TrialReader


Involving Family to Improve Communication in Breast Cancer Care

NCT03283553 — Not applicable, Completed, 132 participants, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins

ClinicalTrials Daily  ·  Areas  ·  Conditions  ·  Drugs  ·  Sponsors  ·  
RegistryNCT03283553
StatusCompleted
PhaseNot applicable
Study typeInterventional; randomized, parallel, masking: double, health services research
Enrollment132 (Actual)
SponsorSidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins (Other); collaborators: Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation
ConditionsActive Breast Cancer Treatment
InterventionsChecklist, MyChart, OpenNotes, Usual Care (Other)
Datesstart 2017-07-20, primary completion 2019-07-15, completion 2019-11-07, first posted 2017-09-14, last updated 2021-03-19
Locations2 sites in United States

Related Papers Related Patents Related Grants Related Experts
AI Assistant Save
All trials for Active Breast Cancer Treatment All trials of Checklist, MyChart, OpenNotes All trials of Usual Care

-Summary

This study evaluates a multi-component communication intervention in the outpatient setting to strengthen communication among patients being actively treated for breast cancer and their support network of family members and friends. The intervention comprises: 1.) a patient-family agenda-setting checklist completed immediately before a regularly scheduled oncology visit, 2.) facilitated registration for the patient portal (for patient and family member, as desired by the patient), and 3.) education (as relevant) on access to clinician electronic visit notes. The study team will conduct a two-group randomized trial to examine feasibility of the protocol and to compare quality of communication with oncology providers, understanding of patient's cancer, confidence in managing patient's care and satisfaction with cancer care between patient-companion dyads who are in the intervention group (n=60) and patient-companion dyads who receive usual medical oncology care (n=60).

Expand all sections  ·  Collapse all

+Detailed description

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among survivors in the US. Most patients with breast cancer receive help from family in making complex decisions about treatment, handling logistically demanding care coordination, and managing symptoms and side effects. Although family members (as defined by each patient) play a vital role in cancer care, they are not formally recognized or assessed in care delivery, and their need for information and support is typically unmet. Lack of attention to family in care delivery is an important gap that too often leaves families without adequate information about patient health and treatments. This may prevent families and patients from engaging in open conversations, cause them unnecessary anxiety, and negatively affect the quality of cancer care and delivery.

Communication is particularly important in cancer care, as the optimal course of action is determined through longitudinal discussion of prognosis, treatments, and patient goals, preferences, and concerns. Strategies to improve communication for serious illnesses such as cancer have been developed, but typically target a specific decision, conversation, or setting, most often the inpatient hospital. There is growing agreement that communication among patients, families, and providers should be initiated early and continue throughout the disease trajectory. However, little is known about how to provide both patients and families with access to timely information about patient health and mechanisms to communicate directly with health care providers, as proposed in this study.

The goal of this study is to test a multicomponent intervention to strengthen communication and longitudinal partnerships among women with breast cancer and their family members. Recent work by the study team has demonstrated the feasibility, acceptability, and benefit of intervention components which will be combined into a single model of care. The study team's preliminary studies indicate that clarifying patient and family expectations regarding the role of family and providing family with timely and comprehensive information about patient health (as desired by the patient) leads to more effective family involvement, more frequent patient-family-provider interactions, more patient-centered communication, and greater preparedness to manage care.

This study will evaluate the feasibility of delivering a multicomponent communication intervention in the outpatient setting comprising: 1.) a patient-family agenda-setting checklist completed immediately before a regularly scheduled medical oncology visit with a participating medical oncologist, 2.) facilitated registration for the patient portal (for patient and family member, as desired by the patient), and 3.) education (as relevant) on access to doctor's electronic visit notes. The study will focus on patients who typically attend medical oncology visits with a family member or trusted friend who are already present and involved in communication. This study will enroll up to 132 patients who are on active treatment for breast cancer, up to 132 family member/friend "companions" and up to 14 medical oncology providers. The study team will compare patients and companions who are in the intervention group (n=60 dyads) with patients and companions who are in the control group and receive usual medical oncology care (n=60 dyads). This study will compare quality of communication with medical oncology providers, understanding of patient's cancer, confidence in managing patient's care, satisfaction with cancer care, and symptoms of anxiety after 3 months, 9 months, and 12 months of follow-up.

