Clinician-patient communication: a systematic review

Area of Science:

• Oncology
• Medical Communication
• Patient Outcomes

Background:

• Clinician-patient communication significantly impacts patient distress during cancer care.
• Identifying effective communication strategies is crucial for improving patient outcomes.

Purpose of the Study:

• To identify clinician-patient communication methods affecting patient distress at critical cancer care points.
• To evaluate the quality and recommendations of existing guidelines, systematic reviews, and randomized trials.

Main Methods:

• Systematic review of practice guidelines, systematic reviews, and randomized trials.
• Quality appraisal using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) Instrument.
• Assessment of methodological rigor for systematic reviews and randomized trials.

Main Results:

• Two of four guidelines were high quality; systematic reviews had clear criteria. Randomized trials were of modest/low quality.
• Open, honest, timely communication is consistently recommended; discussing prognosis reduced anxiety.
• Patient participation increased satisfaction but not necessarily distress; cultural diversity was underrepresented.

Conclusions:

• Limited definitive evidence supports one communication method over another.
• Evidence on decision aids and communication strategies is inconsistent.
• Individualizing communication style is necessary due to diverse patient preferences and participation desires.