Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Identifying and predicting subgroups of information needs among cancer patients: an initial study using latent class analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Understanding how the information needs of cancer patients (CaPts) vary is important because met information needs affect health outcomes and CaPts’ satisfaction. The goals of the study were to identify subgroups of CaPts based on self-reported cancer- and treatment-related information needs and to determine whether subgroups could be predicted on the basis of selected sociodemographic, clinical and clinician–patient relationship variables.

Methods

Three hundred twenty-three CaPts participated in a survey using the “Cancer Patients Information Needs” scale, which is a new tool for measuring cancer-related information needs. The number of information need subgroups and need profiles within each subgroup was identified using latent class analysis (LCA). Multinomial logistic regression was applied to predict class membership.

Results

LCA identified a model of five subgroups exhibiting differences in type and extent of CaPts’ unmet information needs: a subgroup with “no unmet needs” (31.4% of the sample), two subgroups with “high level of psychosocial unmet information needs” (27.0% and 12.0%), a subgroup with “high level of purely medical unmet information needs” (16.0%) and a subgroup with “high level of medical and psychosocial unmet information needs” (13.6%). An assessment of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics revealed that younger CaPts and CaPts’ requiring psychological support seem to belong to subgroups with a higher level of unmet information needs. However, the most significant predictor for the subgroups with unmet information needs is a good clinician–patient relationship, i.e. subjective perception of high level of trust in and caring attention from nurses together with high degree of physician empathy seems to be predictive for inclusion in the subgroup with no unmet information needs.

Conclusions

The results of our study can be used by oncology nurses and physicians to increase their awareness of the complexity and heterogeneity of information needs among CaPts and of clinically significant subgroups of CaPts. Moreover, regression analyses indicate the following association: Nurses and physicians seem to be able to reduce CaPts’ unmet information needs by establishing a relationship with the patient, which is trusting, caring and empathic.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. ASCO (2006) ASCO-ESMO consensus statement on quality cancer care. Am J Clin Oncol 24:3498–3499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Epstein RM, Street RL (2007) Patient-centred communication in cancer care. Promoting healing and reducing suffering. National Cancer Institute. NIH Publication No. 07-6225. Bethesda, MD

  3. Sheer V, Cline R (1995) Testing a model of perceived information adequacy and uncertainty reduction in physician–patient interactions. J Appl Commun Res 23:44–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Street R (1991) Information-giving in medical consultations: the influence of patients’ communicative styles and personal characteristics. Soc Sci Med 32:541–548

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fallowfield L, Jenkins V (1999) Effective communication skills are the key to good cancer care. Eur J Cancer Care 35:1592–1597

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Kim SS, Kaplowitz S, Johnston MV (2004) The effects of physician empathy on patient satisfaction and compliance. Eval Health Prof 27:237–251

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Neumann M, Wirtz M, Bollschweiler E et al (2007) Determinants and patient-reported long-term outcomes of physician empathy in oncology: a structural equation modelling approach. Patient Educ Couns 69:63–75

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Arora N, Johnson P, Gustafson D, McTavish F, Hawkins R, Pingree S (2002) Barriers to information access, perceived health competence, and psychosocial health outcomes: test of a mediation model in a breast cancer sample. Patient Educ Couns 47:37–46

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Thorne SE, Bultz BD, Baile W (2005) Is there a cost to poor communication in cancer care? A critical review of the literature. Psychooncology 14:875–884

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chaitchik S, Kreitler S, Shaked S, Schwart I, Rosin R (1992) Doctor–patient communication in a cancer ward. J Cancer Educ 7:41–54

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Gattellari M, Butow PN, Tattersall MH (2001) Sharing decisions in cancer care. Soc Sci Med 52:1865–1878

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Chan A, Woddruff R (1997) Communication with patients with advanced cancer. J Palliat Care 13:29–33

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Quirt C, Macillop W, Ginsburg A et al (1997) Do doctors know when their patients don’t? A survey of doctor–patient communication in lung cancer. Lung Cancer 18:1–10

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Arora NK (2003) Interacting with cancer patients: the significance of physicians’ communication behavior. Soc Sci Med 57:791–806

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hain T (2000) The role of health professionals in informing cancer patients: findings from The Teamwork Project (phase one). Health Expect 3:217–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mesters I, van den Borne B, De Boer M, Pruyn J (2001) Measuring information among cancer patients. Patient Educ Couns 43:253–262

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Dillman DA (1978) Mail and telephone surveys. The total design method. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  18. Dillman DA (2000) Mail and internet surveys. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ommen O, Janssen C, Neugebauer E, Bouillon B, Rehm K, Rangger C, Erli H, Pfaff H (2008) Trust, social support and patient type—associations between patients perceived trust, supportive communication and patients preferences in regard to paternalism, clarification and participation of severely injured patients. Patient Educ Couns 73:196–204