+Arms and interventions

ArmTypeInterventionsDescription
Multicomponent InterventionExperimentalOther: Checklist, MyChart, OpenNotes1.) A one-page paper-pencil agenda setting checklist completed immediately before a regularly scheduled medical oncology visit to elicit and align patient and companion perspectives regarding issues to discuss with the provider, and to stimulate discussion about the role of the companion in the visit, 2.) facilitated registration for the patient portal (for patient and family member, as desired by the patient), and 3.) education (as relevant) on access to doctor's electronic visit notes.
Usual CarePlacebo comparatorOther: Usual CareCare as usual with the medical oncologist.
  • Checklist, MyChart, OpenNotes (Other): 1\) Patient-family agenda-setting checklist, 2) Facilitated proxy registration for MyChart, and 3) Education on access to doctor's electronic visit notes.
  • Usual Care (Other): Routine medical oncology care

+Outcome measures

Primary outcomes

  • Between-group Differences in Patient Complete Illness Understanding at 9-months [9 months]: Illness understanding was measured by 4 questions regarding knowledge that is considered to be essential to making informed treatment decisions in serious illness, including: 1.) understanding of illness, 2.) knowledge of disease status, 3.) awareness of disease state, and 4.) expectation of duration of life. We summed responses to each item (coded 1 or 0 to reflect the presence or absence of understanding), yielding a score ranging from 0 to 4. Participants with perfect scores reflecting complete illness understanding (4 of 4 correct responses) were compared to all others.
  • Between-group Differences in Mean Patient Satisfaction With Cancer Care at 9-months [9 months]: Outcome was measured with the short-form 10-item version of the Family Satisfaction with Cancer Care (FAMCARE) questionnaire, a validated multi-item instrument that was developed to assess family perspective on cancer care. Respondents are asked to rate 10 items that relate to emotional support, personalization of care, support of decision-making, accessibility, and coordination. Response categories include "very satisfied" (2 points), "satisfied" (1 point), or "not satisfied" (0 points), and the 10-items may be summed to yield a total score (range: 0 to 20) with higher scores reflecting greater satisfaction.
  • Between-group Differences in Patient Anxiety at 9-months [9 months]: Outcome was measured using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2-item questionnaire (GAD-2), a well-established 2-item instrument that asks about symptoms of anxiety in a two-week recall period from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). Full range is 0-6 with higher scores indicating more anxiety. Symptoms of anxiety refer to a cutpoint of 3+ on the GAD-2.
  • Between-group Differences in Care Partner Complete Illness Understanding at 9-months [9 months]: Illness understanding was measured by 4 questions regarding knowledge that is considered to be essential to making informed treatment decisions in serious illness, including: 1.) understanding of illness, 2.) knowledge of disease status, 3.) awareness of disease state, and 4.) expectation of duration of life. We summed responses to each item (coded 1 or 0 to reflect the presence or absence of understanding), yielding a score ranging from 0 to 4. Participants with perfect scores reflecting complete illness understanding (4 of 4 correct responses) were compared to all others.
  • Between-group Differences in Care Partner Satisfaction With Cancer Care at 9-months [9 months]: Outcome was measured with the short-form 10-item version of the FAMCARE (Family Satisfaction with Cancer Care) questionnaire, a validated multi-item instrument that was developed to assess family perspective on cancer care. Respondents are asked to rate 10 items that relate to emotional support, personalization of care, support of decision-making, accessibility, and coordination. Response categories include "very satisfied" (2 points), "satisfied" (1 point), or "not satisfied" (0 points), and the 10-items may be summed to yield a total score (range: 0 to 20) with higher scores reflecting greater satisfaction.
  • Between-group Differences in Care Partner Anxiety at 9-months [9 months]: Outcome was measured using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2-item questionnaire (GAD-2), a well-established 2-item instrument that asks about symptoms of anxiety in a two-week recall period from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). Full range is 0-6 with higher scores indicating more anxiety. Symptoms of anxiety refer to a cutpoint of 3+ on the GAD-2.

