Louis A. Penner.

Purpose: Health providers’ implicit racial bias negatively affects communication and patient reactions to many medical interactions. However, its effects on racially discordant oncology interactions are largely unknown. Thus, we examined whether oncologist implicit racial bias has similar effects in oncology interactions. We further investigated whether oncologist implicit bias negatively affects patients’ perceptions of recommended treatments (i.e., degree of confidence, expected difficulty). We predicted oncologist implicit bias would negatively affect communication, patient reactions to interactions, and, indirectly, patient perceptions of recommended treatments.Methods: Participants were 18 non-black medical oncologists and 112 black patients. Oncologists completed an implicit racial bias measure several weeks before video-recorded treatment discussions with new patients. Observers rated oncologist communication and recorded interaction length of time and amount of time oncologists and patients spoke. Following interactions, patients answered questions about oncologists’ patient-centeredness and difficulty remembering contents of the interaction, distress, trust, and treatment perceptions.Results: As predicted, oncologists higher in implicit racial bias had shorter interactions, and patients and observers rated these oncologists’ communication as less patient-centered and supportive. Higher implicit bias also was associated with more patient difficulty remembering contents of the interaction. In addition, oncologist implicit bias indirectly predicted less patient confidence in recommended treatments, and greater perceived difficulty completing them, through its impact on oncologists’ communication (as rated by both patients and observers).Conclusion: Oncologist implicit racial bias is negatively associated with oncologist communication, patients’ reactions to racially discordant oncology interactions, and patient perceptions of recommended treatments. These perceptions could subsequently directly affect patient-treatment decisions. Thus, implicit racial bias is a likely source of racial treatment disparities and must be addressed in oncology training and practice.

Pediatric cancer caregivers are typically present at their child’s frequent, invasive treatments, and such treatments elicit substantial distress. Yet variability exists in how even the most anxious caregivers cope. Here we examined one potential source of this variability: caregivers’ tendencies to self-distance when reflecting on their feelings surrounding their child’s treatments. We measured caregivers’ self-distancing and trait anxiety at baseline, anticipatory anxiety during their child’s treatment procedures, and psychological distress and avoidance 3 months later. Self-distancing buffered high (but not low) trait anxious caregivers against short- and long-term distress without promoting avoidance. These findings held when controlling for other buffers, highlighting the unique benefits of self-distancing. These results identify a coping process that buffers vulnerable caregivers against a chronic life stressor while also demonstrating the ecological validity of laboratory research on self-distancing. Future research is needed to explicate causality and the cognitive and physiological processes that mediate these results.

This research concerned relationships among Black cancer patients’ health care attitudes and behaviors (e.g., adherence, decisional control preferences,) and their race-related attitudes and beliefs shaped by (a) general life experiences (i.e., perceived discrimination, racial identity) and (b) experiences interacting with health care systems (i.e., physician mistrust, suspicion about medical care). Perceived discrimination, racial identity, and medical suspicion correlated weakly with one another; mistrust and suspicion correlated only moderately. Race-related attitudes and beliefs were associated with health care attitudes and behavior, but patterns of association varied. Physician mistrust and medical suspicion each independently correlated with adherence and decisional control preferences, but discrimination only correlated with control preferences. Associations among patients’ different racial attitudes/beliefs are more complex than previously assumed. Interventions that target patient attitudes/beliefs and health care disparities might be more productive if they focus on mistrust or suspicion specific to health care providers/systems and their correlates identified in this study.

Health and healthcare disparities are well documented across many diseases and conditions. Not surprisingly, disparities also exist in the context of palliative care, placing a particular burden on members of racial and ethnic minority groups. This chapter describes patterns of disparities that have been documented in various palliative care domains, including the use of services, geographic or medical settings, pain management, disenrollment from hospice, and advance directives. Although most research is on African American, Hispanic, and Asian adults, the chapter also reviews the limited research on additional ethnic groups and on children. The chapter also proposes a conceptual model to discuss the multiple and multilevel factors that contribute to these disparities, including societal, hospital, and provider; patient-provider interpersonal communication; and patient and family factors, and describes current research limitations and makes recommendations for future research. Communication interventions and strategies that may reduce or eliminate palliative care disparities are suggested.

Large health disparities persist between Black and White Americans. The social psychology of intergroup relations suggests some solutions to health care disparities due to racial bias. Three paths can lead from racial bias to poorer health among Black Americans. First is the already well-documented physical and psychological toll of being a target of persistent discrimination. Second, implicit bias can affect physicians’ perceptions and decisions, creating racial disparities in medical treatments, although evidence is mixed. The third path describes a less direct route: Physicians’ implicit racial bias negatively affects communication and the patient–provider relationship, resulting in racial disparities in the outcomes of medical interactions. Strong evidence shows that physician implicit bias negatively affects Black patients’ reactions to medical interactions, and there is good circumstantial evidence that these reactions affect health outcomes of the interactions. Solutions focused on the physician, the patient, and the health care delivery system; all agree that trying to ignore patients’ race or to change physicians’ implicit racial attitudes will not be effective and may actually be counterproductive. Instead, solutions can minimize the impact of racial bias on medical decisions and on patient–provider relationships.