Evaluation of the Chemotherapy Patient Monitor: an interactive tool for facilitating communication between patients and oncologists during the cancerconsultation

Citation
H. Anderson et al., Evaluation of the Chemotherapy Patient Monitor: an interactive tool for facilitating communication between patients and oncologists during the cancerconsultation, EUR J CA C, 10(2), 2001, pp. 115-123
Citations number
21
Categorie Soggetti
Health Care Sciences & Services
Journal title
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER CARE
ISSN journal
09615423 → ACNP
Volume
10
Issue
2
Year of publication
2001
Pages
115 - 123
Database
ISI
SICI code
0961-5423(200106)10:2<115:EOTCPM>2.0.ZU;2-I
Abstract
Effective communication between oncologists and patients with cancer is of paramount importance. The Chemotherapy Patient Monitor (CPM) is a novel too l designed to assist doctor-patient communication regarding patient concern s and side-effects. Initially, the CPM was assessed in a primary evaluation study of its use during consultations with 26 patients with advanced color ectal cancer tone consultation without, followed by two with, the CPM per p atient). This led to a further dissemination/audit of 34 patients attending oncology centres in the UK, who had completed the survey prior to three co nsultations. The CPM contains a checklist of common side-effects of chemoth erapy regimens used in advanced colorectal cancer, and other common concern s of patients with advanced colorectal cancer. The CPM records the presence of side-effects/concerns, the distress caused, whether patients wish to di scuss them further, and actions taken as a result. Questionnaires explored the views of patients and oncologists in the UK and Spain regarding the eff ectiveness of consultations during a baseline visit conducted without the C PM, and then with the CPM in subsequent visits. These data were then comple mented by the dissemination/audit study of the CPM across nine centres in t he UK. All patients understood the CPM. The CPM was rated as useful by onco logists in 83% of consultations, and did not lengthen 82% of visits. Patien ts felt it had improved the visit in 95% of cases. Responses from patients (100%) and oncologists (84%) indicated willingness to use the CPM for at le ast some consultations in the future. The results of the dissemination/audi t study supported these conclusions. We conclude that the CPM appears to be a useful new tool for improving patient-doctor communication during cancer consultations.