Patsy Yates1, Rob Carter2, Robyn Cockerell1, Donna Cowan3, Cyril Dixon3,4, Anne Magnus2, Robert U Newton5,6, Nicolas H Hart1,5, Daniel A Galvão5, Brenton Baguley6,7, Nicholas Denniston8, Tina Skinner6, Jeremy Couper9, Jon Emery10, Mark Frydenberg11, Wei-Hong Liu1. 1. Faculty of Health, Cancer and Palliative Care Outcomes Centre, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 2. Faculty of Health, Deakin Health Economics, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 3. Movember, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 4. Dixon Healthcare Consulting, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 5. Exercise Medicine Research Institute, Edith Cowan University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia. 6. School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 7. School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 8. Private Practitioner, Queensland, Australia. 9. Department of Psychiatry, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 10. Department of General Practice, Centre for Cancer Research, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 11. Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Cabrini Institute, Cabrini Health, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of implementing an integrated multicomponent survivorship care model for men affected by prostate cancer. METHODS: Using a single arm prospective cohort study design, men with prostate cancer were recruited from two regional public hospitals in Australia for a 6-months program that provided information and decision support, exercise and nutrition management, specialised clinical support, and practical support through localised and central care coordination. Carers of the men were also invited to the program. Data were collected from multiple sources to evaluate: (1) recruitment capability and participant characteristics; (2) appropriateness and feasibility of delivering the specific intervention components using an electronic care management tool; and (3) suitability of data collection procedures and proposed outcome measures. RESULTS: Of the 105 eligible men, 51 (consent rate 49%) participated in the program. Of the 31 carers nominated by the men, 13 consented (consent rate 42%). All carers and 50 (98%) men completed the program. Most (92%) men were newly diagnosed with localised prostate cancer. All men attended initial screening and assessment for supportive care needs; a total of 838 episodes of contact/consultation were made by the intervention team either in person (9%) or remotely (91%). The intervention was implemented as proposed with no adverse events. The proposed outcome measures and evaluation procedures were found to be appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the feasibility of implementing this integrated multicomponent care model for men affected by prostate cancer.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of implementing an integrated multicomponent survivorship care model for men affected by prostate cancer. METHODS: Using a single arm prospective cohort study design, men with prostate cancer were recruited from two regional public hospitals in Australia for a 6-months program that provided information and decision support, exercise and nutrition management, specialised clinical support, and practical support through localised and central care coordination. Carers of the men were also invited to the program. Data were collected from multiple sources to evaluate: (1) recruitment capability and participant characteristics; (2) appropriateness and feasibility of delivering the specific intervention components using an electronic care management tool; and (3) suitability of data collection procedures and proposed outcome measures. RESULTS: Of the 105 eligible men, 51 (consent rate 49%) participated in the program. Of the 31 carers nominated by the men, 13 consented (consent rate 42%). All carers and 50 (98%) men completed the program. Most (92%) men were newly diagnosed with localised prostate cancer. All men attended initial screening and assessment for supportive care needs; a total of 838 episodes of contact/consultation were made by the intervention team either in person (9%) or remotely (91%). The intervention was implemented as proposed with no adverse events. The proposed outcome measures and evaluation procedures were found to be appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the feasibility of implementing this integrated multicomponent care model for men affected by prostate cancer.
Authors: Patsy Yates; Rob Carter; Robyn Cockerell; Donna Cowan; Cyril Dixon; Anita Lal; Robert U Newton; Nicolas Hart; Daniel A Galvão; Brenton Baguley; Nicholas Denniston; Tina Skinner; Jeremy Couper; Jon Emery; Mark Frydenberg; Wei-Hong Liu Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-02-02 Impact factor: 2.692