• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

一项针对初级保健提供者的基于网络的培训干预措施,内容为帮助患者为癌症治疗决策及关于临床试验的对话做好准备:一项采用混合方法和随访的试点研究评估

A Web-Based Training Intervention for Primary Care Providers on Preparing Patients for Cancer Treatment Decisions and Conversations About Clinical Trials: Evaluation of a Pilot Study Using Mixed Methods and Follow-Up.

作者信息

Parker Naomi D, Michaels Margo, Fisher Carla L, Crowe Alyssa, Weiss Elisa S, Sae-Hau Maria, Arnold Jason, Cassells Andrea, Durante Domenic, Lee Ji-Hyun, Vega Raymond Mailhot, Natale-Pereira Ana, Vasquez Taylor S, Zhang Zhongyue, Bylund Carma L

机构信息

Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.

School of Public Health, Boston University, Boston, MA, United States.

出版信息

JMIR Med Educ. 2025 Jul 17;11:e66892. doi: 10.2196/66892.

DOI:10.2196/66892
PMID:40674725
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Recruitment to cancer clinical trials (CCTs) is low, particularly for underrepresented groups such as uninsured patients, those with low-income status, and racial and ethnic minoritized individuals. A significant barrier is that treating oncologists often fail to inform patients about the possibility of CCT participation as an option for quality cancer care. Therefore, patient inquiries about trials before starting treatment should be normalized and encouraged, particularly for underrepresented groups. Primary care providers (PCPs) are uniquely suited to do this because they interact with patients at the time of cancer diagnosis, provide ongoing care, and are trusted sources of information.

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to pilot an innovative web-based CCT training intervention for PCPs, including practicing clinicians and trainees, to increase their ability to prepare patients for cancer treatment decisions and conversations with oncologists about clinical trials.

METHODS

We conducted an evaluation of a pilot study using a self-guided, 1-hour web-based training intervention for PCPs with survey assessments before the intervention, immediately after the intervention, and at the 3-month follow-up. We used a mixed methods approach, incorporating quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis. The evaluation was guided by the Kirkpatrick evaluation model, focusing on levels 1 (reaction), 2 (learning), and 3 (behavior).

RESULTS

A total of 29 PCPs completed the intervention and pre- and postintervention measures, with 28 (97%) PCPs completing the 3-month follow-up assessment. Of these 28 PCPs, 8 (29%) participated in a qualitative interview after the 3-month follow-up assessment. Participants reported high levels of satisfaction with the course. CCT knowledge, as well as attitudes and beliefs, improved after the course and were sustained at the 3-month follow-up. PCPs reported willingness to communicate with patients about cancer treatment options, including CCTs, and willingness to talk with their colleagues about potential changes in referral practices. However, fewer PCPs had actually engaged in these conversations by the 3-month follow-up. In the interviews, PCPs cited limited interprofessional knowledge sharing and organizational constraints as barriers. Notably, PCPs reported changes in their communication behavior with patients: a higher proportion reported communicating with patients at the time of referral about cancer treatment options and clinical trials at the 3-month follow-up than at baseline. In the interviews, PCPs reported that they felt more comfortable and empowered to have these conversations.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study found that a self-guided, 1-hour web-based training intervention for PCPs resulted in improved knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs, as well as improved communication with patients, to prepare them for discussions with oncologists about cancer treatment and CCTs. Future dissemination of this course has the potential to make an impact on CCT accrual.

摘要

背景

癌症临床试验(CCT)的招募率较低,尤其是对于那些代表性不足的群体,如未参保患者、低收入患者以及少数族裔个体。一个重大障碍是,治疗肿瘤学家往往未能告知患者参与CCT作为优质癌症治疗选择的可能性。因此,应将患者在开始治疗前对试验的询问常态化并予以鼓励,尤其是对于代表性不足的群体。初级保健提供者(PCP)非常适合做这件事,因为他们在癌症诊断时与患者互动,提供持续护理,并且是值得信赖的信息来源。

目的

本研究旨在为PCP(包括执业临床医生和实习生)试点一种基于网络的创新性CCT培训干预措施,以提高他们帮助患者为癌症治疗决策做准备以及与肿瘤学家就临床试验进行沟通的能力。

方法

我们对一项试点研究进行了评估,该研究采用了为期1小时的基于网络的自我引导式培训干预措施,针对PCP,在干预前、干预后立即以及3个月随访时进行调查评估。我们采用了混合方法,纳入了定量和定性数据的收集与分析。评估以柯克帕特里克评估模型为指导,重点关注第1级(反应)、第2级(学习)和第3级(行为)。

结果

共有29名PCP完成了干预以及干预前后的测量,其中28名(97%)PCP完成了3个月的随访评估。在这28名PCP中,8名(29%)在3个月随访评估后参加了定性访谈。参与者对该课程满意度较高。课程结束后,CCT知识以及态度和信念有所改善,并在3个月随访时得以维持。PCP表示愿意与患者就癌症治疗选择(包括CCT)进行沟通,并且愿意与同事讨论转诊实践中的潜在变化。然而,到3个月随访时,实际进行这些沟通的PCP较少。在访谈中,PCP提到跨专业知识共享有限和组织限制是障碍。值得注意的是,PCP报告了他们与患者沟通行为的变化:与基线相比,在3个月随访时,有更高比例的PCP报告在转诊时与患者就癌症治疗选择和临床试验进行了沟通。在访谈中,PCP表示他们在进行这些沟通时感觉更自在且更有信心。

结论

这项试点研究发现,针对PCP的为期1小时的基于网络的自我引导式培训干预措施可改善知识、态度和信念,以及与患者的沟通,从而使他们为与肿瘤学家讨论癌症治疗和CCT做好准备。该课程未来的推广有可能对CCT的入组产生影响。

相似文献

1
A Web-Based Training Intervention for Primary Care Providers on Preparing Patients for Cancer Treatment Decisions and Conversations About Clinical Trials: Evaluation of a Pilot Study Using Mixed Methods and Follow-Up.一项针对初级保健提供者的基于网络的培训干预措施,内容为帮助患者为癌症治疗决策及关于临床试验的对话做好准备:一项采用混合方法和随访的试点研究评估
JMIR Med Educ. 2025 Jul 17;11:e66892. doi: 10.2196/66892.
2
Sexual Harassment and Prevention Training性骚扰与预防培训
3
Interventions for providers to promote a patient-centred approach in clinical consultations.为医疗服务提供者提供的干预措施,以促进临床会诊中以患者为中心的方法。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Dec 12;12(12):CD003267. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003267.pub2.
4
Interventions for interpersonal communication about end of life care between health practitioners and affected people.干预健康从业者与受影响者之间关于临终关怀的人际沟通。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jul 8;7(7):CD013116. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013116.pub2.
5
A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel, docetaxel, gemcitabine and vinorelbine in non-small-cell lung cancer.对紫杉醇、多西他赛、吉西他滨和长春瑞滨在非小细胞肺癌中的临床疗效和成本效益进行的快速系统评价。
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(32):1-195. doi: 10.3310/hta5320.
6
Comparison of Two Modern Survival Prediction Tools, SORG-MLA and METSSS, in Patients With Symptomatic Long-bone Metastases Who Underwent Local Treatment With Surgery Followed by Radiotherapy and With Radiotherapy Alone.两种现代生存预测工具 SORG-MLA 和 METSSS 在接受手术联合放疗和单纯放疗治疗有症状长骨转移患者中的比较。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2024 Dec 1;482(12):2193-2208. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003185. Epub 2024 Jul 23.
7
Home treatment for mental health problems: a systematic review.心理健康问题的居家治疗:一项系统综述
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(15):1-139. doi: 10.3310/hta5150.
8
Patient buy-in to social prescribing through link workers as part of person-centred care: a realist evaluation.患者通过联络人员接受社会处方作为以患者为中心的护理的一部分:一项现实主义评价。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2024 Sep 25:1-17. doi: 10.3310/ETND8254.
9
Parents' and informal caregivers' views and experiences of communication about routine childhood vaccination: a synthesis of qualitative evidence.父母及非正式照料者关于儿童常规疫苗接种沟通的观点与经历:定性证据综述
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 7;2(2):CD011787. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011787.pub2.
10
The Black Book of Psychotropic Dosing and Monitoring.《精神药物剂量与监测黑皮书》
Psychopharmacol Bull. 2024 Jul 8;54(3):8-59.

本文引用的文献

1
National Estimates of the Participation of Patients With Cancer in Clinical Research Studies Based on Commission on Cancer Accreditation Data.基于癌症委员会认证数据的癌症患者参与临床研究的全国估计。
J Clin Oncol. 2024 Jun 20;42(18):2139-2148. doi: 10.1200/JCO.23.01030. Epub 2024 Apr 2.
2
Increasing Racial and Ethnic Diversity in Cancer Clinical Trials: An American Society of Clinical Oncology and Association of Community Cancer Centers Joint Research Statement.提高癌症临床试验中的种族和民族多样性:美国临床肿瘤学会和社区癌症中心协会联合研究声明。
J Clin Oncol. 2022 Jul 1;40(19):2163-2171. doi: 10.1200/JCO.22.00754. Epub 2022 May 19.
3
Willingness to Discuss Clinical Trials Among Black vs White Men With Prostate Cancer.
黑人和白人前列腺癌男性参与临床试验意愿的比较。
JAMA Oncol. 2020 Nov 1;6(11):1773-1777. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.3697.
4
Disparities in clinical trial participation and the influence of physician specialty.临床试验参与方面的差异以及医生专业的影响。
Clin Trials. 2021 Feb;18(1):127-129. doi: 10.1177/1740774520956578. Epub 2020 Sep 14.
5
The Impact of an Online Training Program About Cancer Clinical Trials on Primary Care Physicians' Knowledge, Attitudes and Beliefs, and Behavior.在线癌症临床试验培训项目对初级保健医生知识、态度、信念和行为的影响。
J Cancer Educ. 2021 Oct;36(5):1039-1044. doi: 10.1007/s13187-020-01731-3.
6
Dealing with cognitive dissonance: an approach.应对认知失调:一种方法。
Med Educ. 2019 Dec;53(12):1167-1168. doi: 10.1111/medu.13955. Epub 2019 Sep 18.
7
Cognitive dissonance: how self-protective distortions can undermine clinical judgement.认知失调:自我保护的扭曲如何削弱临床判断。
Med Educ. 2019 Dec;53(12):1178-1186. doi: 10.1111/medu.13938. Epub 2019 Aug 8.
8
Perceptions of Cancer Care and Clinical Trials in the Black Community: Implications for Care Coordination Between Oncology and Primary Care Teams.黑人社区对癌症护理和临床试验的看法:对肿瘤学和初级保健团队之间护理协调的影响。
Oncologist. 2017 Sep;22(9):1094-1101. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2017-0122. Epub 2017 Jul 13.
9
Primary care physicians' attitudes and beliefs about cancer clinical trials.初级保健医生对癌症临床试验的态度和信念。
Clin Trials. 2017 Oct;14(5):518-525. doi: 10.1177/1740774517717722. Epub 2017 Jul 11.
10
Does patient activation level affect the cancer patient journey?患者激活水平是否会影响癌症患者的就医旅程?
Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Jul;100(7):1276-1279. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2017.03.019. Epub 2017 Mar 16.