Amanda Bolderston1, Angela Cashell2, Maurene McQuestion3, Michele Cardoso4, Clare Summers5, Rachel Harris6. 1. FCAMRT Provincial Professional Practice and Academic Leader, British Columbia Cancer Agency, British Columbia, Canada. Electronic address: Amanda.Bolderston@bccancer.bc.ca. 2. Clinical Educator, Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Ontario, Canada. 3. Clinical Nurse Specialist, Head and Neck Site Group, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Ontario, Canada. 4. Clinical Specialist RT, Juravinski Cancer Centre, Ontario, Canada. 5. Nova Scotia Cancer Centre, Halifax, UK. 6. Professional and Education Manager, Society and College of Radiographers, London, UK.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Radiation therapy skin reactions are one of the most common side effects and can cause patient distress. In some cases, a severe radiation-induced skin reaction may limit delivered dose and potentially compromise treatment outcomes. There are some established best practices, but approaches and patient advice appear to have changed little over the years and are often based on tradition, not evidence. Canadian radiation therapy departments use different skin care products and approaches, and there has been little previous work to examine national practice patterns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study used a 42-item electronic survey based on a questionnaire designed by the UK Society and College of Radiographers. Practice data were collected related to assessment and prophylactics, interventions for prevention and management, and use of tools and guidelines. The final survey version was distributed to an identified radiation therapist-registered nurse dyad at each radiation therapy department in Canada (n = 44). RESULTS: Thirty-three departments responded (75% response rate). Results suggest a variation in national management. A number of departments continue to advise patients not to wash or use deodorant/antiperspirant despite having evidence to the contrary. There are also unnecessary restrictions on the use and timing of application of lotions as well as conflicting postradiotherapy skin care instructions regarding sun exposure. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated variation in practice across Canadian radiation therapy departments. National interprofessional guidelines could improve uptake of best practices. Where there is little evidence, a stress-reduction approach with more collaborative decision-making should be used to minimize patient disruption.
INTRODUCTION: Radiation therapy skin reactions are one of the most common side effects and can cause patient distress. In some cases, a severe radiation-induced skin reaction may limit delivered dose and potentially compromise treatment outcomes. There are some established best practices, but approaches and patient advice appear to have changed little over the years and are often based on tradition, not evidence. Canadian radiation therapy departments use different skin care products and approaches, and there has been little previous work to examine national practice patterns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study used a 42-item electronic survey based on a questionnaire designed by the UK Society and College of Radiographers. Practice data were collected related to assessment and prophylactics, interventions for prevention and management, and use of tools and guidelines. The final survey version was distributed to an identified radiation therapist-registered nurse dyad at each radiation therapy department in Canada (n = 44). RESULTS: Thirty-three departments responded (75% response rate). Results suggest a variation in national management. A number of departments continue to advise patients not to wash or use deodorant/antiperspirant despite having evidence to the contrary. There are also unnecessary restrictions on the use and timing of application of lotions as well as conflicting postradiotherapy skin care instructions regarding sun exposure. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated variation in practice across Canadian radiation therapy departments. National interprofessional guidelines could improve uptake of best practices. Where there is little evidence, a stress-reduction approach with more collaborative decision-making should be used to minimize patient disruption.
Authors: Samuel Finkelstein; Lauren Kanee; Tara Behroozian; Julie Ryan Wolf; Corina van den Hurk; Edward Chow; Pierluigi Bonomo Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-01-24 Impact factor: 3.603