Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Neuro-Oncology 2/2016

01-01-2016 | Clinical Study

Impact of cognitive function on communication in patients with primary or secondary brain tumours

Authors: Diana N. Naehrig, Eng-Siew Koh, Monica Vogiatzis, Waka Yanagisawa, Carol Kwong, Heather L. Shepherd, Chris Milross, Haryana M. Dhillon

Published in: Journal of Neuro-Oncology | Issue 2/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Communication support tools (CST) improve patient outcomes in oncology including: knowledge, satisfaction, self-management, and adherence to planned treatment. Little is known about communication support tools use in patients with primary or secondary brain tumours. We aimed to explore cognitive function and communication support tool use in this population. This prospective survey involved patients, caregivers and health professionals. Questionnaires were completed after initial brain radiotherapy consultation and 1–2 weeks later. Patients completed the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Descriptive statistics are reported. Fifty-three patients participated, median age 62 years, ECOG status 0–2 (90 %), with 75 % having secondary brain metastasis. 21/53 (40 %) patients reported needing help reading medical information. Only 28 % patients had normal cognition (MoCA score ≥ 26/30). Initially, 82 % of patients and 87 % of caregivers reported the consultation was ‘extremely/quite clear, and 69 % of their health professionals thought consultation ‘extremely/quite clear’ to patient. At follow-up, fewer patients (75 %) reported health professionals’ explanation as ‘extremely/quite clear’. Although patients recalled discussed illness and treatment details, 82 % recalled treatment-related side effects and management thereof by 46 %. CST use was reported by 22 % patients, 19 % caregivers, and 27 % health professionals. When used, tools improved understanding according to 92 % patients, 100 % caregivers, and 91 % health professionals. The majority of patients have some level of cognitive impairment. Information discussed appears clear to most patients, but this is not sustained, and recall of treatment toxicity management is poor. Few CSTs are used in consultations, but when used, are reported as helpful by all.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Caissie A et al (2012) Quality of life in patients with brain metastases using the EORTC QLQ-BN20+ 2 and QLQ-C15-PAL. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 83(4):1238–1245PubMedCrossRef Caissie A et al (2012) Quality of life in patients with brain metastases using the EORTC QLQ-BN20+ 2 and QLQ-C15-PAL. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 83(4):1238–1245PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Minniti G et al (2013) Health-related quality of life in elderly patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma treated with short-course radiation therapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 86(2):285–291PubMedCrossRef Minniti G et al (2013) Health-related quality of life in elderly patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma treated with short-course radiation therapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 86(2):285–291PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Chang EL et al (2009) Neurocognition in patients with brain metastases treated with radiosurgery or radiosurgery plus whole-brain irradiation: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 10(11):1037–1044PubMedCrossRef Chang EL et al (2009) Neurocognition in patients with brain metastases treated with radiosurgery or radiosurgery plus whole-brain irradiation: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 10(11):1037–1044PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Zucchella C et al (2013) Cognitive impairment in primary brain tumors outpatients: a prospective cross-sectional survey. J Neurooncol 112(3):455–460PubMedCrossRef Zucchella C et al (2013) Cognitive impairment in primary brain tumors outpatients: a prospective cross-sectional survey. J Neurooncol 112(3):455–460PubMedCrossRef
5.
7.
go back to reference Nasreddine ZS et al (2005) The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc 53:695–699PubMedCrossRef Nasreddine ZS et al (2005) The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc 53:695–699PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Olson R et al (2011) Prospective comparison of the prognostic utility of the Mini Mental State Examination and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment in patients with brain metastases. Support Care Cancer 19(11):1849–1855PubMedCrossRef Olson R et al (2011) Prospective comparison of the prognostic utility of the Mini Mental State Examination and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment in patients with brain metastases. Support Care Cancer 19(11):1849–1855PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Olson RA, Chhanabhai T, McKenzie M (2008) Feasibility study of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in patients with brain metastases. Support Care Cancer 16(11):1273–1278PubMedCrossRef Olson RA, Chhanabhai T, McKenzie M (2008) Feasibility study of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in patients with brain metastases. Support Care Cancer 16(11):1273–1278PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Langbecker D, Janda M, Yates P (2012) Development and piloting of a brain tumour-specific question prompt list. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 21(4):517–526CrossRef Langbecker D, Janda M, Yates P (2012) Development and piloting of a brain tumour-specific question prompt list. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 21(4):517–526CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Clayton JM et al (2007) Randomized controlled trial of a prompt list to help advanced cancer patients and their caregivers to ask questions about prognosis and end-of-life care. J Clin Oncol 25(6):715–723PubMedCrossRef Clayton JM et al (2007) Randomized controlled trial of a prompt list to help advanced cancer patients and their caregivers to ask questions about prognosis and end-of-life care. J Clin Oncol 25(6):715–723PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Clayton JM et al (2012) Physician endorsement alone may not enhance question-asking by advanced cancer patients during consultations about palliative care. Support Care Cancer 20(7):1457–1464PubMedCrossRef Clayton JM et al (2012) Physician endorsement alone may not enhance question-asking by advanced cancer patients during consultations about palliative care. Support Care Cancer 20(7):1457–1464PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Brown