Values and options in cancer care (VOICE): study design and rationale for a patient-centered communication and decision-making intervention for physicians, patients with advanced cancer, and their caregivers
1 Rochester Healthcare Decision-Making Group, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York, USA
2 Department of Psychiatry, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York, USA
3 James P. Wilmot Cancer Center, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York, USA
4 Center for Communication and Disparities Research, Department of Family Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York, USA
5 Centre for Medical Psychology and Evidence-based Medicine, School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
6 Department of Internal Medicine, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California, USA
7 Department of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York, USA
8 Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
9 Center for Healthcare Policy and Research, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California, USA
10 University of Rochester Medical Center, 300 Crittenden Blvd, Rochester, NY, USA
BMC Cancer 2013, 13:188 doi:10.1186/1471-2407-13-188Published: 9 April 2013
Communication about prognosis and treatment choices is essential for informed decision making in advanced cancer. This article describes an investigation designed to facilitate communication and decision making among oncologists, patients with advanced cancer, and their caregivers.
The Values and Options in Cancer Care (VOICE) Study is a National Cancer Institute sponsored randomized controlled trial conducted in the Rochester/Buffalo, NY and Sacramento, CA regions. A total of 40 oncologists, approximately 400 patients with advanced cancer, and their family/friend caregivers (one per patient, when available) are expected to enroll in the study. Drawing upon ecological theory, the intervention uses a two-pronged approach: oncologists complete a multifaceted tailored educational intervention involving standardized patient instructors (SPIs), and patients and caregivers complete a coaching intervention to facilitate prioritizing and discussing questions and concerns. Follow-up data will be collected approximately quarterly for up to three years.
The intervention is hypothesized to enhance patient-centered communication, quality of care, and patient outcomes. Analyses will examine the effects of the intervention on key elements of physician-patient-caregiver communication (primary outcomes), the physician-patient relationship, shared understanding of prognosis, patient well-being, and health service utilization (secondary outcomes).
Clinical Trials Identifier: NCT01485627