Elizabeth J M Pearson1, Meg E Morris2, Carol E McKinstry3. 1. La Trobe Rural Health School, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, 3086, Australia. elizabeth.jm.pearson@gmail.com. 2. Allied Health, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, 3086, Australia. 3. La Trobe Rural Health School, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Bendigo, Victoria, 3552, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aims to identify the current practices of health professionals in the assessment and treatment of cancer-related fatigue (CRF). METHODS: Health professionals working with oncology clients participated in an electronic survey distributed via professional associations and oncology societies. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-nine professionals from nursing, medical, and allied health disciplines participated in an electronic survey. Overall, there was a perception that CRF was inadequately managed at some facilities. Routine fatigue screening processes in the workplace were reported by more than half of participants; however, less than one quarter used a clinical guideline or conducted in-depth CRF assessments. Awareness of interventions for CRF varied amongst participants with one quarter able to list five appropriate interventions for cancer-related fatigue. Access to services for managing fatigue was inconsistent across service types, with post-treatment triage a high priority for CRF in some organisations yet not others. Participants identified a need for improved guidelines, enhanced expertise and better access to services for people with CRF. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for further education in CRF management for a range of health disciplines in oncology and additional resources to facilitate translation of CRF guidelines into clinical practice.
PURPOSE: This study aims to identify the current practices of health professionals in the assessment and treatment of cancer-related fatigue (CRF). METHODS: Health professionals working with oncology clients participated in an electronic survey distributed via professional associations and oncology societies. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-nine professionals from nursing, medical, and allied health disciplines participated in an electronic survey. Overall, there was a perception that CRF was inadequately managed at some facilities. Routine fatigue screening processes in the workplace were reported by more than half of participants; however, less than one quarter used a clinical guideline or conducted in-depth CRF assessments. Awareness of interventions for CRF varied amongst participants with one quarter able to list five appropriate interventions for cancer-related fatigue. Access to services for managing fatigue was inconsistent across service types, with post-treatment triage a high priority for CRF in some organisations yet not others. Participants identified a need for improved guidelines, enhanced expertise and better access to services for people with CRF. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for further education in CRF management for a range of health disciplines in oncology and additional resources to facilitate translation of CRF guidelines into clinical practice.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer; Fatigue; Health professional; Knowledge; Practice; Survey
Authors: D Howell; S Keller-Olaman; T K Oliver; T F Hack; L Broadfield; K Biggs; J Chung; D Gravelle; E Green; M Hamel; T Harth; P Johnston; D McLeod; N Swinton; A Syme; K Olson Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Justin C Brown; Tania B Huedo-Medina; Linda S Pescatello; Shannon M Pescatello; Rebecca A Ferrer; Blair T Johnson Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2010-11-04 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Carmelita P Escalante; Michael A Kallen; Rosalie U Valdres; P K Morrow; Ellen F Manzullo Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2010-03-11 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Caroline M Donnelly; Andrea Lowe-Strong; Jane P Rankin; Anna Campbell; James M Allen; Jacqueline H Gracey Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2009-08-23 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Pleun J de Raaf; Cora de Klerk; Reinier Timman; Jan J V Busschbach; Wendy H Oldenmenger; Carin C D van der Rijt Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-01-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Doranne L Hilarius; Paul H Kloeg; Elsken van der Wall; Manon Komen; Chad M Gundy; Neil K Aaronson Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2010-03-19 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Amy P Abernethy; Tania Shelby-James; Belinda S Fazekas; David Woods; David C Currow Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2005-11-12 Impact factor: 3.234
Authors: Martina E Schmidt; Marlena Milzer; Cécile Weiß; Paul Reinke; Miriam Grapp; Karen Steindorf Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-02-11 Impact factor: 3.359