RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Improving Communication Between Doctors and Breast Cancer Patients
JF The Annals of Family Medicine
JO Ann Fam Med
FD American Academy of Family Physicians
SP 387
OP 394
DO 10.1370/afm.721
VO 5
IS 5
A1 Moira Stewart
A1 Judith Belle Brown
A1 Joanne Hammerton
A1 Allan Donner
A1 Alan Gavin
A1 Ronald L. Holliday
A1 Tim Whelan
A1 Ken Leslie
A1 Irene Cohen
A1 Wayne Weston
A1 Tom Freeman
YR 2007
UL http://www.annfammed.org/content/5/5/387.abstract
AB PURPOSE We wanted to assess the effectiveness of intensive education for physicians compared with a traditional session on communicating with breast cancer patients. METHODS A randomized controlled trial was conducted in practices in London, Hamilton, and Toronto, Canada, with 17 family physicians, 16 surgeons, and 18 oncologists, and with 102 patients of the surgeons and oncologists. Doctors were randomized to 1 of 2 continuing education approaches: a traditional 2-hour version (control group), or a new 6-hour intensive version including exploring the patients’ perspectives and reviewing videotapes and receiving feedback (intervention group). Communication behavior of the physicians was measured objectively both before and after the intervention. As well, 4 postintervention patient outcomes were measured, by design only for surgeons and oncologists: patient-centerdness of the visit, satisfaction, psychological distress, and feeling better. RESULTS No significant differences were found on the communication score of the intervention vs the control physicians when controlling for preintervention communication scores. Intervention family physicians, however, had significantly higher communication subscores than control family physicians. Also, patients of the intervention surgeons and oncologists were significantly more satisfied (scores of 82.06 vs 77.78, P = .03) and felt better (88.2% vs 70.6%, P=.02) than patients of the control surgeons and oncologists when controlling for covariates and adjusting for clustering within doctor. CONCLUSIONS The continuing medical education intervention was effective in terms of some but not all physician and patient outcomes.