Cancer worry and empathy moderate the effect of a survivorship‐focused intervention on quality of life

Abstract

Objective This study examined the impact of a survivorship planning consultation (SPC) for patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma and diffuses large B‐cell lymphoma on quality of life (QOL). We specifically assessed two potential moderators, cancer worry and perceived empathy, of the intervention effects on QOL. Methods This cluster randomized, four‐site trial examined the efficacy of a SPC; physicians received communication skills training and applied these skills in a survivorship‐focused office visit using a care plan vs a control arm in which physicians were trained to and subsequently provided a time‐controlled, manualized wellness rehabilitation consultation focused only on discussion of healthy nutrition and exercise. We examined the effect of the intervention on patients' QOL and examined potential moderators—cancer worry and perceived physician empathy. Results Forty‐two physicians and 198 patients participated. There was no main effect of the intervention on any of the QOL dimensions (ps > 0.10). However, cancer worry was a significant moderator of the effects of the intervention on three QOL domains (physical P = .04; social P = .04; spiritual P = .01) and perceived empathy was a significant moderator of QOL (physical P = .004; psychological P = .04; social P = .01). Specifically, the beneficial effects of the intervention were more pronounced among patients who initially reported higher levels of cancer worry and lower levels of physician empathy. Conclusions This study identified two factors, perceived empathy and cancer worry, that were found to impact the QOL of patients who participated in this communication‐based survivorship intervention.

Socioeconomic, racial and ethnic differences in patient experience of clinician empathy: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Table 1 displays the nine studies with CARE Measure data stratified by SES [44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52]. Table 2 displays the 14 studies with CARE Measure data stratified by race/ethnicity [47,51,[53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64]. Two studies had CARE Measure data stratified by both SES and race/ethnicity and thus appear in both tables [47,51].…”

Socioeconomic, racial and ethnic differences in patient experience of clinician empathy: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Table 2 displays the 14 studies with CARE Measure data stratified by race/ethnicity. 40,44,[49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60] Most of the studies were from the United States and the practice settings were diverse, including multidisciplinary practice, orthopedic surgery, emergency medicine, and primary care, among others. Only two studies had CARE Measure data stratified by both SES and race/ethnicity.…”

Effect of the COVID‐19 pandemic on surgical oncology practice—Results of an SSO survey

“…Congruently, a study in medical oncology found that some cancer patients felt reluctant to communicate with their doctors via a video platform due to feelings of self‐consciousness, and the absence of a physical examination 24,25 . As the perceived empathy of the provider and the patient's anxiety about their cancer can significantly impact the quality of life and oncologic outcome, the lack of rapport could prove to be a great barrier for telemedicine in surgical oncology 26 . Conversely, the burden of expensive oncologic treatments can be mitigated by telemedicine which saves patients on travel expenses, time lost from work, and other related costs 27,28 …”

“…24,25 As the perceived empathy of the provider and the patient's anxiety about their cancer can significantly impact the quality of life and oncologic outcome, the lack of rapport could prove to be a great barrier for telemedicine in surgical oncology. 26 Conversely, the burden of expensive oncologic treatments can be mitigated by telemedicine which saves patients on travel expenses, time lost from work, and other related costs. 27,28 The members of SSO noted that there are technological and regulatory obstacles to telemedicine.…”