Literature DB >> 22722886

Cancer patients' and clinicians' opinions on the best time in secondary care to approach patients for recruitment to longitudinal questionnaire-based research.

Laura Ashley1, Helen Jones, Galina Velikova, Penny Wright.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: A priority of the UK National Cancer Survivorship Initiative is to increase collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) longitudinally post-diagnosis. This study aimed to gather cancer patients' and clinicians' opinions and preferences about the best time, in the secondary care pathway, to approach patients about joining longitudinal observational PROMs-based (LO-PROMs) research.
METHODS: The sample comprised 15 patients with non-metastatic breast, colorectal or prostate cancer, and 15 clinicians including surgeons, oncologists and nurse specialists. Patients and clinicians participated in one face-to-face topic-guided audio-recorded interview. Data were analysed using thematic content analysis.
RESULTS: Patients did not want to be approached about LO-PROMs research early in the care pathway, near diagnosis and treatment planning or before any surgery and its results. Patients felt that LO-PROMs research is best introduced from the time people are 'settled' on (post-surgical) treatment regimens, provided they are coping well emotionally and not experiencing significant physical side effects; patients emphasised variability in people's experience of and response to cancer and treatment. Clinicians also advised against approach near diagnosis, although generally recommended initiating recruitment somewhat sooner than patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients expressed strong homogeneous preferences and ideally wanted to be approached about LO-PROMs research when their initial fears and anxiety about cancer treatment and survival had diminished, and they felt some sense of certainty and optimism about the future. As the timeline of clinical events varies, maximising recruitment may mean approaching patients at varied time points post-diagnosis. Further recruitment implications are discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22722886     DOI: 10.1007/s00520-012-1518-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Support Care Cancer        ISSN: 0941-4355            Impact factor:   3.603


  32 in total

1.  Visualising differences in professionals' perspectives on quality and safety.

Authors:  Joanne Francis Travaglia; Peter Ivan Nugus; David Greenfield; Johanna Irene Westbrook; Jeffrey Braithwaite
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 7.035

Review 2.  Barriers to participation in randomised controlled trials: a systematic review.

Authors:  S Ross; A Grant; C Counsell; W Gillespie; I Russell; R Prescott
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  The rationale, design, and implementation of the American Cancer Society's studies of cancer survivors.

Authors:  Tenbroeck Smith; Kevin D Stein; C Christina Mehta; Chiewkwei Kaw; James L Kepner; Trent Buskirk; Jeremy Stafford; Frank Baker
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2007-01-01       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 4.  Barriers to participation in clinical trials of cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review of patient-reported factors.

Authors:  Edward J Mills; Dugald Seely; Beth Rachlis; Lauren Griffith; Ping Wu; Kumanan Wilson; Peter Ellis; James R Wright
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 41.316

5.  Invisible barriers to clinical trials: the impact of structural, infrastructural, and procedural barriers to opening oncology clinical trials.

Authors:  David M Dilts; Alan B Sandler
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-10-01       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Cancer prevalence in the United Kingdom: estimates for 2008.

Authors:  J Maddams; D Brewster; A Gavin; J Steward; J Elliott; M Utley; H Møller
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-06-30       Impact factor: 7.640

7.  The Pathways Study: a prospective study of breast cancer survivorship within Kaiser Permanente Northern California.

Authors:  Marilyn L Kwan; Christine B Ambrosone; Marion M Lee; Janice Barlow; Sarah E Krathwohl; Isaac Joshua Ergas; Christine H Ashley; Julie R Bittner; Jeanne Darbinian; Keren Stronach; Bette J Caan; Warren Davis; Susan E Kutner; Charles P Quesenberry; Carol P Somkin; Barbara Sternfeld; John K Wiencke; Shichun Zheng; Lawrence H Kushi
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2008-05-14       Impact factor: 2.506

8.  Simply no time? Barriers to GPs' participation in primary health care research.

Authors:  Eva Hummers-Pradier; Christa Scheidt-Nave; Heike Martin; Stephanie Heinemann; Michael M Kochen; Wolfgang Himmel
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2008-04-15       Impact factor: 2.267

9.  The attitudes of 1066 patients with cancer towards participation in randomised clinical trials.

Authors:  V Jenkins; D Farewell; L Batt; T Maughan; L Branston; C Langridge; L Parlour; V Farewell; L Fallowfield
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2010-11-30       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Integrating cancer survivors' experiences into UK cancer registries: design and development of the ePOCS system (electronic Patient-reported Outcomes from Cancer Survivors).

Authors:  L Ashley; H Jones; J Thomas; D Forman; A Newsham; E Morris; O Johnson; G Velikova; P Wright
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2011-11-08       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  5 in total

1.  Cancer survivor perspectives on sharing patient-generated health data with central cancer registries.

Authors:  T G Smith; M E Dunn; K Y Levin; S P Tsakraklides; S A Mitchell; L V van de Poll-Franse; K C Ward; C L Wiggins; X C Wu; M Hurlbert; N K Aaronson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2019-08-09       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Cancer Data and Aboriginal Disparities (CanDAD)-developing an Advanced Cancer Data System for Aboriginal people in South Australia: a mixed methods research protocol.

Authors:  Paul Henry Yerrell; David Roder; Margaret Cargo; Rachel Reilly; David Banham; Jasmine May Micklem; Kim Morey; Harold Bundamurra Stewart; Janet Stajic; Michael Norris; Alex Brown
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-12-23       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Integrating patient reported outcomes with clinical cancer registry data: a feasibility study of the electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes From Cancer Survivors (ePOCS) system.

Authors:  Laura Ashley; Helen Jones; James Thomas; Alex Newsham; Amy Downing; Eva Morris; Julia Brown; Galina Velikova; David Forman; Penny Wright
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2013-10-25       Impact factor: 5.428

4.  A feasibility study exploring the role of pre-operative assessment when examining the mechanism of 'chemo-brain' in breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Valerie Jenkins; Ryan Thwaites; Mara Cercignani; Sandra Sacre; Neil Harrison; Hefina Whiteley-Jones; Lisa Mullen; Giselle Chamberlain; Kevin Davies; Charles Zammit; Lucy Matthews; Helena Harder
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2016-03-31

5.  Current trends in patient and public involvement in cancer research: A systematic review.

Authors:  Kathrine Hoffmann Pii; Lone Helle Schou; Karin Piil; Mary Jarden
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2018-10-30       Impact factor: 3.377

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.