Nursing - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableWomen with gynaecological cancer awaiting radiotherapy: Self-reported wellbeing, general psychological distress, symptom distress, sexual function, and supportive care needs(ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE, 2022-10)OBJECTIVE: To better serve women with gynaecological cancers, we need a sound understanding of their health, wellbeing and needs. This study sought to explore these issues in a sample of Australian women before commencing curative radiotherapy. METHODS: We undertook a secondary analysis of baseline data from a supportive care trial (n = 311). Descriptive statistics were used to summarise responses to measures of wellbeing, general psychological distress, symptom distress, sexual function and vaginal changes, and supportive care needs. Pre-specified regression models were used to examine sources of variation in wellbeing and sexual function. RESULTS: Women reported lower emotional, functional and physical wellbeing than population norms (all p < 0.001). The prevalence of general psychological distress was 31% (95% CI 26-36%). Distress caused by physical symptoms was typically low. Health system and information needs comprised eight of the top ten moderate-to-high supportive care needs. Most women reported no change in interest for physical contact or sex compared to pre-diagnosis, but some sexually active women (16-24%) reported smaller vaginal size, increased dryness, and more pain on intercourse. General psychological distress was a robust marker of poorer wellbeing and sexual function. CONCLUSIONS: Before radiotherapy, a substantial minority of women with gynaecological cancers experience general psychological distress, reduced wellbeing and moderate-to-high health system and information needs. A model of comprehensive care incorporating assessment of unmet needs, general psychological distress, and sexual issues is recommended. Healthcare providers may require training to elicit and respond to a constellation of interrelated issues and access relevant services for women requiring additional support.
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableDifferential adherence to peer and nurse components of a supportive care package-The appeal of peer support may be related to women's health and psychological status(ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD, 2022-03)OBJECTIVE: Knowledge of factors associated with intervention non-adherence may provide insights into the clinical utility of non-pharmacologic interventions. METHODS: This study compared complete and incomplete adherers to two separate components of a novel intervention package for women undergoing curative intent radiotherapy for gynaecological cancer on socio-demographic, clinical and pre-radiotherapy patient-reported outcomes data. RESULTS: Adherence to the tailored specialist nurse consultations was satisfactory (71% participated in all available sessions, 19% participated in all but one). Adherence to the telephone peer support sessions was less satisfactory (47% participated in all available sessions, 24% participated in all but one session). Complete adherers to the peer sessions reported significantly lower levels of psychological distress and significantly higher levels of physical, emotional and functional wellbeing before radiotherapy. No other statistically significant differences were observed between complete and incomplete adherers to the nurse- or peer-led sessions. CONCLUSION: Women's ability or motivation to engage with peer support may be influenced by their health and psychological status. Further, the extent of intervention non-adherence to the peer-led component may have compromised the assessment of its efficacy. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Peer support may be less acceptable or appropriate for women with more complex care needs. Such women may prefer specialised care from trained professionals.
-
ItemIncluding migrant oncology patients in research: A multisite pilot randomised controlled trial testing consultation audio-recordings and question prompt lists(ELSEVIER INC, 2022-08)BACKGROUND: Oncology patients who are migrants or refugees face worse outcomes due to language and communication barriers impacting care. Interventions such as consultation audio-recordings and question prompt lists may prove beneficial in mediating communication challenges. However, designing robust research inclusive of patients who do not speak English is challenging. This study therefore aimed to: a) pilot test and assess the appropriateness of the proposed research design and methods for engaging migrant populations, and b) determine whether a multi-site RCT efficacy assessment of the communication intervention utilising these methods is feasible. METHODS: This study is a mixed-methods parallel-group, randomised controlled feasibility pilot trial. Feasibility outcomes comprised assessment of: i) screening and recruitment processes, ii) design and procedures, and iii) research time and costing. The communication intervention comprised audio-recordings of a key medical consultation with an interpreter, and question prompt lists and cancer information translated into Arabic, Greek, Traditional, and Simplified Chinese. RESULTS: Assessment of feasibility parameters revealed that despite barriers, methods utilised in this study supported the inclusion of migrant oncology patients in research. A future multi-site RCT efficacy assessment of the INFORM communication intervention using these methods is feasible if recommendations to strengthen screening and recruitment are adopted. Importantly, hiring of bilingual research assistants, and engagement with community and consumer advocates is essential. Early involvement of clinical and interpreting staff as key stakeholders is likewise recommended. CONCLUSION: Results from this feasibility RCT help us better understand and overcome the challenges and misconceptions about including migrant patients in clinical research.
