Clinicians communicating with patients experiencing cancer pain

Donna L. Berry, Diana J. Wilkie, Charles Thomas, Paige Fortner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

34 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Provider-patient communication deficits are often implicated as barriers to adequate cancer pain relief. The purpose of this study was to describe verbal communication behaviors and interactions between providers and patients reporting cancer pain. Methods: As part of a multisite clinical trial, we enrolled 17 oncology physician specialists and 84 patient participants who had reported cancer pain or treatment-related pain in the previous week associated with prostate or head and neck cancer. The study baseline clinic visits (N = 84) were audiotaped, transcribed, and entered into non-numerical unstructured data indexing searching and theorizing (NUD·IST) for content analysis. Each text unit in each transcript was coded as to conversation context: pain, additional symptom/side effects, tumor treatment, and/or personal remarks. Clinician questions were coded as either open-ended or closed-ended, clinician interruptions and subject changes were counted, and a measure of verbal dominance was calculated. Results: The clinicians spent over half the conversations doing the talking. We calculated a close-ended to open-ended question ratio of 5.8:1. In 55% of the visits, the patient with cancer was interrupted by the clinician when the patient attempted to provide information or ask a question. Symptoms/side effects were addressed in practically all visits, whereas sensory pain was addressed in 90% of the visits. Conclusions: The clinicians were attentive to daily problems relevant to treatment side effects; however, the results also indicate a pattern of communication during the clinic visit that is typically clinician oriented. The nature of such communication may prevent the patient from sharing significant facts and experiences relevant to cancer pain and thus compromise the quality of pain management.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)374-381
Number of pages8
JournalCancer Investigation
Volume21
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Communication
Ambulatory Care
Pain
Verbal Behavior
Pain Management
Head and Neck Neoplasms
Cancer Pain
Prostate
Neoplasms
Therapeutics
Clinical Trials
Physicians

Keywords

  • Cancer
  • Content analysis
  • Pain
  • Provider-patient communication
  • Radiation oncology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cancer Research
  • Oncology

Cite this

Clinicians communicating with patients experiencing cancer pain. / Berry, Donna L.; Wilkie, Diana J.; Thomas, Charles; Fortner, Paige.

In: Cancer Investigation, Vol. 21, No. 3, 2003, p. 374-381.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Berry, Donna L. ; Wilkie, Diana J. ; Thomas, Charles ; Fortner, Paige. / Clinicians communicating with patients experiencing cancer pain. In: Cancer Investigation. 2003 ; Vol. 21, No. 3. pp. 374-381.
@article{1feb07cff2fd4ee3a91fef09df3f2c9d,
title = "Clinicians communicating with patients experiencing cancer pain",
abstract = "Purpose: Provider-patient communication deficits are often implicated as barriers to adequate cancer pain relief. The purpose of this study was to describe verbal communication behaviors and interactions between providers and patients reporting cancer pain. Methods: As part of a multisite clinical trial, we enrolled 17 oncology physician specialists and 84 patient participants who had reported cancer pain or treatment-related pain in the previous week associated with prostate or head and neck cancer. The study baseline clinic visits (N = 84) were audiotaped, transcribed, and entered into non-numerical unstructured data indexing searching and theorizing (NUD·IST) for content analysis. Each text unit in each transcript was coded as to conversation context: pain, additional symptom/side effects, tumor treatment, and/or personal remarks. Clinician questions were coded as either open-ended or closed-ended, clinician interruptions and subject changes were counted, and a measure of verbal dominance was calculated. Results: The clinicians spent over half the conversations doing the talking. We calculated a close-ended to open-ended question ratio of 5.8:1. In 55{\%} of the visits, the patient with cancer was interrupted by the clinician when the patient attempted to provide information or ask a question. Symptoms/side effects were addressed in practically all visits, whereas sensory pain was addressed in 90{\%} of the visits. Conclusions: The clinicians were attentive to daily problems relevant to treatment side effects; however, the results also indicate a pattern of communication during the clinic visit that is typically clinician oriented. The nature of such communication may prevent the patient from sharing significant facts and experiences relevant to cancer pain and thus compromise the quality of pain management.",
keywords = "Cancer, Content analysis, Pain, Provider-patient communication, Radiation oncology",
author = "Berry, {Donna L.} and Wilkie, {Diana J.} and Charles Thomas and Paige Fortner",
year = "2003",
doi = "10.1081/CNV-120018228",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "374--381",
journal = "Cancer Investigation",
issn = "0735-7907",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinicians communicating with patients experiencing cancer pain

AU - Berry, Donna L.

