4.5 Article

Advice to Clinicians on Communication from Adolescents and Young Adults with Cancer and Parents of Children with Cancer

期刊

CHILDREN-BASEL
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/children10010007

关键词

adolescent and young adult; pediatric oncology; communication; patient-centered care; cancer survivorship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Effective communication is crucial in pediatric and AYA oncology to improve healthcare and patient-centered care. By comparing communication advice from AYAs and parents, we can identify important guidance for clinicians. Thematic analysis of interviews revealed similar advice on compassion, connection, hope, commitment, and transparency, with AYAs emphasizing the importance of clinicians staying calm.
Effective communication is integral to patient and family-centered care in pediatric and adolescent and young adult (AYA) oncology and improving healthcare delivery and outcomes. There is limited knowledge about whether AYAs and parents have similar communication preferences and needs. By eliciting and comparing communication advice from AYAs and parents, we can identify salient guidance for how clinicians can better communicate. We performed secondary analysis of semi-structured interviews from 2 qualitative communication studies. In one study, 80 parents of children with cancer during treatment, survivorship, or bereavement were interviewed. In the second study, AYAs with cancer during treatment or survivorship were interviewed. We asked AYAs and parents to provide communication advice for oncology clinicians. Using thematic analysis, we identified categories of advice related to three overarching themes: interpersonal relationships, informational preferences, and delivery of treatment, resources, and medical care. AYAs and parents provided similar advice about the need for compassion, strong connections, hopefulness, commitment, and transparent honesty However, AYAs placed additional emphasis on clinicians maintaining a calm demeanor.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据