-
ItemCulturally and linguistically diverse oncology patients' perspectives of consultation audio-recordings and question prompt lists(WILEY, 2018-09)OBJECTIVE: Ethnicity and migrant status result in disparities with cancer burden and survival, with communication difficulties cited as the main barrier to access. Our research team tested a communication intervention package comprising consultation audio-recordings (ARs) and question prompt lists (QPLs) for low English-speaking (LES) patients with cancer. This study explored LES patient experiences, preferences, and recommendations regarding the communication package. METHODS: Participants completed a questionnaire and qualitative interview regarding ARs and QPLs. Eligibility criteria comprised aged ≥18 years old; a consultation with an oncologist between June 1, 2015 and April 1, 2016; an Arabic, Cantonese, Greek, or Mandarin professional interpreter booked for that consultation; and randomised to receive the communication intervention. RESULTS: Eighteen patients completed the qualitative interview and 17 completed the questionnaire. Fifteen reported listening to the AR at least once. Participants reported that QPLs and ARs provide support and assistance with remembering and understanding medical information. Both resources were seen as having applicability beyond the oncology setting in regards to improving health service delivery and continuity of care. However, patients felt that individual tailoring of the resources should be considered. Patients also found it useful to share ARs with family. CONCLUSIONS: The LES participants in this study considered the ARs and QPLs useful for most, but not all contexts. Recommendations regarding delivery and use highlight that these resources should be tailored and patient-driven. Further, patients foresaw a range of additional uses for consultation ARs within the broader healthcare context.
-
ItemSuboptimal health literacy in patients with lung cancer or head and neck cancer(SPRINGER, 2013-08)BACKGROUND: Health literacy is the capacity to seek, understand and utilise health information to make informed health decisions. Suboptimal health literacy has been linked to poor health outcomes. This study assessed health literacy in patients treated for head and neck or lung cancer and associations between health literacy and demographic factors and distress levels. METHODS: Consecutive English-speaking patients were approached at Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre. Face-to-face interviews were conducted. Health literacy was assessed using the Shortened Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (S-TOFHLA) and Health Literacy Management Scale (HeLMS). Distress was assessed by the Distress Thermometer. RESULTS: Response rate was 73 % (n = 93). Using S-TOFHLA, prevalence of inadequate and marginal health literacy was 5.4 and 6.5 % respectively, and both groups were associated with older age (p = 0.043) and low education level (p = 0.009). Specific assessment of S-TOFHLA revealed that 70 % could not interpret prescription labels. HeLMS reported that 17 % had health literacy difficulties. Low scores on domains of HeLMS were associated with lower education level (p < 0.05) but younger age (p < 0.05). Distress was not associated with S-TOFHLA scores but related to low scores in two domains of HeLMS (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Using two different measures, a substantial proportion of patients have poor health literacy abilities and may experience difficulties in accessing health services.
-
ItemNavigate: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of an online treatment decision aid for men with low-risk prostate cancer and their partners (vol 22, 49, 2021)(BMC, 2021-01-27)An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.
-
ItemNavigate: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of an online treatment decision aid for men with low-risk prostate cancer and their partners(BMC, 2021-01-11)BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) is the disease management option of choice for low-risk prostate cancer. Despite this, men with low-risk prostate cancer (LRPC) find management decisions distressing and confusing. We developed Navigate, an online decision aid to help men and their partners make management decisions consistent with their values. The aims are to evaluate the impact of Navigate on uptake of AS; decision-making preparedness; decisional conflict, regret and satisfaction; quality of illness communication; and prostate cancer-specific quality of life and anxiety. In addition, the healthcare cost impact, cost-effectiveness and patterns of use of Navigate will be assessed. This paper describes the study protocol. METHODS: Three hundred four men and their partners are randomly assigned one-to-one to Navigate or to the control arm. Randomisation is electronically generated and stratified by site. Navigate is an online decision aid that presents up-to-date, unbiased information on LRPC tailored to Australian men and their partners including each management option and potential side-effects, and an interactive values clarification exercise. Participants in the control arm will be directed to the website of Australia's peak national body for prostate cancer. Eligible patients will be men within 3 months of being diagnosed with LRPC, aged 18 years or older, and who are yet to make a treatment decision, who are deemed eligible for AS by their treating clinician and who have Internet access and sufficient English to participate. The primary outcome is self-reported uptake of AS as the first-line management option. Secondary outcomes include self-reported preparedness for decision-making; decisional conflict, regret and satisfaction; quality of illness communication; and prostate cancer-specific quality of life. Uptake of AS 1 month after consent will be determined through patient self-report. Men and their partners will complete study outcome measures before randomisation and 1, 3 and 6 months after study consent. DISCUSSION: The Navigate online decision aid has the potential to increase the choice of AS in LRPC, avoiding or delaying unnecessary radical treatments and associated side effects. In addition, Navigate is likely to reduce patients' and partners' confusion and distress in management decision-making and increase their quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12616001665426 . Registered on 2 December 2016. All items from the WHO Trial Registration Data set can be found in this manuscript.
-
ItemEvaluating a nurse-led survivorship care package (SurvivorCare) for bowel cancer survivors: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial(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.
-
ItemPragmatic, consensus-based minimum standards and structured interview to guide the selection and development of cancer support group leaders: a protocol paper(BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2017-06)INTRODUCTION: Across the globe, peer support groups have emerged as a community-led approach to accessing support and connecting with others with cancer experiences. Little is known about qualities required to lead a peer support group or how to determine suitability for the role. Organisations providing assistance to cancer support groups and their leaders are currently operating independently, without a standard national framework or published guidelines. This protocol describes the methods that will be used to generate pragmatic consensus-based minimum standards and an accessible structured interview with user manual to guide the selection and development of cancer support group leaders. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will: (A) identify and collate peer-reviewed literature that describes qualities of support group leaders through a systematic review; (B) content analyse eligible documents for information relevant to requisite knowledge, skills and attributes of group leaders generally and specifically to cancer support groups; (C) use an online reactive Delphi method with an interdisciplinary panel of experts to produce a clear, suitable, relevant and appropriate structured interview comprising a set of agreed questions with behaviourally anchored rating scales; (D) produce a user manual to facilitate standard delivery of the structured interview; (E) pilot the structured interview to improve clinical utility; and (F) field test the structured interview to develop a rational scoring model and provide a summary of existing group leader qualities. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is approved by the Department Human Ethics Advisory Group of The University of Melbourne. The study is based on voluntary participation and informed written consent, with participants able to withdraw at any time. The results will be disseminated at research conferences and peer review journals. Presentations and free access to the developed structured interview and user manual will be available to cancer agencies.
-
ItemThe trials and tribulations of conducting an m-health pilot randomized controlled trial to improve oral cancer therapy adherence: recommendations for future multisite, non-drug clinical trials(BioMed Central, 2019-04-15)OBJECTIVE: Integrating mobile phone-based health (m-health) interventions into healthcare systems is one solution to improve access to services for the growing number of patients with chronic illness. Practical challenges such as poor recruitment and inadequate resource allocation can hamper the assessment of such interventions with clinical trial methodology. This paper highlights the challenges encountered during a pilot randomized controlled trial of an m-health medication adherence intervention and offers recommendations for future multi-site, non-drug clinical trials. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were recruited to the study; eight were randomly allocated to the intervention arm. Intervention participants responded to their daily medication-reminder text messages, indicating that medication had been taken or not, and nurses were able to organize their calls around their workload. The trial closed prematurely primarily due to inadequate numbers of eligible patients; however, other potentially resolvable feasibility issues were identified. These included lack of infrastructure at study sites, poor screening data acquisition and management processes, and inexperience in conducting supportive care trials at participating sites. M-health intervention trials are designed to inform implementation of best supportive care practice. Adequate skills and infrastructure are research prerequisites that require careful consideration and sufficient investment for the successful execution of multi-site supportive care trials. Trial registration Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register: ACTRN12612000635864.