Dataset Information

Evaluation of a survivorship needs assessment planning tool for head and neck cancer survivor-caregiver dyads.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:The objectives of this study were to test the acceptability and feasibility of a survivorship needs assessment planning (SNAP) tool for head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors and caregivers, evaluate short-term changes in psychosocial outcomes after completing the SNAP session, and develop strategies for system refinement. METHODS:We used a prospective one-group design and mixed methods with HNC survivors and caregivers (N?=?25 dyads). Participants completed baseline and 6-week surveys before and after completing a SNAP clinic visit to assess psychosocial outcomes and acceptability. Intervention sessions included tablet-based needs assessments driving tailored care plans. Dyads' open-ended feedback and clinician interviews (N?=?12) evaluated acceptability and feasibility. RESULTS:SNAP data collection time burden and technology challenges were minimal, and care plans included messages (M =?19), educational materials (M?=?13), and referrals (M?=?4.5; 86% behavioral medicine, 77% nutrition, 65% physical therapy). Participants reported high satisfaction with the session and care plan, highlighting the key strengths of pulling complex medical information together and the focus on caregiver well-being, with multiple suggestions to facilitate clinic workflow. Depression and unmet needs decreased and survivorship knowledge increased significantly in survivors and caregivers (p?

SUBMITTER: Sterba KR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6478174 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of a survivorship needs assessment planning tool for head and neck cancer survivor-caregiver dyads.

Sterba Katherine R KR Armeson Kent K Zapka Jane J Scallion Megan A MA Garris Tiffany K TK Graboyes Evan M EM Ruggiero Kenneth K Day Terry A TA

Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice 20190115 1

<h4>Purpose</h4>The objectives of this study were to test the acceptability and feasibility of a survivorship needs assessment planning (SNAP) tool for head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors and caregivers, evaluate short-term changes in psychosocial outcomes after completing the SNAP session, and develop strategies for system refinement.<h4>Methods</h4>We used a prospective one-group design and mixed methods with HNC survivors and caregivers (N = 25 dyads). Participants completed baseline and 6-w ...[more]

PMID: 30645719

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction Stroke is known as one of the leading causes of mortality and disability worldwide. Self-care plays a significant role in improving the quality of life, self-efficacy and many other outcomes of stroke survivors. However, it is a dyadic phenomenon where patient self-care and the caregiver contribution to self-care are inter-related in terms of predictors and outcomes. Currently, there is still no systematic assessment conducted to examine the overall effectiveness of self-care interventions carried out in stroke survivor–caregiver dyads and explore the effect on stroke survivor and/or caregiver outcomes. Methods We plan to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence regarding the self-care interventions carried out in stroke survivor–caregiver dyads. We will undertake a systematic search of multiple databases including PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and four Chinese databases (CNKI, CBM, WANFANG and VIP) from inception to July 2021 for the purpose of collecting the relevant articles. The eligible studies are defined as those original researches, written in English or Chinese, on self-care interventions in stroke survivor–caregiver dyad samples. Two independent researchers will be deployed to identify the eligible trials according to the selection criteria and extract the relevant data. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols checklist has been used for this protocol. We will use the Cochrane Risk for Bias tool to assess the risk of bias for randomised controlled trials. Ethics and dissemination In our review, any identifiable patient data will be excluded, which removes the need for ethical approval and participant consent. The final results of our study will be published in an open-access peer-reviewed journal, and abstract will be presented at suitable national/international conferences. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021239824.

Project description:PurposeTo develop a tradeoff hyperplane model to facilitate tradeoff decision-making before inverse planning.Methods and materialsWe propose a model-based approach to determine the tradeoff hyperplanes that allow physicians to navigate the clinically viable space of plans with best achievable dose-volume parameters before planning. For a given case, a case reference set (CRS) is selected using a novel anatomic similarity metric from a large reference plan pool. Then, a regression model is built on the CRS to estimate the expected dose-volume histograms (DVHs) for the current case. This model also predicts the DVHs for all CRS cases and captures the variation from the corresponding DVHs in the clinical plans. Finally, these DVH variations are analyzed using the principal component analysis to determine the tradeoff hyperplane for the current case. To evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed approach, 244 head and neck cases were randomly partitioned into reference (214) and validation (30) sets. A tradeoff hyperplane was built for each validation case and evenly sampled for 12 tradeoff predictions. Each prediction yielded a tradeoff plan. The root-mean-square errors of the predicted and the realized plan DVHs were computed for prediction achievability evaluation.ResultsThe tradeoff hyperplane with 3 principal directions accounts for 57.8% ± 3.6% of variations in the validation cases, suggesting the hyperplanes capture a significant portion of the clinical tradeoff space. The average root-mean-square errors in 3 tradeoff directions are 5.23 ± 2.46, 5.20 ± 2.52, and 5.19 ± 2.49, compared with 4.96 ± 2.48 of the knowledge-based planning predictions, indicating that the tradeoff predictions are comparably achievable.ConclusionsClinically relevant tradeoffs can be effectively extracted from existing plans and characterized by a tradeoff hyperplane model. The hyperplane allows physicians and planners to explore the best clinically achievable plans with different organ-at-risk sparing goals before inverse planning and is a natural extension of the current knowledge-based planning framework.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of a survivorship needs assessment planning tool for head and neck cancer survivor-caregiver dyads.

Publications

Evaluation of a survivorship needs assessment planning tool for head and neck cancer survivor-caregiver dyads.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets