OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of literature reporting on the use of volunteers in support programs for people with cancer. METHODS: PsycINFO, Medline and CINAHL were used to identify papers published up to April 2007 reporting one-to-one support programs using volunteers. Program data were extracted from the papers, which were rated on research quality and descriptions of the program, volunteers and support recipients. RESULTS: Twenty-eight papers were reviewed. Nineteen (69%) reported peer-support programs, with four (14%) pertaining to the Reach to Recovery program for women with breast cancer, and eight (28%) describing other peer-support programs for women with breast cancer. Few papers described the programs sufficiently to enable a good understanding of support recipients, volunteers, and what transpired between volunteers and support recipients. Twenty papers (71%) were research studies: 10 (36%) with one group descriptive data, 6 (21%) were non-randomized comparative studies and 4 (14%) were randomized controlled trials. CONCLUSION: While most papers reported that programs were beneficial, few presented data from studies using rigorous research methodologies to support these claims. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Using volunteers in cancer care may have merits; however, papers need to provide more information regarding these programs and further evidence is required to determine their effectiveness.
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of literature reporting on the use of volunteers in support programs for people with cancer. METHODS: PsycINFO, Medline and CINAHL were used to identify papers published up to April 2007 reporting one-to-one support programs using volunteers. Program data were extracted from the papers, which were rated on research quality and descriptions of the program, volunteers and support recipients. RESULTS: Twenty-eight papers were reviewed. Nineteen (69%) reported peer-support programs, with four (14%) pertaining to the Reach to Recovery program for women with breast cancer, and eight (28%) describing other peer-support programs for women with breast cancer. Few papers described the programs sufficiently to enable a good understanding of support recipients, volunteers, and what transpired between volunteers and support recipients. Twenty papers (71%) were research studies: 10 (36%) with one group descriptive data, 6 (21%) were non-randomized comparative studies and 4 (14%) were randomized controlled trials. CONCLUSION: While most papers reported that programs were beneficial, few presented data from studies using rigorous research methodologies to support these claims. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Using volunteers in cancer care may have merits; however, papers need to provide more information regarding these programs and further evidence is required to determine their effectiveness.
Authors: Jennifer A Mirrielees; Kayla R Breckheimer; Teresa A White; Deb A Denure; Michelle M Schroeder; Martha E Gaines; Lee G Wilke; Amye J Tevaarwerk Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Susan Magasi; Jennifer Banas; Bruriah Horowitz; Judy Panko Reis; Kimberly The; Tom Wilson; David Victoson Journal: Prog Community Health Partnersh Date: 2019
Authors: Ben Huntingdon; Penelope Schofield; Zahava Wolfowicz; Rebecca Bergin; Donna Kabel; Jennifer Edmunds; Sylvia Penberthy; Ilona Juraskova Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-07-30 Impact factor: 3.603