Communication Skills Training In Oncology Research Articles

Communication skills training for healthcare professionals in oncology over the past decade: a systematic review of reviews.

Effective communication in cancer care requires complex communication skills of healthcare professionals (HCPs), which can be advanced by communication skills training (CST). The number of empirical studies on CST has grown steadily over the last decade. However, controversies on CST abound. The aim of this review of reviews is to summarize evidence for the effectiveness of CST in oncology as well as for effective CST features (intensity, format and content) and to synthesize the current opinion on CST. The evidence synthesized from multiple reviews supported the effect of CST on HCPs' communication skills. Yet, the certainty of evidence was limited as studies were diverse and effects heterogeneous. Furthermore, limited evidence was found for effective CST intensity, format and content. Authors of the reviews advocated further high-quality research with robust outcome measurement to establish the most essential features of CST and recommended implementation of CST in the standard training of HCPs with continuous supervision. CST can probably improve some aspects of HCPs' communication skills. Despite the uncertain evidence, implementation of CST into clinical practice is widely advocated and specific recommendations regarding intensity and format are provided. Evidence to justify and substantiate implementation efforts is needed.

ComOn-Coaching: The effect of a varied number of coaching sessions on transfer into clinical practice following communication skills training in oncology: Results of a randomized controlled trial.

ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of the number of coaching sessions after communication skills training on the medical communicative performance of oncologists in clinical practice.Methods/DesignThe training, consisting of a workshop and one (control group) vs. four (intervention group) sessions of individual coaching, was evaluated in a randomized controlled trial. Eligible participants included physicians working in any setting where patients with oncological diseases were treated. Real medical consultations were video recorded at three time points: before the workshop (t0), after the workshop (t1) and after completion of coaching (t2). The 1.5-day workshop was based on role-playing in small groups; in the coaching sessions, the videos recorded at t1 were analyzed in detail by both the trainer and the physician. The coaching sessions were manualized and based on the physician’s learning goals. The primary hypothesis was that the intervention group would improve to a higher extent than the control group, as assessed by external raters using rating scales specially developed for this project. Physicians were stratified for sex and setting and randomized by an independent statistician. The group assignment was revealed for physicians and trainers at the end of the workshop, while the raters were blinded to group assignments and assessment points.ResultsA total of 72 physicians participated in one of 8 workshops and could be allocated to either the control or intervention group. The intervention group showed a statistically significant improvement (ES d = 0.41, p<.01) in the All items domain of the rating scales between t1 and t2 and showed a significant advantage compared with the CG (ES = .41, p = .04). The impact on diverse specified skills was heterogeneous; a larger sample is necessary for more detailed analysis.ConclusionsThe training achieved some observable and significant changes in the communicative behavior of oncologists in clinical practice. The four coaching sessions showed some significant advantages compared to the single coaching session. Considerable effort is necessary to achieve sustained changes in communication in clinical every-day practice. Thus, our coaching concept is a promising method for this purpose.

Core components of Communication Skills Training in oncology: A synthesis of the literature contrasted with consensual recommendations.

This systematic review synthesises the literature on Communication Skills Training (CST) programmes for oncology professionals to identify their core components and compare them with the recommendations formulated in a position paper based on a European expert consensus meeting. A systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE (OVID and PUBMED), CINAHL, EMBASE, PSYCHINFO, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. The analytic approach relied on an a priori framework based on the position paper's recommendations, generating several themes. Forty-nine articles were included. The CST programmes reported between 2010 and 2016 were heterogeneous. Some recommendations, especially those regarding content and pedagogic tools, were followed by most providers, while others, such as setting, objectives and participants, were not. This synthesis raises questions on how CST programmes are conceived and how they could or should be conceived in future. While medicine, especially clinical communication, is socially and culturally embedded, some recommendations regarding CST programmes seem to be universally valuable, contributing to ensure quality and enhanced credibility, and thus endorsement and sustained implementation, of CST programmes in the oncology setting.

COMSKIL Communication Training in Oncology-Adaptation to German Cancer Care Settings.

Medical communication is a skill which can be learned and taught and which can substantially improve treatment outcomes, especially if patients' communication preferences are taken into account. Here, we give an overview of communication training research and outline the COMSKIL program as a state-of-the-art communication skills training in oncology. COMSKIL has a solid theoretical foundation and teaches core elements of medical communication in up to ten fully operationalized modules. These address typical situations ranging from breaking bad news to responding to difficult emotions, shared decision-making, and communicating via interpreters.