RF et al (2011) Identifying patient information needs about cancer clinical trials using a question prompt list. Patient Educ Couns 84(1):69–77PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Brown RF et al (2011) Identifying patient information needs about cancer clinical trials using a question prompt list. Patient Educ Couns 84(1):69–77PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Butow P et al (1998) Information booklets about cancer: factors influencing patient satisfaction and utilisation. Patient Educ Couns 33:129–141PubMedCrossRef Butow P et al (1998) Information booklets about cancer: factors influencing patient satisfaction and utilisation. Patient Educ Couns 33:129–141PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Dimoska A et al (2012) Implementing patient question-prompt lists into routine cancer care. Patient Educ Couns 86(2):252–258PubMedCrossRef Dimoska A et al (2012) Implementing patient question-prompt lists into routine cancer care. Patient Educ Couns 86(2):252–258PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Dunn SM et al (1993) General information tapes inhibit recall of the cancer consultation. J Clin Oncol 11(11):2279–2285PubMed Dunn SM et al (1993) General information tapes inhibit recall of the cancer consultation. J Clin Oncol 11(11):2279–2285PubMed
17.
go back to reference Knox R et al (2002) Audiotapes of oncology consultations: only for the first consultation? Ann Oncol 13(4):622–627PubMedCrossRef Knox R et al (2002) Audiotapes of oncology consultations: only for the first consultation? Ann Oncol 13(4):622–627PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Shepherd HL et al (2011) Three questions that patients can ask to improve the quality of information physicians give about treatment options: a cross-over trial. Patient Educ Couns 84(3):379–385PubMedCrossRef Shepherd HL et al (2011) Three questions that patients can ask to improve the quality of information physicians give about treatment options: a cross-over trial. Patient Educ Couns 84(3):379–385PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Tattersall MHN, Butow PN (2002) Consultation audio tapes: an underused cancer patient information aid and clinical research tool. Lancet Oncol 3(7):431–437PubMedCrossRef Tattersall MHN, Butow PN (2002) Consultation audio tapes: an underused cancer patient information aid and clinical research tool. Lancet Oncol 3(7):431–437PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Initiative N.B.C.C.a.N.C.C (2003) Clinical practice guidelines for the psychosocial care of adults with cancer. In: N.B.C. Centre (eds.) , Department of Health and Ageing, Camperdown Initiative N.B.C.C.a.N.C.C (2003) Clinical practice guidelines for the psychosocial care of adults with cancer. In: N.B.C. Centre (eds.) , Department of Health and Ageing, Camperdown
21.
go back to reference Aaronson NK et al (1993) The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 85(5):365–376PubMedCrossRef Aaronson NK et al (1993) The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 85(5):365–376PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Osoba D et al (1996) The development and psychometric validation of brain cancer quality-of-life questionnaire for use in combination with general cancer-specific questionnaires. Qual Life Res 5:139–150PubMedCrossRef Osoba D et al (1996) The development and psychometric validation of brain cancer quality-of-life questionnaire for use in combination with general cancer-specific questionnaires. Qual Life Res 5:139–150PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Powers B, Trinh J, Bosworth H (2010) Can this patient read and understand written health information? JAMA 304(1):76–84PubMedCrossRef Powers B, Trinh J, Bosworth H (2010) Can this patient read and understand written health information? JAMA 304(1):76–84PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference SPSS Inc (2012) SPSS version 20.0 for Macintosh SPSS Inc (2012) SPSS version 20.0 for Macintosh
25.
go back to reference Kinnersley P et al. (2008) Interventions before consultations to help patients address their information needs by encouraging question asking: systematic review. Br Med J 337 Kinnersley P et al. (2008) Interventions before consultations to help patients address their information needs by encouraging question asking: systematic review. Br Med J 337
26.
go back to reference Stacey D et al (2014) Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014(1):CD001431 Stacey D et al (2014) Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014(1):CD001431
27.
go back to reference Leighl NB et al (2011) Supporting treatment decision making in advanced cancer: a randomized trial of a decision aid for patients with advanced colorectal cancer considering chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 29(15):2077–2084PubMedCrossRef Leighl NB et al (2011) Supporting treatment decision making in advanced cancer: a randomized trial of a decision aid for patients with advanced colorectal cancer considering chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 29(15):2077–2084PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Gravel K, Legare F, Graham I (2006) Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: a systematic review of health professionals’ perceptions. Implement Sci 1(1):16PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Gravel K, Legare F, Graham I (2006) Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: a systematic review of health professionals’ perceptions. Implement Sci 1(1):16PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Elwyn G et al (2013) “Many miles to go…”: a systematic review of the implementation of patient decision support interventions into routine clinical practice. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 13(Suppl 2):S14PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Elwyn G et al (2013) “Many miles to go…”: a systematic review of the implementation of patient decision support interventions into routine clinical practice. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 13(Suppl 2):S14PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Impact of cognitive function on communication in patients with primary or secondary brain tumours
Authors
Diana N. Naehrig
Eng-Siew Koh
Monica Vogiatzis
Waka Yanagisawa
Carol Kwong
Heather L. Shepherd
Chris Milross
Haryana M. Dhillon
Publication date
01-01-2016
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Neuro-Oncology / Issue 2/2016
Print ISSN: 0167-594X
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7373
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-015-1964-1

Other articles of this Issue 2/2016

Journal of Neuro-Oncology 2/2016 Go to the issue