Anna Sigridur Islind1,2, Victoria Johansson3, Helena Vallo Hult3,4, Pia Alsén5, Emma Andreasson6,7, Eva Angenete6,7, Martin Gellerstedt3. 1. Department of Computer Science, Reykjavik University, Reykjavik, Iceland. islind@ru.is. 2. School of Business, Economics and IT, University West, Trollhättan, Sweden. islind@ru.is. 3. School of Business, Economics and IT, University West, Trollhättan, Sweden. 4. Region Västra Götaland, NU Hospital Group, Trollhättan, Sweden. 5. Department of Health Sciences, University West, Trollhättan, Sweden. 6. Department of Surgery, SSORG - Scandinavian Surgical Outcomes Research Group, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. 7. Region Västra Götaland, Sahlgrenska University Hospital/Östra, Department of Surgery, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The number of colorectal cancer patient survivors is increasing. Information and support during and after treatment are requested by patients, but questions remain on what to provide. The aim of this study was to understand what informational needs colorectal cancer patients and survivors have, with a focus on the potential support given by patient peers and the use of blended care. METHODS: A qualitative study using focus groups was conducted with patients diagnosed at the same hospital at least one year prior to the initiation of the study. The focus group interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using deductive content analysis. RESULTS: The need for informational support varied over time and depended on individual patient characteristics. Timing was crucial and patients requested options of blended care and informational support after treatment cessation. The patients felt alone after treatment and requested assistance in communication with their next-of-kin. They also identified the value of peer support, especially to contextualize knowledge provided by healthcare. CONCLUSION: This study showed a need for focus on individualized informational support. Blended care through integrating communication with peers online could be one way to support patients, both to enable shared decision-making as well as to provide person-centered care.
PURPOSE: The number of colorectal cancerpatient survivors is increasing. Information and support during and after treatment are requested by patients, but questions remain on what to provide. The aim of this study was to understand what informational needs colorectal cancerpatients and survivors have, with a focus on the potential support given by patient peers and the use of blended care. METHODS: A qualitative study using focus groups was conducted with patients diagnosed at the same hospital at least one year prior to the initiation of the study. The focus group interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using deductive content analysis. RESULTS: The need for informational support varied over time and depended on individual patient characteristics. Timing was crucial and patients requested options of blended care and informational support after treatment cessation. The patients felt alone after treatment and requested assistance in communication with their next-of-kin. They also identified the value of peer support, especially to contextualize knowledge provided by healthcare. CONCLUSION: This study showed a need for focus on individualized informational support. Blended care through integrating communication with peers online could be one way to support patients, both to enable shared decision-making as well as to provide person-centered care.
Authors: James D Harrison; Jane M Young; Melanie A Price; Phyllis N Butow; Michael J Solomon Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2009-03-25 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Victoria Johansson; Anna Sigridur Islind; Tomas Lindroth; Eva Angenete; Martin Gellerstedt Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2021-02-09 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Julien A M Vos; Laura A M Duineveld; Vera E van Miltenburg; Inge Henselmans; Henk C P M van Weert; Kristel M van Asselt Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-06-21 Impact factor: 3.359
Authors: Laura E Brotzman; Danielle M Crookes; Jessica D Austin; Alfred I Neugut; Rachel C Shelton Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2021-10-23 Impact factor: 3.626
Authors: Sofie Walming; Eva Angenete; David Bock; Mattias Block; Hanna de la Croix; Anette Wedin; Eva Haglind Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2021-01-14 Impact factor: 1.771