期刊论文详细信息
BMC Cancer
Effect of individualized communication skills training on physicians’ discussion of clinical trials in oncology: results from a randomized controlled trial
Research Article
Darcey D. Terris1  Michael Wirsching2  Kurt Fritzsche2  Alexander Wuensch3  Gabriele Ihorst4  Hartmut Bertz5  Tanja Goelz6  Juergen Bengel7 
[1] Center for Family Research, University of Georgia, 1095 College Station Rd, 30602, Athens, GA, USA;Center for Mental Health, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, Hauptstr. 8, D-79104, Freiburg, Germany;Center for Mental Health, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, Hauptstr. 8, D-79104, Freiburg, Germany;Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Langerstrasse 3, D-81675, Munich, Germany;Clinical Trials Unit (CTU), Medical Center – University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, Elsaesser Str. 2, D-79110, Freiburg, Germany;Department of Internal Medicine I (Hematology and Oncology), Medical Center – University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, Hugstetterstr. 55, D-79106, Freiburg, Germany;Department of Internal Medicine I (Hematology and Oncology), Medical Center – University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, Hugstetterstr. 55, D-79106, Freiburg, Germany;Center for Pediatrics, Department of General Pediatrics, Adolescent Medicine and Neonatology, Medical Center – University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, Mathildenstr.1, D-79106, Freiburg, Germany;Institute of Psychology, Department Rehabilitation Psychology and Psychotherapy, Albert-Ludwigs-University Freiburg, Engelbergerstr. 41, D-79106, Freiburg, Germany;
关键词: Communication skills training;    CST;    Oncology;    Randomized clinical trials;    Informed consent;   
DOI  :  10.1186/s12885-017-3238-0
 received in 2016-06-09, accepted in 2017-03-28,  发布年份 2017
来源: Springer
PDF
【 摘 要 】

BackgroundDiscussing randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with cancer patients is one of the most challenging communication tasks a physician faces. Only two prior Communication Skills Trainings (CSTs) focused on RCTs in oncology have been reported. Their results demonstrated the need for further improvement. We developed and evaluated an enhanced, individually-tailored CST focused on improving physicians’ communication during discussions of RCTs.MethodsThe CST focused on personal learning goals derived from video pre-assessment that were addressed in a 1.5-day group workshop and one-on-one coaching sessions. Forty physicians were recruited and randomly assigned to intervention and control groups. Video-recorded standardized consultations with actor-patients were utilized. As a primary outcome (1), training success was evaluated by blinded raters using a previously developed checklist. Change in checklist items was evaluated between pre- and post-training assessment and compared against control group results. As a secondary outcome (2), the physicians’ feeling of confidence was assessed by a questionnaire.Results(1) Significant improvements in the intervention group were observed for the score on all items (p = 0.03), for the subgroup of content-specific items (p = 0.02), and for the global rating of communication competence (p = 0.04). The improvement observed for the subgroup of general communication skill items did not achieve significance (p = 0.20). (2) The feeling of confidence improved in nine out of ten domains.ConclusionWhile the individually-tailored CST program significantly improved the physicians’ discussions of RCTs, specifically related to discussion content, what remains unknown is the influence of such programs in practice on participant recruitment rates.The study was registered retrospectively in 2010/07/22 under DRKS-ID: DRKS00000492.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s). 2017

【 预 览 】
附件列表
Files Size Format View
RO202311106660523ZK.pdf 472KB PDF download
Fig. 1 40KB Image download
【 图 表 】

Fig. 1

【 参考文献 】
  • [1]
  • [2]
  • [3]
  • [4]
  • [5]
  • [6]
  • [7]
  • [8]
  • [9]
  • [10]
  • [11]
  • [12]
  • [13]
  • [14]
  • [15]
  • [16]
  • [17]
  • [18]
  • [19]
  • [20]
  • [21]
  • [22]
  • [23]
  • [24]
  • [25]
  • [26]
  • [27]
  • [28]
  • [29]
  • [30]
  • [31]
  • [32]
  • [33]
  • [34]
  • [35]
  • [36]
  文献评价指标  
  下载次数:10次 浏览次数:8次