The development and comparative effectiveness of a patient-centered pathology report for breast cancer care: a randomized clinical trial.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Supportive Care in Cancer Pub Date : 2025-03-04 DOI:10.1007/s00520-025-09304-0
Sara H Javid, Mark R Kilgore, Elizabeth J Austin, Elizabeth U Parker, Rebeca Alvarez, Meghan R Flanagan, Elena G Brewer, Catalina Gibbons, Sarah K Holt, Janie M Lee, Amelia W Donlan, Lauren M DeStefano, John L Gore
{"title":"The development and comparative effectiveness of a patient-centered pathology report for breast cancer care: a randomized clinical trial.","authors":"Sara H Javid, Mark R Kilgore, Elizabeth J Austin, Elizabeth U Parker, Rebeca Alvarez, Meghan R Flanagan, Elena G Brewer, Catalina Gibbons, Sarah K Holt, Janie M Lee, Amelia W Donlan, Lauren M DeStefano, John L Gore","doi":"10.1007/s00520-025-09304-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Pathology reports contain complex medical terminology that may be confusing or overwhelming for patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer. We evaluated the effectiveness of patient-centered pathology reports (PCPRs), which translate pathology results into patient-friendly language.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty-six participants newly diagnosed with breast cancer were randomized to receive either a PCPR and standard pathology report (intervention arm) or a standard pathology report alone (control arm). Patients were surveyed at initial pathology disclosure and 1 month later to assess breast cancer knowledge and ratings of decisional confidence, conflict, and self-efficacy for treatment decision-making. Knowledge was assessed for four pathology domains independently.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Accuracy of breast cancer knowledge across all domains trended higher for the intervention group compared with the control group (66% vs. 50%, p = 0.11); cancer type and surgical margin status knowledge domains exceeded 75% accuracy for the intervention group. No significant differences between groups were observed for patient-reported ratings of communication, decisional conflict, and decision self-efficacy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PCPRs in lay language appeared to improve patients' knowledge of their breast cancer diagnosis, were acceptable to patients and providers, and have the potential to be broadly applied in an effort to improve patient knowledge and improve the patient experience surrounding a breast cancer diagnosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":22046,"journal":{"name":"Supportive Care in Cancer","volume":"33 3","pages":"248"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Supportive Care in Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-025-09304-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Pathology reports contain complex medical terminology that may be confusing or overwhelming for patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer. We evaluated the effectiveness of patient-centered pathology reports (PCPRs), which translate pathology results into patient-friendly language.

Methods: Sixty-six participants newly diagnosed with breast cancer were randomized to receive either a PCPR and standard pathology report (intervention arm) or a standard pathology report alone (control arm). Patients were surveyed at initial pathology disclosure and 1 month later to assess breast cancer knowledge and ratings of decisional confidence, conflict, and self-efficacy for treatment decision-making. Knowledge was assessed for four pathology domains independently.

Results: Accuracy of breast cancer knowledge across all domains trended higher for the intervention group compared with the control group (66% vs. 50%, p = 0.11); cancer type and surgical margin status knowledge domains exceeded 75% accuracy for the intervention group. No significant differences between groups were observed for patient-reported ratings of communication, decisional conflict, and decision self-efficacy.

Conclusions: PCPRs in lay language appeared to improve patients' knowledge of their breast cancer diagnosis, were acceptable to patients and providers, and have the potential to be broadly applied in an effort to improve patient knowledge and improve the patient experience surrounding a breast cancer diagnosis.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
以患者为中心的乳腺癌病理报告的发展和比较有效性:一项随机临床试验。
目的:病理报告包含复杂的医学术语,可能会让新诊断为乳腺癌的患者感到困惑或不知所措。我们评估了以患者为中心的病理报告(pcpr)的有效性,该报告将病理结果翻译成患者友好的语言。方法:66名新诊断为乳腺癌的参与者随机接受PCPR和标准病理报告(干预组)或单独接受标准病理报告(对照组)。患者在初始病理披露和1个月后接受调查,评估乳腺癌知识和决策信心、冲突和治疗决策自我效能的评分。对四个病理领域的知识进行独立评估。结果:与对照组相比,干预组在所有领域对乳腺癌知识的准确性有更高的趋势(66%对50%,p = 0.11);干预组的肿瘤类型和手术切缘状态知识域准确率超过75%。在患者报告的沟通、决策冲突和决策自我效能评分方面,两组间没有显著差异。结论:外行语言的pcpr似乎可以提高患者对乳腺癌诊断的认识,为患者和提供者所接受,并且具有广泛应用于提高患者对乳腺癌诊断的认识和改善患者体验的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Supportive Care in Cancer
Supportive Care in Cancer 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
9.70%
发文量
751
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Supportive Care in Cancer provides members of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) and all other interested individuals, groups and institutions with the most recent scientific and social information on all aspects of supportive care in cancer patients. It covers primarily medical, technical and surgical topics concerning supportive therapy and care which may supplement or substitute basic cancer treatment at all stages of the disease. Nursing, rehabilitative, psychosocial and spiritual issues of support are also included.
期刊最新文献
Cannabis stigma and symptom management considerations in cancer survivors: a mixed-methods exploration of patient perspectives. The effect of hand massage on pain, comfort, and sleep quality in palliative care oncology patients. Impact of patient education and care on quality of life and mental well-being in cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy: a systematic review. The invisible wall: experiences of social isolation in colorectal cancer patients with ostomy-a qualitative meta-synthesis. Inequalities in receipt of specialized consultation and treatment by material resources among stage IV non-small cell lung cancer patients: a population-based cohort study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1