RESUMEN

Objective: Specialist genitourinary (GU) nurses provide care to a broad and diverse group of patients diagnosed with kidney, bladder, prostate, testicular, adrenal, and penile cancer. The purpose of this study was to identify GU cancer nurse perspectives of perceived unmet needs in service provision, specific educational and research priorities. Methods: A concurrent mixed methods study design incorporated quantitative and qualitative data collection from the GU Cancer nurses workforce in Australia. Quantitative data collected using an electronic survey instrument and were analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data collected through semi-structured interviews and coded for thematic analysis. Ethical approval was gained. Results: Fifty responses were received from the electronic survey. 39/50 (78%) were female and 35 (70%) were metropolitan based. The highest domains of perceived unmet needs related to psychological/emotional needs - 17/23 (74%), intimacy needs - 15/23 (65%) and informational needs - 13/23 (57%). The themes from the qualitative interviews identified: (1) Patient needs - lack of tumour specific contact for cancer patients, fragmented delivery of cancer care, perception of better access to supportive care for public patients, lack of access to supportive care screening tools for needs assessment. (2) Educational needs - lack of GU specific cancer educational resources/learning opportunities and barriers to accessing educational opportunities. (3) Research priorities - impact on carers/partners, specific needs of different GU cancers, future focus on genetic testing/counselling, interventions for financial toxicity and development of models of care for geriatric GU patients. Conclusions: Specialist GU cancer nurses support a broad group of patients. Given the prominence of addressing unmet cancer care needs among people with GU cancers in this study, cancer nursing as a discipline alongside the multidisciplinary team, requires innovative solutions to overcome fragmented care which is often highly complex, and develop individualised and integrated care across the cancer care continuum. We encourage clinicians, researchers, policy makers, people affected by cancer, and their care networks, to continue to drive innovation by (1) Embedding an integrated approach to cancer nursing, (2) Implementation of shared care, (3) Implementation of patient navigation, (4) Embracing emerging technologies, (5) Future focus on education, and (6) Future focus on nurse-led research.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the implementation of a multicomponent survivorship programme for men with prostate cancer and their carers. DESIGN: A single cohort study, guided by the RE-AIM framework. SETTING: Multiple health services in Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Men with prostate cancer and their carers, and health professionals. INTERVENTION: A 12-month telehealth programme that provided centralised and coordinated decision and information support, exercise and nutrition management, specialised clinical support and practical support to men and their carers. DATA COLLECTION: Multiple sources of data including participant-reported health outcomes and experience of care, qualitative interviews, records of the programme were collected at different time points. RESULTS: Reach: Of 394 eligible men at various stages of survivorship, 142 consented (36% consent rate) and 136 (96%) completed the programme. Adoption: All men participated in general care coordination and more than half participated in exercise and/or nutrition management interventions. Participation in the specialised support component (ie, psychosocial and sexual health support, continence management) was low despite the high level of need reported by men. Effectiveness: Overall, the men reported improvements in their experience of care. Implementation: Factors such as addressing service gaps, provision of specialised services, care coordination, adoption of needs-based and telehealth-based approaches were identified as enablers to the successful implementation of the programme. Issues such as insufficient integration with existing services, lack of resources and high caseload of the intervention team, men's reluctance to discuss needs and lack of confidence with technology were barriers in implementing the programme. CONCLUSION: Survivorship interventions are relevant to men regardless of the stage of their disease and treatments undertaken. It is possible to provide access to a comprehensive model of survivorship care to promote the health and quality of life for men with prostate cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This study was registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12617000174381).

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

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.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)