LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Publisher: BioMed Central
Journal: Implementation Science
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: R, A990, RA1-1270, Public aspects of medicine, R5-920, Medicine (General), Study Protocol, Medicine, DOAJ:Public Health, DOAJ:Health Sciences

Abstract

Background

The time period from diagnosis to the end of treatment is challenging for newly diagnosed cancer patients. Patients have a substantial need for information, decision aids, and psychosocial support. Recordings of initial oncology consultations improve information recall, reduce anxiety, enhance patient satisfaction with communication, and increase patients' perceptions that the essential aspects of their disease and treatment have been addressed during the consultation. Despite the research evidence supporting the provision of consultation recordings, uptake of this intervention into oncology practice has been slow. The primary aim of this project is to conduct an implementation study to explicate the contextual factors, including use of evidence, that facilitate and impede the transfer and uptake of consultation-recording use in a sample of patients newly diagnosed with breast or prostate cancer.

Methods

Sixteen oncologists from cancer centres in three Canadian cities will participate in this three-phase study. The preimplementation phase will be used to identify and address those factors that are fundamental to facilitating the smooth adoption and delivery of the intervention during the implementation phase. During the implementation phase, breast and prostate cancer patients will receive a recording of their initial oncology consultation to take home. Patient interviews will be conducted in the days following the consultation to gather feedback on the benefits of the intervention. Patients will complete the Digital Recording Use Semi-Structured Interview (DRUSSI) and be invited to participate in focus groups in which their experiences with the consultation recording will be explored. Oncologists will receive a summary letter detailing the benefits voiced by their patients. The postimplementation phase includes a conceptual framework development meeting and a seven-point dissemination strategy.

Discussion

Consultation recording has been used in oncology, family medicine, and other medicine specialties, and despite affirming evidence and probable applications to a large number of diseases and a variety of clinical contexts, clinical adoption of this intervention has been slow. The proposed study findings will advance our conceptual knowledge of the ways to enhance uptake of consultation recordings in oncology.

