Does being accompanied make a difference in communication during breast cancer consultations? Results from a multi-centered randomized controlled trial

References

• 1. Clayman ML, Roter D, Wissow LS, Bandeen-Roche K. Autonomy-related behaviors of patient companions and their effect on decision-making activity in geriatric primary care visits. Social Science & Medicine. 2005;60(7):1583–1591. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.08.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 2. Del Piccolo L, Goss C, Bottacini A, et al. Asking questions during breast cancer consultations: Does being alone or being accompanied make a difference? Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2014;18(3):299–304. doi:10.1016/j.ejon.2014.02.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 3. Gilbar R. Family involvement, independence, and patient autonomy in practice. Med Law Rev. 2011;19(2):192–234. doi:10.1093/medlaw/fwr008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 4. Street RL, Gordon HS. Companion participation in cancer consultations. Psychooncology. 2008;17(3):244–251. doi:10.1002/pon.1225
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 5. Gordon HS, Street RL, Jr., Sharf BF, Souchek J. Racial differences in doctors’ information-giving and patients’ participation. Cancer. 2006;107(6):1313–1320. doi:10.1002/cncr.22122
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 6. Labrecque MS, Blanchard CG, Ruckdeschel JC, Blanchard EB. The impact of family presence on the physician–cancer patient interaction. Social Science & Medicine. 1991;33(11):1253–1261. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(91)90073-L
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 7. Wolff JL, Roter DL. Family presence in routine medical visits: A meta-analytical review. Soc Sci Med. 2011;72(6):823–831. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.01.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 8. Isenberg SR, Aslakson RA, Dionne-Odom JN, et al. Family companions' involvement during pre-surgical consent visits for major cancer surgery and its relationship to visit communication and satisfaction . Patient Educ Couns. 2018;101(6):1066–1074. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2018.01.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 9. Miller N, Rogers SN. A review of question prompt lists used in the oncology setting with comparison to the Patient Concerns Inventory. Eur J Cancer Care. 2018;27(1):e12489. doi:10.1111/ecc.12489
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 10. Brandes K, Linn AJ, Butow PN, van Weert JCM. The characteristics and effectiveness of Question Prompt List interventions in oncology: A systematic review of the literature. Psychooncology. 2015;24(3):245–252. doi:10.1002/pon.3637
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 11. Brown RF, Bylund CL, Li Y, Edgerson S, Butow P. Testing the utility of a cancer clinical trial specific Question Prompt List (QPL-CT) during oncology consultations. Patient Educ Couns. 2012;88(2):311–317. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2012.02.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 12. Clayton JM, Butow PN, Tattersall MHN, et al. Randomized Controlled Trial of a prompt List to Advanced Cancer Patients and Their Caregivers to Questions About prognosis and End-of-Life Care. JCO. 2007;25(6):715–723. doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.06.7827
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 13. Hebert RS, Schulz R, Copeland VC, Arnold RM. Pilot Testing of a Question Prompt Sheet to Encourage Family Caregivers of Cancer patients and Physicians to Discuss End-of-life Issues. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2009;26(1):24–32. doi:10.1177/1049909108324360
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 14. Rodenbach RA, Brandes K, Fiscella K, et al. Promoting End-of-Life Discussions in Advanced Cancer: Effects of Patient Coaching and Question Prompt Lists. JCO. 2017;35(8):842–851. https://doi.org/10.1200%2FJKO.2016.68.5651 doi:10.1200/JCO.2016.68.5651
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 15. Bottacini A, Goss C, Mazzi MA, et al. The involvement of early stage breast cancer patients during oncology consultations in Italy: A multi-centered, randomized controlled trial of a question prompt sheet versus question listing. BMJ Open. 2017;7(8):e015079. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015079
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 16. Goss C, Ghilardi A, Deledda G, et al. INvolvement of breast CAncer patients during oncological consultations: A multicentre randomised controlled trial - the INCA study protocol. BMJ Open. 2013;3(5):e002266. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002266
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 17. Holmes-Rovner M, Kroll J, Schmitt N, et al. Patient satisfaction with health care decisions: the satisfaction with decision scale. Med Decis Making. 1996;16(1):58–64. doi:10.1177/0272989X9601600114
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 18. Howie JG, Heaney DJ, Maxwell M, Walker JJ. A comparison of a Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) against two established satisfaction scales as an outcome measure of primary care consultations. Family Practice. 1998;15(2):165–171. doi:10.1093/fampra/15.2.165
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 19. Kriston L, Scholl I, Hölzel L, Simon D, Loh A, Härter M. The 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). Development and psychometric properties in a primary care sample. Patient Educ Couns. 2010;80(1):94–99. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2009.09.034
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 20. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16(9):606–613. doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 21. Rizzo R, Piccinelli M, Mazzi MA, Bellantuono C, Tansella M. The Personal Health Questionnaire: a new screening instrument for detection of ICD-10 depressive disorders in primary care. Psychol Med. 2000;30(4):831–840. doi:10.1017/s0033291799002512
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 22. Goldberg DP, Blackwell B. Psychiatric Illness in General practice. A detailed study using a new method of case identification. Br Med J. 1970;1(5707):439–443. doi:10.1136/bmj.2.5707.439
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23. Politi PL, Piccinelli M, Wilkinson G. Reliability, validity and factor structure of the 12-item General Health Questionnaire among young males in Italy. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1994;90(6):432–437. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0447.1994.tb01620.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 24. Degner LF, Sloan JA, Venkatesh P. The control preferences scale. Can J Nurs Res. 1997;29(3):21e43.
   Google Scholar
• 25. Hahn SR, Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, et al. The difficult patient: prevalence, psychopathology, and functional impairment. J Gen Intern Med. 1996;11(1):1–8. doi:10.1007/BF02603477
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar