Video conferencing long distance caregivers during oncology appointments: Implications for clinical practice.

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

e24198 Background: Distance Caregivers (DCGs) – caregivers living > 1 hour away from the patient – face unique challenges regarding frustration at receiving second hand information about the patient’s condition and uncertainty regarding how to assist the patient. Videoconferencing allows DCGs to connect for the patient’s oncology appointments while avoiding costly travel expenses and time away from work and family. Methods: 441 patient-DCG dyads enrolled in a randomized controlled trial at a large, urban comprehensive cancer center. Patients of all cancer types were eligible if they had monthly oncologist appointments. DCGs were randomized to one of three arms. Arm 1 – received four monthly videoconference coaching sessions with a nurse or social worker, connected for the patient’s oncology appointments, and had access to a website designed for DCGs; Arm 2 – connected for the patient’s oncology appointments over four months and had access to the DCG website; Arm 3 – received access to the DCG website. To evaluate the impact on clinical practice, outpatient oncology appointments were timed. Helpfulness of the intervention was rated from 0-10 with higher scores representing greater amounts of helpfulness. Descriptive statistics, ANOVA, and Pearson’s correlation were conducted to describe features, determine group differences, and identify relationships among variables. Results: Mean helpfulness ratings were 9.06 (patients), 9.30 (local caregivers), 9.08 (DCGs), and 7.98 (oncologists). Average appointment times (in minutes) for Arm 1, Arm 2, and Arm 3 were 19.63 (SD = 7.69), 21.34 (SD = 9.95), and 17.80 (SD = 10.20), respectively. Arm 2 had significantly longer appointments than Arm 3 (mean difference: 3.54, p = .025). No relationships were found between length of appointment time and helpfulness ratings. Conclusions: The videoconferencing intervention was well-received by oncologists, patients, and DCGs. Appointments were longest in Arm 2, followed by Arm 1, then Arm 3 (control). It makes sense that connecting an additional person lengthened the meetings, but it was noteworthy that Arm 2 was longest. DCGs in Arm 2 (who did not have the coaching) likely had more unanswered questions that were discussed with the oncologist compared to Arm 1 DCGs. Cancer centers should consider this when implementing videoconferencing technology. Clinical trial information: NCT02666183 .