Dataset Information

Barriers to lung cancer care: health professionals' perspectives.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Globally, lung cancer is the most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death. Problematically, there is a wide variation in the management and survival for people with lung cancer and there is limited understanding of the reasons for these variations. To date, the views of health professionals across relevant disciplines who deliver such care are largely absent. The present study describes Australian health professionals' views about barriers to lung cancer care to help build a research and action agenda for improving lung cancer outcomes.

Methods

Qualitative semi-structured interviews were undertaken with a multidisciplinary group of 31 Australian health professionals working in lung cancer care for an average of 16 years (range 1-35 yrs.; SD = 10.2) seeing a mean of 116 patients annually.

Results

Three superordinate themes were identified: illness representations, cultural influences, and health system context. Illness representations included three themes: symptoms attributed as smoking-related but not cancer, health-related stigma, and therapeutic nihilism. Cultural influence themes included Indigenous health care preferences, language and communication, and sociodemographic factors. Health system context included lack of regional services and distance to treatment, poor care coordination, lack of effective screening methods, and health professional behaviours.

Conclusions

Fractured and locally isolated approaches routinely confound responses to the social, cultural and health system complexities that surround a diagnosis of lung cancer and subsequent treatment. Improving outcomes for this disadvantaged patient group will require government, health agencies, and the community to take an aggressive, integrated approach balancing health policy, treatment priorities, and societal values.

SUBMITTER: Dunn J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5196009 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPeople with prediabetes are at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes and its complications, such as cardiovascular diseases and premature mortality. Primary prevention and health maintenance are therefore imperative. Evidence has shown that prediabetes can be prevented or delayed with behavioural change, mainly in eating habits and physical activity. Interventions that use a person-centered approach can lead to improvements in self-management, quality of life, and health outcomes. Nevertheless, there is a need for further research that engages healthcare professionals and people with prediabetes in constructing and implementing preventive programs. The purpose of this study is to explore and describe how healthcare professionals perceive prediabetes, the current challenges in its detection and treatment, and what is needed to improve quality of care.MethodsThis qualitative study was conducted in Region Stockholm. A total of 26 primary health care professionals participated in individual interviews: 15 diabetes nurses and/or district nurses, five general practitioners, five dietitians, and one physiotherapist. Interview transcripts were analyzed with qualitative content analysis.ResultsThe analysis revealed two main themes that emphasize the need to make prediabetes more visible in primary health care. Despite the healthcare professionals' engagement and their motivation to improve prediabetes care, ad hoc practices and the absence of clear screening guidelines and referral pathways made it harder to focus on primary prevention. Supporting professionals in implementing structured care for people with prediabetes might encourage more efficient interprofessional collaboration and contribute to better strategies for promoting behavioural change.ConclusionsEstablishing prediabetes care guidelines, supporting health care professionals´ knowledge and skills in prediabetes care, and implementing interprofessional referral pathways are some steps to enhance prediabetes detection and care precedence in primary health care. These steps could lead to more preventive care and ensure patient safety and health care equity.

Project description:BACKGROUND:With the widespread use of mobile technologies, mobile information systems have become crucial tools in health care operations. Although the appropriate use of mobile health (mHealth) may result in major advances in expanding health care coverage (increasing decision-making speeds, managing chronic conditions, and providing suitable health care in emergencies), previous studies have argued that current mHealth research does not adequately evaluate mHealth interventions, and it does not provide sufficient evidence regarding the effects on health. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to facilitate the widespread use of mHealth systems; an accurate evaluation of the systems from the users' perspective is essential after the implementation and use of the system in daily health care practices. This study extends the expectation-confirmation model by using characteristics of individuals, technology, and tasks to identify critical factors affecting mHealth continuance and performance from the perspective of health care professionals (HCPs). METHODS:A questionnaire survey was used to collect data from HCPs who were experienced in using mHealth systems of a Taiwanese teaching hospital. In total, 282 questionnaires were distributed, and 201 complete and valid questionnaires were returned, thus indicating a valid response rate of 71.3% (201/282). The collected data were analyzed using WarpPLS version 5.0 (ScriptWarp Systems). RESULTS:The results revealed that mHealth continuance (R2=0.522) was mainly affected by perceived usefulness, technology maturity, individual habits, task mobility, and user satisfaction, whereas individual performance (R2=0.492) was affected by mHealth continuance. In addition, user satisfaction (R2=0.548) was affected by confirmation and perceived usefulness of mHealth, whereas perceived usefulness (R2=0.521) was affected by confirmation. This implied that confirmation played a key role in affecting perceived usefulness and user satisfaction. Furthermore, the results showed that mHealth continuance positively affected individual performance. CONCLUSIONS:The identified critical factors influencing mHealth continuance and performance can be used as a useful assessment tool by hospitals that have implemented mHealth systems to facilitate the use and infusion of the systems. Furthermore, the results can help health care institutions that intend to introduce or develop mHealth applications to identify critical issues and effectively allocate limited resources to mHealth systems.