Secondary outcomes

  • Between-group Differences in Patient Quality of Communication at 9-months [9 months]: Outcome was measured using the Quality of Communication (QC) Scale, a validated 10-item instrument to assess quality of communication between the participant and the medical oncology team. The scale for each item is from 0 ('Worst you can imagine') to 10 ('Best you can imagine'). Full range is 0-100 with higher scores indicating higher perceived quality of communication.
  • Between-group Differences in Care Partner Quality of Communication at 9-months [9 months]: Outcome was measured using the Quality of Communication (QC) Scale, a validated 10-item instrument to assess quality of communication between the participant and the medical oncology team. The scale for each item is from 0 ('Worst you can imagine') to 10 ('Best you can imagine'). Full range is 0-100 with higher scores indicating higher perceived quality of communication.

+Eligibility

Sex: All, ages: 18 Years to any

Inclusion Criteria:

1. Medical oncology patient: Established patient of participating medical oncologist greater than 18 years of age, have a diagnosis of early stage or advanced breast cancer, are receiving active systemic therapy (in the form of IV adjuvant systemic therapy if early stage), are English speaking, able to provide informed consent themselves, and identify a family member who they would like to include in their care.
2. Care partner: Family member (e.g. spouse, adult child, parent, adult sibling or other relative) or unpaid friend who regularly accompanies patient to medical oncology visits.
3. Medical oncology provider: Practicing medical oncology provider at a participating clinic who provides care to patients with breast cancer.

Exclusion Criteria:

1. Medical oncology patients: Younger than 18 years, pregnant, not being treated for breast cancer, do not attend medical oncology visits with family member or unpaid friend or unwilling for their family member or unpaid friend to be contacted.
2. Care partner: Paid non-family member who accompanies patient to visits.

+Posted results

Participant flow

MilestoneMulticomponent InterventionUsual Care
Started6963
Patient baseline interview6962
Patient 3-month interview6760
Patient 9-month interview6357
Patient 12-month interview5950
Completed5950
Not completed1013

Outcome results

  • Between-group Differences in Patient Complete Illness Understanding at 9-months (Primary), Count of participants, Participants: Multicomponent Intervention 42; Usual Care 38 (p 0.264)
  • Between-group Differences in Mean Patient Satisfaction With Cancer Care at 9-months (Primary), Mean, score on a scale: Multicomponent Intervention 16.9 +/- 3.9; Usual Care 15.4 +/- 5.4 (p 0.555)
  • Between-group Differences in Patient Anxiety at 9-months (Primary), Count of participants, Participants: Multicomponent Intervention 7; Usual Care 8 (p 0.619)
  • Between-group Differences in Care Partner Complete Illness Understanding at 9-months (Primary), Count of participants, Participants: Multicomponent Intervention 44; Usual Care 39 (p 0.532)
  • Between-group Differences in Care Partner Satisfaction With Cancer Care at 9-months (Primary), Mean, score on a scale: Multicomponent Intervention 15.7 +/- 4.4; Usual Care 15.4 +/- 5.5 (p 0.108)
  • Between-group Differences in Care Partner Anxiety at 9-months (Primary), Count of participants, Participants: Multicomponent Intervention 8; Usual Care 10 (p 0.405)
  • Between-group Differences in Patient Quality of Communication at 9-months (Secondary), Mean, units on a scale: Multicomponent Intervention 89.8 +/- 11.6; Usual Care 88.0 +/- 18.7 (p 0.412)
  • Between-group Differences in Care Partner Quality of Communication at 9-months (Secondary), Mean, units on a scale: Multicomponent Intervention 90.3 +/- 10.3; Usual Care 86.2 +/- 15.9 (p 0.872)
  • Between-group Differences in Care Partner Registration for Shared Access to the Patient Portal at 9-months (Post hoc), Count of participants, Participants: Multicomponent Intervention 49; Usual Care 1 (p <0.001)
  • Between-group Differences in Patient Views of Clinical Visit Notes in the Patient Portal at 9-months (Post hoc), Count of participants, Participants: Multicomponent Intervention 38; Usual Care 18 (p 0.003)
  • Between-group Differences in Care Partner Views of Clinical Visit Notes in the Patient Portal at 9-months (Post hoc), Count of participants, Participants: Multicomponent Intervention 30; Usual Care 0 (p <0.001)
  • Between-group Differences in Patient Exchange of Direct Messages in the Patient Portal at 9-months (Post hoc), Count of participants, Participants: Multicomponent Intervention 52; Usual Care 38 (p 0.128)
  • Between-group Differences in Care Partner Exchange of Direct Messages in the Patient Portal at 9-months (Post hoc), Count of participants, Participants: Multicomponent Intervention 3; Usual Care 0 (p 0.247)

