A qualitative study on patients’ and their support persons’ preferences for receiving one longer consultation or two shorter consultations when being informed about allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

• Main Authors: Anne Herrmann, Ernst Holler, Matthias Edinger, Sascha Eickmann, Daniel Wolff
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2021-06-01
• Series: BMC Health Services Research
• Subjects: Hematological cancer; Stem cell transplantation; Patient preferences; Interviews; Qualitative research; Patient-centered care
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06632-9

Abstract Background Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) is the only potentially curative treatment option for many patients with hematological disorders but it includes a significant risk of mortality and long-term morbidity. Many patients and their support persons feel overwhelmed when being informed about alloHSCT and may benefit from improvements in consultation style and timing. Aims To explore, qualitatively, in a sample of hematological cancer patients and their support persons, their preferences for receiving one longer consultation or two shorter consultations when being informed about alloHSCT. Participants’ perceptions of when and how different consultation styles should be offered were also examined. Methods Semi-structured face-to-face and phone interviews were conducted. A purposeful sampling frame was used. Data were analysed using framework analysis. Results Twenty patients and 13 support persons were recruited (consent rate: 96%, response rate: 91%). Most patients (60%) and support persons (62%) preferred two shorter consultations over one longer consultation. This helped them digest and recall the information provided, remember questions they had, involve significant others and search for additional information. Patients would have liked to be offered paper and pen to take notes, take a break after 30 min and have their understanding checked at the end of the first consultation, e.g. using question prompt lists. Some patients and support persons preferred both consultations to happen on the same day to reduce waiting times as well as travel times and costs. Others preferred having a few days in-between both consultations to better help them prepare the second consultation. Participants reported varying preferences for different consultation styles depending on personal and disease-related characteristics, such as age, health literacy level and previous treatment. Conclusion To our knowledge, this is the first qualitative study to explore patients’ and their support persons’ preferences for having one longer consultation or two shorter consultations when being informed about alloHSCT. Receiving two shorter consultations may help patients process and recall the information provided and more actively involve their support persons. Clinicians should consider offering patients and their support persons to take a break after 30 min, provide paper and pen as well as question prompt lists.