The need for communication skills training in oncology.

Communication between health-care professionals and their patients is an element that can make all the difference in how those patients navigate their cancer journey. In a 2011 issue of the Annals of Oncology, Barth and Lannen reported on their systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of communication skills training courses in oncology. In this issue of JADPRO, two authors share their perspectives on the findings of Barth and Lannen and what advanced practitioners (APs) can learn from their research.

The Impact of Communication Skills Training in Oncology: a Linguistic Analysis

This study aimed to investigate the impact of a communication skills training (CST) in oncology on clinicians' linguistic strategies. A verbal communication analysis software (Logiciel d'Analyse de la Communication Verbale) was used to compare simulated patients interviews with oncology clinicians who participated in CST (N=57) (pre/post with a 6-month interval) with a control group of oncology clinicians who did not (N=56) (T1/T2 with a 6-month interval). A significant improvement of linguistic strategies related to biomedical, psychological and social issues was observed. Analysis of linguistic aspects of videotaped interviews might become in the future a part of individualised feedback in CST and utilised as a marker for an evaluation of training.

A Model of Professional Development for Practicing Genetic Counselors: Adaptation of Communication Skills Training in Oncology

Ongoing professional development for practicing genetic counselors is critical in maintaining best practice. Communication skills training (CST) workshops for doctors in oncology, utilizing trained actors in role plays, have been implemented for many years to improve patient-centred communication. This model was adapted to provide professional development in counseling skills for practicing genetic counselors, already highly trained in counseling skills. Detailed evidence based scenarios were developed. Evaluation of participants' experience and perceived outcomes on practice included surveys immediately post workshops (2002, 2004, 2005, 2008 (×2); n = 88/97), 2-5years later (2007; n = 21/38) and a focus group (2007; n = 7). All rated workshops as effective training. Aspects highly valued included facilitator feedback, actors rather than role-playing with peers and being able to stop and try doing things differently. Perceived outcomes included the opportunity to reflect on practice; bring focus to communication; motivation and confidence. The high level of satisfaction is a strong endorsement for ongoing communication skills training in this format as part of professional development.

Displacement, rationalization and intellectualization: evaluation of the main defense mechanisms in oncology clinicians

AimsThis study aims to identify the most used defense mechanisms in oncology clinicians.MethodDefenses were evaluated conducting an interview with a simulated patient in 62 nurses and 51 physicians by means of the Defense Mechanism Rating Scales for Clinician (DMRS-C).ResultsDisplacement (20%), rationalization (19.1%) and intellectualization (12.1%) were the most frequently observed mechanisms.ConclusionThese results underline the need to include the topic of the stress induced by the interview in clinicians during communication skills training in oncology.

Communication skills training in oncology

Cancer clinicians do not receive routine training in the psychosocial aspects of patient care such as how to communicate bad news or respond to patients who have unrealistic expectations of cure. Postgraduate workshops may be an effective way to increase interpersonal skills in managing these stressful patient encounters. The authors conducted 2 half-day workshops for oncology faculty, one on breaking bad news and one on dealing with "problem situations." Participants met in a large group for didactic presentations and then small groups in which they used role-play and discussion to problem-solve difficult cases from their practices. The small groups were assisted in their work by trained physician facilitators. The workshops were evaluated by means of a follow-up satisfaction questionnaire as well as a self-efficacy measure, which was administered before and after the workshops. Twenty-seven faculty and 2 oncology fellows participated in the training programs. Satisfaction questionnaires showed that the programs met the educational objectives and were considered to be useful and relevant by the participants. Self-efficacy questionnaires revealed an increase in confidence in communicating bad news and managing problem situation cases from before to after the workshop. The majority of attendees welcomed the opportunity to discuss their difficult cases with colleagues. A number resolved to implement newly learned approaches to common patient problems they encountered frequently. Communication skills workshops may be a useful modality to provide training to oncologists in stressful aspects of the physician-patient relationship. Further research is needed to assess whether long term benefits accrue to the participants.

Communication skills training in oncology

Communication skills training in oncology

Communication skills training in oncology: A position paper

Communication skills training in oncology: A position paper