Adverse events

Time frame: 12 months

ArmDeathsSerious adverse eventsOther adverse events
Multicomponent Intervention5/69 (7.2%)0/69 (0.0%)0/69 (0.0%)
Usual Care10/63 (15.9%)0/63 (0.0%)0/63 (0.0%)

+Locations (2)

FacilityCityCountryStatus
Johns Hopkins Kimmel Cancer Center - Medical OncologyBaltimore, MarylandUnited States
Johns Hopkins Kimmel Cancer Center at Green Spring Station - Medical OncologyLutherville, MarylandUnited States

+Publications

  • Wolff JL, Roter DL, Barron J, Boyd CM, Leff B, Finucane TE, Gallo JJ, Rabins PV, Roth DL, Gitlin LN. A tool to strengthen the older patient-companion partnership in primary care: results from a pilot study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2014 Feb;62(2):312-9. doi: 10.1111/jgs.12639. Epub 2014 Jan 13. PMID 24417565
  • Wolff JL, Berger A, Clarke D, Green JA, Stametz R, Yule C, Darer JD. Patients, care partners, and shared access to the patient portal: online practices at an integrated health system. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2016 Nov;23(6):1150-1158. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocw025. Epub 2016 Mar 28. PMID 27026614
  • Delbanco T, Walker J, Bell SK, Darer JD, Elmore JG, Farag N, Feldman HJ, Mejilla R, Ngo L, Ralston JD, Ross SE, Trivedi N, Vodicka E, Leveille SG. Inviting patients to read their doctors' notes: a quasi-experimental study and a look ahead. Ann Intern Med. 2012 Oct 2;157(7):461-70. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-7-201210020-00002. PMID 23027317
  • Results publication: Wolff JL, Aufill J, Echavarria D, Heughan JA, Lee KT, Connolly RM, Fetting JH, Jelovac D, Papathakis K, Riley C, Stearns V, Thorner E, Zafman N, Levy HP, Dy SM, Wolff AC. Sharing in care: engaging care partners in the care and communication of breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019 Aug;177(1):127-136. doi: 10.1007/s10549-019-05306-9. Epub 2019 Jun 4. PMID 31165374
  • Results publication: Wolff JL, Aufill J, Echavarria D, Blackford AL, Connolly RM, Fetting JH, Jelovac D, Papathakis K, Riley C, Stearns V, Zafman N, Thorner E, Levy HP, Guo A, Dy SM, Wolff AC. A randomized intervention involving family to improve communication in breast cancer care. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2021 Feb 12;7(1):14. doi: 10.1038/s41523-021-00217-9. PMID 33579966

+Study documents

+Investigators

My Notes