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Pfaff H (2003) Der Kölner Patientenfragebogen: Theoretischer Rahmen, Konstrukte und Messinstrumente./The Cologne Patient Questionnaire: theory, constructs and measures. In: Pfaff H, Freise D, Mager G, Schrappe M (eds) Der Kölner Patientenfragebogen (KPF): Entwicklung und Validierung eines Fragebogens zur Erfassung der Einbindung des Patienten als Kotherapeuten./The Cologne Patient Questionnaire (CPQ): development and validation of a questionnaire to assess the patient as a co-therapist. Asgard, Sankt Augustin, pp 7–27

  21. Pfaff H, Steffen P, Brinkmann A, Lütticke J, Nitzsche A (2004) Der Kölner Patientenfragebogen (KPF). Kennzahlenhandbuch./The Cologne Patient Questionnaire (CPQ). Handbook of indices. Veröffentlichungsreihe der Abteilung Medizinische Soziologie des Instituts für Arbeitsmedizin, Sozialmedizin und Sozialhygiene der Universität zu Köln: ISSN 1618-7067

  22. Neumann M, Wirtz M, Bollschweiler E, Warm M, Wolf J, Pfaff H (2008) Psychometrische Evaluation der deutschen Version des Messinstruments “Consultation and Relational Empathy” (CARE) am Beispiel von Krebspatienten./Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the “Consultation and Relational Empathy” (CARE) at the example of cancer patients. Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol 58:5–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mercer SW, Maxwell M, Heaney D, Watt GC (2004) The Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) measure: development and preliminary validation and reliability of an empathy-based consultation process measure. Fam Prac 21:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Mercer SW, McConnachie A, Maxwell M, Heaney D, Watt GC (2005) Relevance and practical use of the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) measure in general practice. Fam Prac 22:328–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mercer SW, Neumann M, Wirtz M, Fitzpatrick B, Vojt G (2008) General practitioner empathy, patient enablement, and patient-reported outcomes in primary care in an area of high socio-economic deprivation in Scotland: a pilot prospective study using structural equation modelling. Patient Educ Couns 73:240–245

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Allison PD (2001) Missing data. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  27. Schafer JL, Graham JW (2002) Missing data: our view of the state of the art. Psychol Meth 7:147–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Graham JW, Cumsille PE, Elek-Fisk E (2003) Methods for handling missing data. In: Schinka JA, Velicer WF (eds) Research methods in psychology. Wiley, New York, pp 87–114

    Google Scholar 

  29. Clogg CC (1995) Latent class models. In: Arminger G, Clogg CC, Sobel ME (eds) Handbook of statistical modeling for the social and behavioural sciences. Plenum, New York, pp 311–359

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hagenaars JA, McCutcheon AL (2002) Applied latent class analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  31. Lazarsfeld PF (1950) The logical and mathematical foundation of latent structure analysis. In: Stouffer S (ed) Measurement and prediction. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 362–412

    Google Scholar 

  32. McCutcheon AL (1987) Latent class analysis. Sage, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  33. Muthen B, Muthen LK (2000) Integrating person-centered and variable-centered analyses: growth mixture modeling with latent trajectory classes. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 24:882–891

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Hambleton R, Swaminathan H, Rogers HJ (1991) Fundamentals of item response theory. Sage, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  35. Vermunt JK, Magidson J (2005) Latent Gold 4.0 user’s guide. Statistical Innovations, Belmont

    Google Scholar 

  36. Vermunt JK, Magidson J (2002) Latent class cluster analysis. In: Hagenaars JA, McCutcheon AL (eds) Applied latent class analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 89–107

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  37. Neumann M, Galushko M, Goldblatt H, Visser A, Wirtz M, Karbach U, Ernstmann N, Ommen O, Pfaff H (2009) Barriers to use psycho-oncological services an exploration of perspectives by users, their relatives, non-users, physicians, and nurses. Support Care Cancer. doi:10.1007/s00520-009-0731-2

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC (2006) Multivariate data analysis. Upper Prentice Hall, Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  39. Mittag O, Böhmer S, Deck R et al (2003) Fragen über Fragen: cognitive survey in der Fragebogenentwicklung./One question after the other: cognitive survey in the development of questionnaires. Soz Praventivmed 48:55–64

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Longo DR (2005) Understanding health information, communication, and information seeking of patients and consumers: a comprehensive and integrated model. Health Expect 8:189–194

