scholarly journals Physician Communication and Patient Understanding of Molecular Testing Terminology

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon M. Blee ◽  
Rachel Pocock Shah ◽  
Ana P. M. Pinheiro ◽  
Jeffrey Switchenko ◽  
Margie Dixon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physician Communication ◽  
Molecular Testing ◽  
Patient Understanding

Physician communication and patient understanding of molecular testing of tumors.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18217-e18217
Author(s):  
Rebecca D. Pentz ◽  
Rachel Hannah Pocock ◽  
Ana M Pinheiro ◽  
Jeffrey M. Switchenko ◽  
Margie D Dixon
Keyword(s):  
Targeted Therapy ◽  
Descriptive Statistics ◽  
Patient Treatment ◽  
Physician Communication ◽  
Molecular Testing ◽  
Patient Understanding ◽  
Future Studies ◽  
Improve Patient ◽  
And Training ◽  
Technical Terms

e18217 Background: Molecular testing is being used with increasing prevalence to diagnose and treat cancer. Novel technical terminology is required to describe this testing to patients; however, it is unknown what language is being used and whether this language is understood, This study aimed to determine how oncologists describe this testing to patients and whether patients understand the technical terms and conceptual topics used by physicians. Methods: Patients and oncologists were consented for this study at one academic and two community hospitals. Conversations including a discussion of molecular testing were recorded; patients were then interviewed to assess their understanding of the terminology and topics described by their physicians. Recordings were transcribed and qualitatively analyzed; descriptive statistics were calculated from the coded data to identify the most frequently used technical terms and conceptual topics, assess overall patient understanding, and calculate an understanding score for each patient. Results: Sixty conversations about molecular testing were observed and recorded between 60 patients and 19 physicians. Thirty-four different technical terms were used by oncologists to describe 5 technical themes (mutation, molecular testing, targeted therapy, driver mutation, and biomarker). Patients understood 45% of undefined technical terms and 43% of defined technical terms. Physicians explained why the molecular testing was ordered in 67% of conversations, with 71% of patients demonstrating understanding, and how the testing would determine the patient’s treatment in 93% of conversations, with 80% of patients demonstrating understanding. Conclusions: Oncologists use variable language to describe molecular testing to patients. Patients do not understand most of the terms being used and defining technical terms does not improve patient understanding. Despite this, oncologists are effectively communicating the purpose of molecular testing and the effect of such testing on patient treatment. Future studies are warranted to determine which language and methods are most effective for describing molecular testing to patients. Guidelines and training for oncologists may be beneficial.

Pathology Consultation Clinic for Patients With Cancer: Meeting the Clinician Behind the Microscope

2021 ◽  
pp. OP.20.00948
Author(s):  
Eliya Shachar ◽  
Shira P. Hasson ◽  
Rochelle Fayngor ◽  
Ido Wolf ◽  
Dov Hershkovitz
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Clinic Visit ◽  
Molecular Testing ◽  
Oncology Patients ◽  
Genetic Sequencing ◽  
Patient Understanding ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Pathology Reports ◽  
Tissue Specimens ◽  
Consultation Services

PURPOSE: Traditionally, pathologists have been branded the doctor's doctor, with a position behind the microscope and limited interaction among patients, despite their rich understanding of disease development and ability to navigate personalized medicine in an era of dynamic molecular testing. METHODS: We piloted a unique patient-pathology consultation service, whereby pathologists review tissue specimens with oncology patients, facilitating a platform for heightening patient understanding of their disease and guiding additional genetic and molecular evaluation. We conducted a retrospective survey assessing patient experience. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients participated in the patient-pathology clinic consultation, with a median age of 64 years and a female predominance (33, 55.9%). The majority of patients were treated for sarcomas (11, 18.6%), breast cancer (10, 17%), and GI tumors (10, 17%). Half of the participants consulted regarding a metastatic disease (28, 47.5%). Thirty patients (50.8%) were referred to additional workup, 11 patients (18.6%) to a second opinion, and 25 participants (42.4%) were counseled to complete genetic sequencing or additional molecular profiles on their pathologic samples. Twelve patients (20.3%) were referred for pathology revision within our institution. Three patients (5.1%) had a change in treatment plan resulting from the clinic visit. The majority (90%) would recommend the patient-pathology clinic to other oncology patients. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the largest study of patient-pathologist consultation services implemented at a single institution. Our work suggests that the program may provide effective patient understanding and reinforce the role of the pathologist as the patient's doctor. This work surfaced the concerns of patients, regarding their pathology reports, and demonstrated that the patient-pathology clinics are a valuable platform to address patients' distress regarding uncertainty of their diagnosis and an integral resource engaging directly with patients, driving additional evaluation and patient-targeted treatment.

Life after Heart Transplantation

2002 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 285-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucia Savadori ◽  
Lorella Lotto ◽  
Rino Rumiati
Keyword(s):  
Heart Transplantation ◽  
Frame Of Reference ◽  
Physician Communication ◽  
Risk Averse ◽  
Medical Team ◽  
Perceived Knowledge ◽  
Surgical Technology ◽  
Postoperative Therapy ◽  
Life Expectation ◽  
Risk Judgments

Progress in surgical technology and in postoperative therapy has remarkably increased life expectation after heart transplantation. Nevertheless, patients still show a resistance to resume a normal life after transplantation, for example, to return to work. In this study we assume that after surgery patients become risk averse because they achieve a positive frame of reference. Because of this propensity toward risk aversion, they withhold from engaging in behavior that their physical condition would allow them in principle. Coherent with this assumption we found that compared to the medical team patients overestimate the degree of risk for routine activities. The study also showed that the representation of risk by the patients could be captured by a dreadfulness factor and a voluntariness factor. Patients' risk judgments were strongly and specifically predicted by the perceived degree of dreadfulness of the activity and, to a lesser extent, by the perceived knowledge of the consequences. Implications for patient-physician communication were explored.

A 10-YEAR EXPERIENCE OF MOLECULAR TESTING IN DMD/BMD MUSCULAR DYSTROPHIES IN GREECE

2006 ◽  
Vol 37 (S 1) ◽  
Author(s):  
K Kekou ◽  
C Sofocleous ◽  
N Bogiatzakis ◽  
H Frissira ◽  
S Youroukos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Muscular Dystrophies ◽  
Molecular Testing
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document