The role of a communication intervention in shaping cancer clinical trial consultations: patient and provider experiences with the TrialTalk tool

Abstract PURPOSE Evaluation of TrialTalk, a communication intervention, in a randomized controlled trial showed that patients who experienced TrialTalk (intervention group) were more likely to consent to trials compared to those who didn’t (control group). This study seeks to explore how and why TrialTalk influenced patients’ trial decisions and compare the decision-making consultation experiences of the two groups. METHODS Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a sample of patients with cancer and providers from both groups who underwent a decision-making consultation, including clinical trials. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded using an evidence synthesis–based model. RESULTS Interviews were conducted between February 2018 and April 2019. In total, 11 providers (8 in the intervention group and 3 in the control group), and 7 patients (4 in the intervention group and 3 in the control group) participated in the interviews. Seven themes were identified about the decision-making consultation, (1) delivering prognostic information and managing patient emotions, (2) describing treatment options and promoting patients’ autonomy, (3) Improving patients’ awareness and understanding of treatment options, (4) Gathering support and information after visit, (5) Recordkeeping and sharing information with other team members, (6) Deliberation and integrating patients’ values and preferences, and (7) Making the decision. Concerns about TrialTalk intervention were noted. CONCLUSION This pilot study shows that both patients and providers had positive experiences with TrialTalk intervention. Using TrialTalk prompted providers to increase their use of several aspects of shared decision-making. Future research is needed to evaluate the impact of TrialTalk implementation on health outcomes.