Jeff Dunn1,2,3,4,5, Nicholas Ralph3,4,6, Anna Green4, Mark Frydenberg7, Suzanne K Chambers2,4,8,5. 1. Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 2. Division of Research & Innovation, University of Southern Queensland, Springfield, Queensland, Australia. 3. Cancer Council Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 4. Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 5. Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Southport, Queensland, Australia. 6. School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia. 7. Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 8. Exercise Medicine Research Institute, Edith Cowan University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe contemporary consumer experiences and priorities of prostate cancer survivorship to inform the development of survivorship guidelines. METHOD: In a cross-sectional qualitative design, semi-structured interviews were undertaken with fifty prostate cancer support group leaders (50% response) across urban and rural/regional Australia. An interpretative phenomenological approach was used to identify participants' experiences and priorities of survivorship. RESULTS: Three themes were identified for informing the development of prostate cancer survivorship guidelines: (a) the Experience of Diagnosis and Treatment, (b) Priorities for Survivorship and (c) Mechanisms for Support. Four priorities for prostate cancer survivorship were: delivering person and men-centred care; improving communication; improving care coordination; and facilitating access to care. Mechanisms for support were as follows: advocacy; peer support; prostate cancer specialist nurses; and communication training for health professionals. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of progress in changing prostate cancer survivorship outcomes for men will become increasingly problematic as this patient population group grows. Co-production provides a way forward to ensure relevance and accessibility for future survivorship initiatives.
OBJECTIVE: To describe contemporary consumer experiences and priorities of prostate cancer survivorship to inform the development of survivorship guidelines. METHOD: In a cross-sectional qualitative design, semi-structured interviews were undertaken with fifty prostate cancer support group leaders (50% response) across urban and rural/regional Australia. An interpretative phenomenological approach was used to identify participants' experiences and priorities of survivorship. RESULTS: Three themes were identified for informing the development of prostate cancer survivorship guidelines: (a) the Experience of Diagnosis and Treatment, (b) Priorities for Survivorship and (c) Mechanisms for Support. Four priorities for prostate cancer survivorship were: delivering person and men-centred care; improving communication; improving care coordination; and facilitating access to care. Mechanisms for support were as follows: advocacy; peer support; prostate cancer specialist nurses; and communication training for health professionals. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of progress in changing prostate cancer survivorship outcomes for men will become increasingly problematic as this patient population group grows. Co-production provides a way forward to ensure relevance and accessibility for future survivorship initiatives.
Authors: Melissa K Hyde; Melissa Opozda; Kirstyn Laurie; Andrew D Vincent; John L Oliffe; Christian J Nelson; Jeff Dunn; Eric Chung; Michael Gillman; Rustom P Manecksha; Gary Wittert; Suzanne K Chambers Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2020-09-26 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Jeff Dunn; Anna Green; Nicholas Ralph; Robert U Newton; Andrew Kneebone; Mark Frydenberg; Suzanne K Chambers Journal: BJU Int Date: 2020-08-18 Impact factor: 5.969