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Schofield NG, Green C, Creed F (2008) Communication skills of health-care professionals working in oncology—can they be improved? Eur J Oncol Nurs 12:4–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Brown R, Butow PN, Boyer MJ, Tattersall MHN (1999) Promoting patient participation in the cancer consultation: evaluation of a prompt sheet and coaching in question asking. Br J Cancer 80:242–248

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Clayton J, Butow PN, Tattersall MHN, Devine RJ, Simpson JM, Aggarwal G, Clark KJ, Currow DC, Elliott LM, Lacey J, Lee PG, Noel MA (2007) Randomized controlled trial of a prompt list to help advanced cancer patients and their caregivers to ask questions about prognosis and end-of-life care. J Clin Oncol 25:715–723

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Kruijver IPM, Garssen B, Visser AP, Kuiper AJ (2006) Signalising psychosocial problems in cancer care. The structural use of a short psychosocial checklist during medical or nursing visits. Patient Educ Couns 62:163–177

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Parker PA, Davison BJ, Tishelman C, Brundage MD (2005) What do we know about facilitating patient communication in the cancer care setting? Psycho-Oncol 14:848–858

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Sepucha KR, Belkora JK, Mutchnik S, Esserman LJ (2002) Consultation planning to help breast cancer patients prepare for medical consultations: effect on communication and satisfaction for patients and physicians. J Clin Oncol 20:2695–2700

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. van Wersch A, de Boer MF, van der Does E, de Jong P, Knegt P, Meeuwis CA, Stringer P, Pruyn JFA (1997) Continuity of information in cancer care: evaluation of a logbook. Patient Educ Couns 31:223–236

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the Else Kröner-Fresenius Foundation for providing financial support during the course of this study (grant number P43/05//A33/05/F0). Melanie Neumann is supported by a grant from the Software AG Foundation, Germany. We would also like to thank Sarah Frances for her qualified support concerning our application of the English language.

We confirm all patient/personal identifiers have been removed or disguised so the patients/persons described are not identifiable and cannot be identified through the details of the article.

Conflict of interest

The authors indicated no potential conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Gerhard Kienle Institute for Medical Theory, Integrative and Anthroposophic Medicine, Medical Department, Private University of Witten/Herdecke, Alfred-Herrhausenstr. 50, 58448, Witten, Germany

    Melanie Neumann, Alfred Längler, Friedrich Edelhäuser, Christian Scheffer & Diethard Tauschel

  2. Integrated Curriculum for Anthroposophic Medicine (ICURAM), Medical Department, Private University of Witten/Herdecke, Alfred-Herrhausenstr. 50, 58448, Witten, Germany

    Melanie Neumann, Alfred Längler, Friedrich Edelhäuser, Christian Scheffer & Diethard Tauschel

  3. Institute for Medical Sociology, Health Services Research and Rehabilitation Sciences, Department of Human Sciences and Department of Medicine, University of Cologne, Eupener Strasse 129, 50933, Cologne, Germany

    Melanie Neumann, Nicole Ernstmann, Oliver Ommen & Holger Pfaff

  4. Interdisciplinary Center for Health Services Research, Medical Department, Private University of Witten/Herdecke, Alfred-Herrhausenstr. 50, 58448, Witten, Germany

    Melanie Neumann, Christian Scheffer & Diethard Tauschel

  5. Institute for Psychology, University of Education Freiburg, Kartäuserstr. 61b, 79117, Freiburg, Germany

    Markus Wirtz

  6. Department of Paediatric Oncology, Community Hospital Herdecke, Gerhard-Kienle-Weg 4, 58313, Herdecke, Germany

    Alfred Längler

Authors
  1. Melanie Neumann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Markus Wirtz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nicole Ernstmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Oliver Ommen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Alfred Längler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Friedrich Edelhäuser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Christian Scheffer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Diethard Tauschel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Holger Pfaff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Melanie Neumann.

Appendix

Appendix

Translation of the German measures

Measure

English translation

Trust in nurses

The nurses were open and honest with me.

I completely trusted my nurses.

The nurses did not interrupt me while I was talking.

I had the impression that the nurses are very competent.

With the nurses in this hospital, one is in good hands.

Caring attention from nurses

The nurses showed feeling in their discussion with me.

The nurses conducted regular discussions with me.

I had a dedicated contact person assigned to me from the nursing staff.

One could personally confide in the nurses.

The nurses gave me time to think when important decisions had to me made.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Neumann, M., Wirtz, M., Ernstmann, N. et al. Identifying and predicting subgroups of information needs among cancer patients: an initial study using latent class analysis. Support Care Cancer 19, 1197–1209 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-010-0939-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-010-0939-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation