Physiotherapy - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3
-
ItemPatient and clinician perspectives of pelvic floor dysfunction after gynaecological cancer(ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC, 2022-06)PURPOSE: To explore and compare patient and clinician experiences, knowledge and preferences in relation to screening and management of pelvic floor (PF) dysfunction in the gynaecology-oncology setting. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with women reporting PF symptoms after gynaecological cancer treatment, and gynaecology-oncology clinicians. Interviews were transcribed and thematically analysed and were conducted until data saturation was reached. RESULTS: We interviewed 12 patients and 13 clinicians. We identified two main themes: (1) Experience with PF symptoms, screening, disclosure and management and (2) Future hope of what should happen to screen and manage PF symptoms. Differences between what participants had experienced and what they felt should happen highlighted a perceived need for improving PF screening and management. A sub-theme that reflected relevant barriers and enablers was also identified. Barriers included time pressure, being focussed on cancer treatment and not side-effects, and patients feeling unwell, emotional, and overwhelmed with the logistics of oncology appointments. Enablers included the patient-clinician relationship, and opportunities for improving management included integrating nursing and PF physiotherapy with oncology appointments. CONCLUSIONS: Gynaecological cancer survivors and clinicians perceive a need to improve screening and management for PF symptoms. While barriers and differences in perception exist, there are opportunities to improve how PF symptoms can be screened and managed in this population. Further studies exploring the feasibility of providing integrated multidisciplinary PF therapy services may be warranted.
-
ItemThe Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire is a valid measure of pelvic floor symptoms in patients following surgery for colorectal cancer(WILEY, 2017-06)AIMS: This study evaluated the construct validity of the Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire against two alternative measures of the severity of bladder and bowel symptoms. METHODS: This was an exploratory analysis of data from two prospective studies. Patients who had undergone surgery for colorectal cancer were analysed. Bladder and bowel symptoms were measured using three validated questionnaires: the Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire, the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Short Form Questionnaire for urinary incontinence and the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Bowel Module post-cancer treatment. RESULTS: The study sample consisted of 44 participants, including 25 men and 19 women. The Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire bladder and bowel domain scores demonstrated moderate positive correlations with the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Short Form Questionnaire for urinary incontinence (r = 0.74, P < 0.01) and the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Bowel Module (r = 0.69-0.78, P < 0.01). Similar results were obtained in each gender subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggested that the Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire may be a valid measurement tool for use in colorectal cancer populations in clinical trials and practice. Future research using larger cohorts is warranted.
-
ItemUnderstanding factors influencing physical activity and exercise in lung cancer: a systematic review(SPRINGER, 2017-03)PURPOSE: Despite evidence and clinical practice guidelines supporting physical activity (PA) for people with lung cancer, this evidence has not translated into clinical practice. This review aims to identify, evaluate and synthesise studies examining the barriers and enablers for patients with lung cancer to participate in PA from the perspective of patients, carers and health care providers (HCPs). METHODS: Systematic review of articles using electronic databases: MEDLINE (1950-2016), CINAHL (1982-2016), EMBASE (1980-2016), Scopus (2004-2016) and Cochrane (2016). Quantitative and qualitative studies, published in English in a peer-reviewed journal, which assessed the barriers or enablers to PA for patients with lung cancer were included. Registered-PROSPERO (CRD4201603341). RESULTS: Twenty-six studies (n = 9 cross-sectional, n = 4 case series, n = 11 qualitative) including 1074 patients, 23 carers and 169 HCPs were included. Barriers and enablers to PA were identified (6 major themes, 18 sub-themes): Barriers included patient-level factors (physical capability, symptoms, comorbidities, previous sedentary lifestyle, psychological influences, perceived relevance), HCP factors (time/knowledge to deliver information) and environmental factors (access to services, resources, timing relative to treatment). Enablers included anticipated benefits, opportunity for behaviour change and influences from HCPs and carers. CONCLUSION: This systematic review has identified the volume of literature demonstrating that barriers and enablers to PA in lung cancer are multidimensional and span diverse factors. These include patient-level factors, such as symptoms, comorbidities, sedentary lifestyle, mood and fear, and environmental factors. These factors should be considered to identify and develop suitable interventions and clinical services in attempt to increase PA in patients with lung cancer.