IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v72y2011i7p1085-1095.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring patient-centered communication in cancer care: A literature review and the development of a systematic approach

Author

Listed:
  • McCormack, Lauren A.
  • Treiman, Katherine
  • Rupert, Douglas
  • Williams-Piehota, Pamela
  • Nadler, Eric
  • Arora, Neeraj K.
  • Lawrence, William
  • Street Jr., Richard L.

Abstract

Patient-centered communication (PCC) is a critical element of patient-centered care, which the Institute of Medicine (Committee on Quality of Health Care in America, 2001) promulgates as essential to improving healthcare delivery. Consequently, the US National Cancer Institute's Strategic Plan for Leading the Nation (2006) calls for assessing the delivery of PCC in cancer care. However, no comprehensive measure of PCC exists, and stakeholders continue to embrace different conceptualizations and assumptions about how to measure it. Our approach was grounded in the PCC conceptual framework presented in a recent US National Cancer Institute monograph (Epstein & Street, 2007). In this study, we developed a comprehensive inventory of domains and subdomains for PCC by reviewing relevant literature and theories, interviewing a limited number of cancer patients, and consulting experts. The resulting measurement domains are organized under the six core functions specified in the PCC conceptual framework: exchanging information, fostering healing relationships, recognizing and responding to emotions, managing uncertainty, making decisions, and enabling patient self-management. These domains represent a promising platform for operationalizing the complicated PCC construct. Although this study focused specifically on cancer care, the PCC measurements are relevant to other clinical contexts and illnesses, given that patient-centered care is a goal across all healthcare. Finally, we discuss considerations for developing PCC measures for research, quality assessment, and surveillance purposes. United States Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute (2006). The NCI Strategic Plan for Leading the Nation: To Eliminate the Suffering and Death Due to Cancer. NIH Publication No. 06-5773.

Suggested Citation

  • McCormack, Lauren A. & Treiman, Katherine & Rupert, Douglas & Williams-Piehota, Pamela & Nadler, Eric & Arora, Neeraj K. & Lawrence, William & Street Jr., Richard L., 2011. "Measuring patient-centered communication in cancer care: A literature review and the development of a systematic approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(7), pages 1085-1095, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:72:y:2011:i:7:p:1085-1095
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(11)00063-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Beach, Wayne A. & Easter, David W. & Good, Jeffrey S. & Pigeron, Elisa, 2005. "Disclosing and responding to cancer "fears" during oncology interviews," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 893-910, February.
    2. Epstein, Ronald M. & Franks, Peter & Fiscella, Kevin & Shields, Cleveland G. & Meldrum, Sean C. & Kravitz, Richard L. & Duberstein, Paul R., 2005. "Measuring patient-centered communication in Patient-Physician consultations: Theoretical and practical issues," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(7), pages 1516-1528, October.
    3. Camerer, Colin & Weber, Martin, 1992. "Recent Developments in Modeling Preferences: Uncertainty and Ambiguity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 325-370, October.
    4. Stiles, William B. & Putnam, Samuel M., 1992. "Verbal exchanges in medical interviews: Concepts and measurement," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 347-355, August.
    5. Charles, Cathy & Gafni, Amiram & Whelan, Tim, 1999. "Decision-making in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision-making model," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(5), pages 651-661, September.
    6. Mary C. Politi & Paul K. J. Han & Nananda F. Col, 2007. "Communicating the Uncertainty of Harms and Benefits of Medical Interventions," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 27(5), pages 681-695, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rebecca Feo & Tiffany Conroy & Eva Jangland & Åsa Muntlin Athlin & Maria Brovall & Jenny Parr & Karin Blomberg & Alison Kitson, 2018. "Towards a standardised definition for fundamental care: A modified Delphi study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(11-12), pages 2285-2299, June.
    2. Henriette Witte & Charlotte Handberg, 2019. "An assessment of survivorship care needs of patients with colorectal cancer: The experiences and perspectives of hospital nurses," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(23-24), pages 4310-4320, December.
    3. Olson, Rebecca E. & Smith, Alexandra & Good, Phillip & Neate, Emily & Hughes, Cody & Hardy, Janet, 2021. "Emotionally reflexive labour in end-of-life communication," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 291(C).
    4. Marla L. Clayman & Carma L. Bylund & Betty Chewning & Gregory Makoul, 2016. "The Impact of Patient Participation in Health Decisions Within Medical Encounters," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(4), pages 427-452, May.
    5. Sherry Dahlke & Kathleen F. Hunter & Kelly Negrin & Maya Reshef Kalogirou & Mary Fox & Adrian Wagg, 2019. "The educational needs of nursing staff when working with hospitalised older people," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1-2), pages 221-234, January.
    6. Dean, Marleah, 2016. "“It’s not if I get cancer, it’s when I get cancer”: BRCA-positive patients’ (un)certain health experiences regarding hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 21-27.
    7. Ishikawa, Hirono & Hashimoto, Hideki & Kiuchi, Takahiro, 2013. "The evolving concept of “patient-centeredness” in patient–physician communication research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 147-153.
    8. Nor Azmaniza Azizam & Siti Noorsuriani Maon & Leny Suzana & Nor Intan Shamimi Abdul Aziz, 2018. "Factors Influencing Selected Health Outcome among Patients Attending Universiti Teknologi MARA Medical Centre," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 8(7), pages 500-511, July.
    9. Liberati, Elisa Giulia & Gorli, Mara & Moja, Lorenzo & Galuppo, Laura & Ripamonti, Silvio & Scaratti, Giuseppe, 2015. "Exploring the practice of patient centered care: The role of ethnography and reflexivity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 45-52.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lee, Yin-Yang & Lin, Julia L., 2010. "Do patient autonomy preferences matter? Linking patient-centered care to patient-physician relationships and health outcomes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(10), pages 1811-1818, November.
    2. Ishikawa, Hirono & Hashimoto, Hideki & Kiuchi, Takahiro, 2013. "The evolving concept of “patient-centeredness” in patient–physician communication research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 147-153.
    3. Diamond-Brown, Lauren, 2018. "“It can be challenging, it can be scary, it can be gratifying”: Obstetricians’ narratives of negotiating patient choice, clinical experience, and standards of care in decision-making," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 48-54.
    4. Ruonan Jia & Ellen Furlong & Sean Gao & Laurie R Santos & Ifat Levy, 2020. "Learning about the Ellsberg Paradox reduces, but does not abolish, ambiguity aversion," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-24, March.
    5. Collins, Dorothy L. & Street Jr., Richard L., 2009. "A dialogic model of conversations about risk: Coordinating perceptions and achieving quality decisions in cancer care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1506-1512, April.
    6. Angell, Beth & Bolden, Galina B., 2015. "Justifying medication decisions in mental health care: Psychiatrists' accounts for treatment recommendations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 44-56.
    7. Anne Corcos & François Pannequin & Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde, 2012. "Aversions to Trust," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 78(3), pages 115-134.
    8. Hyojung Tak & Gregory Ruhnke & Ya-Chen Shih, 2015. "The Association between Patient-Centered Attributes of Care and Patient Satisfaction," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 8(2), pages 187-197, April.
    9. Duersch, Peter & Römer, Daniel & Roth, Benjamin, 2013. "Intertemporal stability of ambiguity preferences," Working Papers 0548, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    10. W. Kip Viscusi & Scott DeAngelis, 2018. "Decision irrationalities involving deadly risks," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 225-252, December.
    11. Claudio A. Bonilla & Pablo A. Gutiérrez Cubillos, 2021. "The effects of ambiguity on entrepreneurship," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 63-80, February.
    12. Dominiak, Adam & Duersch, Peter & Lefort, Jean-Philippe, 2012. "A dynamic Ellsberg urn experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 625-638.
    13. Annika Styczynski & Jedamiah Wolf & Somdatta Tah & Arnab Bose, 2014. "When decision-making processes fail: an argument for robust climate adaptation planning in the face of uncertainty," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 478-491, December.
    14. Gérard Mondello, 2020. "Building Belief Systems and Medical Ethics: The Covid-19 Controversies," GREDEG Working Papers 2020-35, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    15. Nagisa Shiiba & Hide-Fumi Yokoo & Voravee Saengavut & Siraprapa Bumrungkit, 2023. "Ambiguity Aversion And Individual Adaptation To Climate Change: Evidence From A Farmer Survey In Northeastern Thailand," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(01), pages 1-29, February.
    16. Constantinos Antoniou & Emilios C. Galariotis & Daniel Read, 2014. "Ambiguity Aversion, Company Size and the Pricing of Earnings Forecasts," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 20(3), pages 633-651, June.
    17. Yoram Halevy & Vincent Feltkamp, 2005. "A Bayesian Approach to Uncertainty Aversion," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(2), pages 449-466.
    18. Mercè Roca & Robin Hogarth & A. Maule, 2006. "Ambiguity seeking as a result of the status quo bias," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 175-194, May.
    19. Sheng-Yu Fan & Jyh-Gang Hsieh, 2020. "The Experience of Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders and End-of-Life Care Discussions among Physicians," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-10, September.
    20. Pamela Giustinelli & Charles F. Manski, 2018. "Survey Measures Of Family Decision Processes For Econometric Analysis Of Schooling Decisions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(1), pages 81-99, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:72:y:2011:i:7:p:1085-1095. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.