Nursing - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/11343/257

Filters

2012 - 2013 2
2
Reset filters

Settings
Statistics
Citations
Author: Aranda, Sanchia × Author: Gough, Karla × Author: Jefford, Michael × Author: Schofield, Penelope × Start date: 2004 ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Evaluating a nurse-led survivorship care package (SurvivorCare) for bowel cancer survivors: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
    Jefford, M ; Aranda, S ; Gough, K ; Lotfi-Jam, K ; Butow, P ; Krishnasamy, M ; Young, J ; Phipps-Nelson, J ; Russell, L ; King, D ; Schofield, P (BMC, 2013-08-19)
    BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the most common cancer affecting both men and women in Australia. The illness and related treatments can cause distressing adverse effects, impact on emotional and psychological well-being, and adversely affect social, occupational and relationship functioning for many years after the end of treatment or, in fact, lifelong. Current models of follow-up fail to address the complex needs arising after treatment completion. Strategies to better prepare and support survivors are urgently required. We previously developed a nurse-led supportive care program (SurvivorCare) and tested it in a pilot study involving 10 CRC survivors. The intervention was found to be highly acceptable, appropriate, relevant and useful. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a multisite, randomised controlled trial, designed to assess the impact of the addition of the SurvivorCare intervention to usual post-treatment care, for people with potentially cured CRC. SurvivorCare comprises the provision of survivorship educational materials, a tailored survivorship care plan, an individually tailored nurse-led, face-to-face end of treatment consultation and three subsequent telephone calls. Eligible patients have completed treatment for potentially cured CRC. Other eligibility criteria include stage I to III disease, age greater than 18 years and adequate understanding of English. All consenting patients complete questionnaires at three time points over a six-month period (baseline, two and six months). Measures assess psychological distress, unmet needs and quality of life. DISCUSSION: This supportive care package has the potential to significantly reduce individual suffering, whilst reducing the burden of follow-up on acute cancer services through enhanced engagement with and utilisation of general practitioners and community based services. If the intervention is successful in achieving the expected health benefits, it could be disseminated readily. All training and supporting materials have been developed and standardised. Furthermore, the intervention could easily be adapted to other cancer or chronic disease settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12610000207011.
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Impact of a novel nurse-led prechemotherapy education intervention (ChemoEd) on patient distress, symptom burden, and treatment-related information and support needs: results from a randomised, controlled trial
    Aranda, S ; Jefford, M ; Yates, P ; Gough, K ; Seymour, J ; Francis, P ; Baravelli, C ; Breen, S ; Schofield, P (OXFORD UNIV PRESS, 2012-01)
    BACKGROUND: High levels of distress and need for self-care information by patients commencing chemotherapy suggest that current prechemotherapy education is suboptimal. We conducted a randomised, controlled trial of a prechemotherapy education intervention (ChemoEd) to assess impact on patient distress, treatment-related concerns, and the prevalence and severity of and bother caused by six chemotherapy side-effects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and ninety-two breast, gastrointestinal, and haematologic cancer patients were recruited before the trial closing prematurely (original target 352). ChemoEd patients received a DVD, question-prompt list, self-care information, an education consultation≥24 h before first treatment (intervention 1), telephone follow-up 48 h after first treatment (intervention 2), and a face-to-face review immediately before second treatment (intervention 3). Patient outcomes were measured at baseline (T1: pre-education) and immediately preceding treatment cycles 1 (T2) and 3 (T3). RESULTS: ChemoEd did not significantly reduce patient distress. However, a significant decrease in sensory/psychological (P=0.027) and procedural (P=0.03) concerns, as well as prevalence and severity of and bother due to vomiting (all P=0.001), were observed at T3. In addition, subgroup analysis of patients with elevated distress at T1 indicated a significant decrease (P=0.035) at T2 but not at T3 (P=0.055) in ChemoEd patients. CONCLUSIONS: ChemoEd holds promise to improve patient treatment-related concerns and some physical/psychological outcomes; however, further research is required on more diverse patient populations to ensure generalisability.