AU - Wilkie, Diana J.

AU - Thomas, Charles

AU - Fortner, Paige

PY - 2003

Y1 - 2003

N2 - Purpose: Provider-patient communication deficits are often implicated as barriers to adequate cancer pain relief. The purpose of this study was to describe verbal communication behaviors and interactions between providers and patients reporting cancer pain. Methods: As part of a multisite clinical trial, we enrolled 17 oncology physician specialists and 84 patient participants who had reported cancer pain or treatment-related pain in the previous week associated with prostate or head and neck cancer. The study baseline clinic visits (N = 84) were audiotaped, transcribed, and entered into non-numerical unstructured data indexing searching and theorizing (NUD·IST) for content analysis. Each text unit in each transcript was coded as to conversation context: pain, additional symptom/side effects, tumor treatment, and/or personal remarks. Clinician questions were coded as either open-ended or closed-ended, clinician interruptions and subject changes were counted, and a measure of verbal dominance was calculated. Results: The clinicians spent over half the conversations doing the talking. We calculated a close-ended to open-ended question ratio of 5.8:1. In 55% of the visits, the patient with cancer was interrupted by the clinician when the patient attempted to provide information or ask a question. Symptoms/side effects were addressed in practically all visits, whereas sensory pain was addressed in 90% of the visits. Conclusions: The clinicians were attentive to daily problems relevant to treatment side effects; however, the results also indicate a pattern of communication during the clinic visit that is typically clinician oriented. The nature of such communication may prevent the patient from sharing significant facts and experiences relevant to cancer pain and thus compromise the quality of pain management.

AB - Purpose: Provider-patient communication deficits are often implicated as barriers to adequate cancer pain relief. The purpose of this study was to describe verbal communication behaviors and interactions between providers and patients reporting cancer pain. Methods: As part of a multisite clinical trial, we enrolled 17 oncology physician specialists and 84 patient participants who had reported cancer pain or treatment-related pain in the previous week associated with prostate or head and neck cancer. The study baseline clinic visits (N = 84) were audiotaped, transcribed, and entered into non-numerical unstructured data indexing searching and theorizing (NUD·IST) for content analysis. Each text unit in each transcript was coded as to conversation context: pain, additional symptom/side effects, tumor treatment, and/or personal remarks. Clinician questions were coded as either open-ended or closed-ended, clinician interruptions and subject changes were counted, and a measure of verbal dominance was calculated. Results: The clinicians spent over half the conversations doing the talking. We calculated a close-ended to open-ended question ratio of 5.8:1. In 55% of the visits, the patient with cancer was interrupted by the clinician when the patient attempted to provide information or ask a question. Symptoms/side effects were addressed in practically all visits, whereas sensory pain was addressed in 90% of the visits. Conclusions: The clinicians were attentive to daily problems relevant to treatment side effects; however, the results also indicate a pattern of communication during the clinic visit that is typically clinician oriented. The nature of such communication may prevent the patient from sharing significant facts and experiences relevant to cancer pain and thus compromise the quality of pain management.

KW - Cancer

KW - Content analysis

KW - Pain

KW - Provider-patient communication

KW - Radiation oncology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0042859810&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0042859810&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1081/CNV-120018228

DO - 10.1081/CNV-120018228

M3 - Article

C2 - 12901283

AN - SCOPUS:0042859810

VL - 21

SP - 374

EP - 381

JO - Cancer Investigation

JF - Cancer Investigation

SN - 0735-7907

IS - 3

ER -