  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. Hack TF, Pickles T, Bultz BD, Ruether JD, Weir LM, Degner LF, Mackey J: Impact of providing audiotapes of primary adjuvant treatment consultations to women with breast cancer: A multi-site, randomized, controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2003, 21:4138-44.
    • 2. Hack TF, Pickles T, Bultz D, Ruether JD, Degner LF: Impact of providing audiotapes of primary treatment consultations to men with prostate cancer: A multi-site, randomized, controlled trial. Psycho-Oncology 2007, 16:543-52.
    • 3. Hack TF, Pickles T, Bultz BD, Degner LF, Katz A, Davison BJ: Feasibility of an audiotape intervention for patients with cancer: A multicenter, randomized, controlled pilot study. J Psychosocial Oncol 1999, 17:1-15.
    • 4. Deutsch G: Improving communication with oncology patients. Clin Oncol 1992, 4:46-7.
    • 5. Dunn SM, Butow PN, Tattersall MH, Jones QJ, Sheldon JS, Taylor JJ, Sumich MD: General information tapes inhibit recall of the cancer consultation. J Clin Oncol 1993, 11:2279-85.
    • 6. Ford S, Fallowfield L, Hall A, Lewis S: The influence of audiotapes on patient participation in the cancer consultation. Eur J Cancer 1995, 31A:2264-9.
    • 7. Hobgin B, Fallowfield L: Getting it taped: the “bad news” consultation with cancer patients. Br J Hosp Med 1989, 41:330-3.
    • 8. Johnson AA, Adelstein DJ: The use of recorded interviews to enhance physician-patient communication. J Cancer Educ 1991, 6:99-102.
    • 9. McHugh P, Lewis S, Ford S, Newlands E, Rustin G, Coombes C, Smith D, O'Reilly S, Fallowfield L: The efficacy of audiotapes in promoting psychological well-being in cancer patients: a randomised, controlled trial. Br J Cancer 1995, 71:388-92.
    • 10. North N, Cornbleet MA, Knowles G, Leonard RC: Information giving in oncology: a preliminary study of tape-recorder use. Br J Clin Psychol 1992, 31:357-9.
    • 11. Reynolds PM, Sanson-Fisher RE, Poole AD, Harker J, Byrne MJ: Cancer and communication: information giving in an oncology clinic. Br Med J 1981, 282:1449-51.
    • 12. Tattersall MHN, Butow PN, Griffin AM, Dunn SM: The take-home message: patients prefer consultation audiotapes to summary letters. J Clin Oncol 1994, 12:1305-11.
    • 13. Hack TF, Whelan TJ, Olivotto IA, Bultz BD, Weir L, Magwood BD, Ashbury F, Brady J: Standardized audiotape versus recorded consultation to enhance informed consent to a clinical trial in breast oncology: A feasibility study. Psycho-Oncology 2006, 16:371-6.
    • 14. Bruera E, Pituskin E, Calder K, Neumann CM, Hanson J: The addition of an audiocassette recording of a consultation to written recommendations for patients with advanced cancer. Cancer 1999, 86:2420-5.
    • 15. Ong LML, Visser MRM, Lammes FB, van Der Velden J, Kuenen BC, de Haes JC: Effect of providing cancer patients with the audiotaped initial consultation on satisfaction, recall, and quality of life: A randomized, double-blind study. J Clin Oncol 2000, 18:3052-60.
    • 16. Davison BJ, Degner LF: Empowerment of men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer. Cancer Nursing 1997, 20:187-96.
    • 17. McClement SE, Hack TF: Audio-taping the oncology treatment consultation: a literature review. Patient Educ Couns 1999, 36:229-38.
    • 18. Pitkethly M, MacGillivray S, Ryan R: Recordings or summaries of consultations for people with cancer (Review). The Cochrane Collaboration 2008, 4.
    • 19. Tattersall MH, Butow PN: Consultation audio tapes: an underused cancer patient information aid and clinical research tool. Lancet Oncol 2002, 3:431-7.
    • 20. Grimshaw JM, Eccles M, Tetroe J: Implementing clinical guidelines: current evidence and future implications. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2004, 24(Suppl 1):S31-7.
    • 21. Chilvers R, Harrison G, Sipos A, Barley M: Evidence into practice. Application of psychological models of change in evidence-based implementation. Br J Psychiatry 2002, 181:99-101.
    • 22. Ely JW, Osheroff JA, Ebell MH, Chambliss ML, Vinson DC, Stevermer JJ, Pifer EA: Obstacles to answering doctors' questions about patient care with evidence: qualitative study. BMJ 2002, 324:1-7.
    • 23. Haynes B, Haines A: Barriers and bridges to evidence based clinical practice. BMJ 1998, 317:273-6.
    • 24. Pearcey PA: Achieving research-based nursing practice. J Adv Nurs 1995, 22:33-9.
    • 25. Boissel JP, Amsallem E, Cucherat M, Nony P, Haugh MC: Bridging the gap between therapeutic research results and physician prescribing decisions: knowledge transfer, a prerequisite to knowledge translation. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2004, 60:609-16.
    • 26. Rycroft-Malone J: The PARIHS framework - A framework for guiding the implementation of evidence-based practice. J Nurs Care Qual 2004, 19:297-304.
    • 27. Harvey G, Loftus-Hills A, Rycroft-Malone J, Titchen A, Kitson A, McCormack B, Seers K: Getting evidence into practice: the role and function of facilitation. J Adv Nurs 2002, 37:577-88.
    • 28. Kitson A, Harvey G, McCormack B: Approaches to implementing research in practice. Qual in Health Care 1998, 7:149-59.
    • 29. McCormack B, Kitson A, Rycroft-Malone J, Titchen A, Seers K: Getting evidence into practice: the meaning of 'context'. J Adv Nurs 2002, 38:94-104.
    • 30. Rycroft-Malone J, Kitson A, Harvey G, McCormack B, Seers K, Titchen A, Estabrooks C: Ingredients for change: revisiting a conceptual framework. Qual Saf Health Care 2002, 11:174-80.
    • 31. Rycroft-Malone J, Harvey G, Seers K, Kitson A, McCormack B, Titchen A: An exploration of the factors that influence the implementation of evidence into practice. J Clin Nurs 2004, 13:913-24.
    • 32. Helfrich CD, Damschroder LJ, Hagedorn HJ, Daggett GS, Sahay A, Ritchie M, Damush T, Guihan M, Ullrich PM, Stetler CB: A critical synthesis of literature on the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework. Implement Sci 2010.
    • 33. Rogers E: Diffusion of Innovations. 5 edition. New York: Free Press; 2003.
    • 34. West E, Barron DN, Dowsett J, Newton JN: Hierarchies and cliques in the social networks of health care professionals: implications for the design of dissemination strategies. Soc Sci Med 1999, 48:633-46.
    • 35. Buchanan M: Nexus: Small Worlds and the Groundbreaking Theory of Networks New York: WW Norton & Company; 2002.
    • 36. Lomas J: The in-between world of knowledge brokering. BMJ 2007, 334:129-32.
    • 37. Hack TF, Degner LF: Audio-recording important consultations for patients and their families - putting evidence into practice. In Handbook of Communication in Oncology and Palliative Care. Edited by: Kissane DW, Bultz BD, Butow PM, Finlay IG. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010:351-60.
    • 38. Strauss A, Corbin J: Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques Newbury Park: Sage; 1990.
    • 39. Glaser BG, Strauss AL: The Discovery of Grounded Theory New York: Aldine; 1967.
    • 40. Munhall PL: Nursing Research: A Qualitative Perspective. 4 edition. Sudbury, Massachusetts: Jones & Bartlett; 2007.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article