics were assessed. RESULTS: Among 383 potential participants who were identified, 236 respondents were included in the analytic cohort. Mean age was 58.8 (SD 12.10) years, and most participants were female (75.8%) and White/Caucasian (94.1%). The majority (78.4%) identified as currently cancer free. Commonly treated malignancies included breast (43.2%), male reproductive (8.9%), skin (8.5%), and gastrointestinal (GI) (7.2%). Two-thirds of the respondents indicated a desire to have R&S incorporated into their cancer treatment (63.3%). Patients who identified as highly/moderately religious reported wanting R&S more often (highly religious: 95.2% versus moderately religious: 71.4% vs. nonreligious but spiritual: 4.5%). On multivariable analysis, patients who believed their health would improve in the future were more likely to report wanting R&S service (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.0-4.7) as well as wanting to engage their healthcare providers on R&S topics (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.2-4.7). In contrast, perception of current or future health status was not associated with patient desire for the actual surgeon/doctor him/herself to be involved in R&S activities (OR 1.83, 95% CI 0.97-3.45). CONCLUSIONS: Two-thirds of patients undergoing cancer-directed surgery expressed a desire to have R&S incorporated into their cancer treatment. Incorporating R&S into cancer treatment can help a subset of patients throughout their cancer experience.

Comparing Surgeon Approaches to Patient-Centered Cancer Care Using Vignette Methodology.

BACKGROUND: We sought to characterize surgeon perceptions of patient attachment-related behaviors relative to patient-centered approaches during treatment decision-making within the clinical encounter. METHODS: An online survey including clinical vignettes was sent to board-certified surgeons to assess their approach to patient-centered treatment decision-making. Within these vignettes, patient behaviors associated with attachment styles (secure vs 3 insecure subtypes: avoidant, anxious, and fearful) were fixed and patient factors (age, race, occupation, and gender) were randomized. Analysis included repeated measures mixed-effects linear regression. RESULTS: Among the 208 respondents, the majority were male (65.4%) and White/Caucasian (84.5%) with an average age of 51.6 years (SD = 9.9). Most surgeons had been in practice for more than 10 years (66.8%) and treated adult patients (77.4%). Surgical specializations included breast (27.2%), HPB (35.0%), and broad-based/general (21.8%). Patient race, age, and gender did not impact surgeons' patient-centered approach to treatment decision-making (all ps > 0.05). However, when the "patient" had a white collar occupation and were securely attached, surgeons reported a greater likeliness to spend equal time presenting all treatment options (p = 0.02 and p < 0.001, respectively) and believe the patient wanted an active role in decision-making (p = 0.01 and p < 0.001, respectively). Surgeons reported being least likely to agree with a patient's treatment decision (p < 0.001) and an increased likelihood of being directive (p = 0.002) when patients exhibited behaviors associated with avoidant attachment. CONCLUSION: Attachment-related behaviors were associated with differences in surgeon approaches to patient-centered decision-making. Attachment styles may offer a framework for providers to understand patient behaviors and needs, thereby providing insight on how to tailor their approach and provide optimal patient-centered care.

Assessing Differences in Cancer Surgeon Approaches to Patient-Centered Decision-Making Using Vignette-Based Methodology.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to assess surgeon-patient-centered decision-making (PCDM) strategies relative to surgeon and patient factors. METHODS: Approaches to PCDM were evaluated using a cross-sectional survey based on clinical vignettes assessing surgeon likeliness (0 = not at all likely, 100 = very likely) to utilize PCDM strategies. Data were analyzed using repeated-measures mixed-effects linear regression. Adjusted estimates are provided as least-squares mean (LSM) values. RESULTS: The final analytic sample consisted of 208 respondents (58.5% response rate); the majority of respondents were male (67.7%) and Caucasian (82.0%) with an average age of 51.6 years (standard deviation, SD = 9.9 years, range 34.0-78.0 years). Specialties included breast (18.9%), hepatopancreatobiliary (21.4%), and other (59.7%). Surgeons practicing at academic (versus nonacademic) hospitals were less likely to be directive (LSM: 66.2 vs. 70.3, p = 0.004), spend equal time discussing all treatment options (LSM: 77.9 vs. 82.3, p = 0.001), and make explicit treatment recommendations (LSM: 67.7 vs. 71.7, p = 0.005). Surgeons who specialized in breast cancer (versus other specialties), in practice 10+ years (versus < 10 years), and female (versus male) were more likely to spend time discussing all treatment options (LSM: 82.8 vs. 77.3; 81.6 vs. 78.6; and 82.1 vs. 78.0, all p < 0.05). Surgeons perceived patients who had blue-collar (versus white-collar) jobs as less likely to want active participation in decision-making (LSM: 62.9 vs. 65.6, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Surgeon approaches to PCDM varied based on a number of surgeon and patient characteristics. Further studies are needed to understand how surgeon PCDM strategies can be tailored to specific care contexts and patient needs.