Addressing the needs of caregivers of cancer patients in general practice: a complex intervention

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to develop an innovation to assist general practitioners (GPs) in Australia to proactively address the needs of caregivers of people with cancer. METHOD: Six GPs were video recorded each consulting six actor-patients in their respective practices. All cases depicted care...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jiwa, Moyez, Mitchell, G., Sibbrit, D., Girgis, A., Burridge, L.
Format: Journal Article
Published: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd. 2010
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/10913
_version_ 1848747664502423552
author Jiwa, Moyez
Mitchell, G.
Sibbrit, D.
Girgis, A.
Burridge, L.
author_facet Jiwa, Moyez
Mitchell, G.
Sibbrit, D.
Girgis, A.
Burridge, L.
author_sort Jiwa, Moyez
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description BACKGROUND: This study aimed to develop an innovation to assist general practitioners (GPs) in Australia to proactively address the needs of caregivers of people with cancer. METHOD: Six GPs were video recorded each consulting six actor-patients in their respective practices. All cases depicted caregivers of people with cancer. The patients were instructed to complete a Needs Assessment Tool for Caregivers (NAT-C), before the consultation. Actor-patients were instructed to present the NAT-C to three of the six GPs they consulted, selected at random. Two assessors independently reviewed each consultation performance using the Leicester Assessment Package (LAP). The practitioners and actor-patients focused on the value of the NAT-C and how it could be deployed to best effect in a subsequent 'stimulated recall session'.RESULTS: Thirty-four consultations were successfully recorded. The mean duration of consultations was 13 min. 47 sec. (range 6 min. 3 sec. to 22 min. 51 sec.). GPs differed in core competencies as measured by the LAP (P<0.001), range 37-92%. However, they demonstrated no significant differences in performance (LAP scores) analysed by scenario (P = 0.99). The 'generalised estimating equation' (GEE) model identified an improved LAP score in consultations in which the NAT-C was used (average of 3.3 points; 95% CI: -3.99, 10.6), after controlling for the different GPs and scenarios, but this improvement was not statistically significant (P = 0.37). The participants felt that the NAT-C was beneficial and suggested how it could be further refined. CONCLUSIONS: If this innovation had been formally tested in a randomised trial without assessing its impact on the consultation there might have been significant difficulties with administering the intervention in practice.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T06:52:45Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-10913
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T06:52:45Z
publishDate 2010
publisher Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd.
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-109132017-01-30T11:21:43Z Addressing the needs of caregivers of cancer patients in general practice: a complex intervention Jiwa, Moyez Mitchell, G. Sibbrit, D. Girgis, A. Burridge, L. consultation caregivers general practice innovation cancer BACKGROUND: This study aimed to develop an innovation to assist general practitioners (GPs) in Australia to proactively address the needs of caregivers of people with cancer. METHOD: Six GPs were video recorded each consulting six actor-patients in their respective practices. All cases depicted caregivers of people with cancer. The patients were instructed to complete a Needs Assessment Tool for Caregivers (NAT-C), before the consultation. Actor-patients were instructed to present the NAT-C to three of the six GPs they consulted, selected at random. Two assessors independently reviewed each consultation performance using the Leicester Assessment Package (LAP). The practitioners and actor-patients focused on the value of the NAT-C and how it could be deployed to best effect in a subsequent 'stimulated recall session'.RESULTS: Thirty-four consultations were successfully recorded. The mean duration of consultations was 13 min. 47 sec. (range 6 min. 3 sec. to 22 min. 51 sec.). GPs differed in core competencies as measured by the LAP (P<0.001), range 37-92%. However, they demonstrated no significant differences in performance (LAP scores) analysed by scenario (P = 0.99). The 'generalised estimating equation' (GEE) model identified an improved LAP score in consultations in which the NAT-C was used (average of 3.3 points; 95% CI: -3.99, 10.6), after controlling for the different GPs and scenarios, but this improvement was not statistically significant (P = 0.37). The participants felt that the NAT-C was beneficial and suggested how it could be further refined. CONCLUSIONS: If this innovation had been formally tested in a randomised trial without assessing its impact on the consultation there might have been significant difficulties with administering the intervention in practice. 2010 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/10913 Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd. restricted
spellingShingle consultation
caregivers
general practice
innovation
cancer
Jiwa, Moyez
Mitchell, G.
Sibbrit, D.
Girgis, A.
Burridge, L.
Addressing the needs of caregivers of cancer patients in general practice: a complex intervention
title Addressing the needs of caregivers of cancer patients in general practice: a complex intervention
title_full Addressing the needs of caregivers of cancer patients in general practice: a complex intervention
title_fullStr Addressing the needs of caregivers of cancer patients in general practice: a complex intervention
title_full_unstemmed Addressing the needs of caregivers of cancer patients in general practice: a complex intervention
title_short Addressing the needs of caregivers of cancer patients in general practice: a complex intervention
title_sort addressing the needs of caregivers of cancer patients in general practice: a complex intervention
topic consultation
caregivers
general practice
innovation
cancer
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/10913