Communication preferences in glioblastoma
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Communication preferences for glioblastoma treatment: what matters most in times of Covid-19
IRAS ID
292198
Contact name
Florien Boele
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Leeds
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 11 months, 31 days
Research summary
Rationale: Patients diagnosed with glioblastoma face a poor prognosis and disease recurrence is inevitable. Treatment is aggressive and includes surgery, radiotherapy and/ or chemotherapy, with a view to balancing benefits for quantity and quality of life. Yet, little is known about how treatment options are communicated to glioblastoma patients and their families, or how this is impacted by the Covid-19 outbreak.
Objective: We aim to investigate communication preferences of the context of glioblastoma. Outcomes will be used to develop communication guidelines for clinicians so that glioblastoma patients and their families can have more helpful, informed, and patient-centred discussions regarding treatment options.
Study design: Qualitative study with semi-structured interviews.Study population: Adult (≥18 years of age) patients diagnosed with a histologically confirmed glioblastoma, their family carers, and healthcare professionals involved in the care of glioblastoma patients.
Intervention: Not applicable.Main study parameters/endpoints: Topics covered in interviews will include experiences of communication around treatment, which treatment benefits matter most, and how communication around treatment has been affected by the Covid-19 outbreak.
Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit and group relatedness: There are no direct benefits for participants in this study, but their participation will contribute to better knowledge on communication around treatment. There are small potential risks: patients and carers are confronted with issues that brain tumour patients have, which may pose a psychological burden on them. Moreover, it will cost participants time to complete study procedures, although this is not substantial.
REC name
East Midlands - Nottingham 1 Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
21/EM/0006
Date of REC Opinion
21 Jan 2021
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion