Dataset Information

Management of bone health in patients with cancer: a survey of specialist nurses.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Patients with cancer can experience bone metastases and/or cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL), and the resulting bone complications place burdens on patients and healthcare provision. Management of bone complications is becoming increasingly important as cancer survival rates improve. Advances in specialist oncology nursing practice benefit patients through better management of their bone health, which may improve quality of life and survival. METHODS:An anonymised online quantitative survey asked specialist oncology nurses about factors affecting their provision of support in the management of bone metastases and CTIBL. RESULTS:Of 283 participants, most stated that they worked in Europe, and 69.3% had at least 8 years of experience in oncology. The most common areas of specialisation were medical oncology, breast cancer and/or palliative care (20.8-50.9%). Awareness of bone loss prevention measures varied (from 34.3% for alcohol intake to 77.4% for adequate calcium intake), and awareness of hip fracture risk factors varied (from 28.6% for rheumatoid arthritis to 74.6% for age >?65 years). Approximately one-third reported a high level of confidence in managing bone metastases (39.9%) and CTIBL (33.2%). International or institution guidelines were used by approximately 50% of participants. Common barriers to better specialist care and treatment were reported to be lack of training, funding, knowledge or professional development. CONCLUSION:This work is the first quantitative analysis of reports from specialist oncology nurses about the management of bone metastases and CTIBL. It indicates the need for new nursing education initiatives with a focus on bone health management.

SUBMITTER: Drudge-Coates L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6989658 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Management of bone health in patients with cancer: a survey of specialist nurses.

Drudge-Coates Lawrence L van Muilekom Erik E de la Torre-Montero Julio C JC Leonard Kay K van Oostwaard Marsha M Niepel Daniela D Jensen Bente Thoft BT

Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer 20190615 3

<h4>Background</h4>Patients with cancer can experience bone metastases and/or cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL), and the resulting bone complications place burdens on patients and healthcare provision. Management of bone complications is becoming increasingly important as cancer survival rates improve. Advances in specialist oncology nursing practice benefit patients through better management of their bone health, which may improve quality of life and survival.<h4>Methods</h4>An anonymi ...[more]

PMID: 31203509

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The centralisation of specialist cancer surgical services across London Cancer and Greater Manchester Cancer, England, may significantly change how patients experience care. These centres are changing specialist surgical pathways for several cancers including prostate, bladder, kidney, and oesophago-gastric cancers, increasing the specialisation of centres and providing surgery in fewer hospitals. While there are potential benefits related to centralising services, changes of this kind are often controversial. The aim of this study was to identify factors related to the centralisation of specialist surgical services that are important to patients, carers and health care professionals. METHODS:This was a questionnaire-based study involving a convenience sample of patient and public involvement (PPI) and cancer health care professional (HCP) sub-groups in London and Greater Manchester (n?=?186). Participants were asked to identify which of a list of factors potentially influenced by the centralisation of specialist cancer surgery were important to them and to rank these in order of importance. We ranked and shortlisted the most important factors. RESULTS:We obtained 52 responses (28% response rate). The factors across both groups rated most important were: highly trained staff; likelihood and severity of complications; waiting time for cancer surgery; and access to staff members from various disciplines with specialised skills in cancer. These factors were also ranked as being important separately by the PPI and HCP sub-groups. There was considerable heterogeneity in the relative ordering of factors within sub-groups and overall. CONCLUSIONS:This study examines and ranks factors important to patients and carers, and health care professionals in order to inform the implementation of centralisation of specialist cancer surgical services. The most important factors were similar in the two stakeholder sub-groups. Planners should consider the impact of reorganising services on these factors, and disseminate this information to patients, the public and health care professionals when deciding whether or not and how to centralise specialist cancer surgical services.

Project description:BackgroundSkin cancer specialist nurses (SCSNs) support patients and work alongside healthcare professionals throughout the care pathway. Skin cancer management is rapidly evolving, with increasing and more complex treatment options now available, so the need for patient support is growing. While SCSNs are a major source of that support, the provision of SCSN resource across the UK has never previously been assessed. We therefore undertook a first SCSN census on 1st June 2021.MethodsAn electronic survey was disseminated to UK hospital trusts and registered skin cancer healthcare professionals. Responses were identifiable only by the respective trust name.Results112 responses from 87 different secondary care trusts were received; 92% of trusts reporting having at least 1 established SCSN post. Average SCSN staffing per trust was 2.4 (range 0-7) whole time equivalents, managing an average caseload of 83 (range 6-400) patients per week. SCSN workload had increased in 82% hospitals in the previous year and 30% of trusts reported being under-resourced. Most SCSN time was spent managing melanoma (as opposed to non-melanoma skin cancer) patients linked to surgical services. Regional variations existed, particularly associated with provision of lymphoedema services, nurse prescribing skills and patient access to clinical trials. The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a marked increase in SCSN-led telemedicine clinics, but loss of training and education opportunities.ConclusionsSCSNs based in secondary care hospitals play a major role supporting both clinicians and patients throughout the care pathway. This first UK census confirmed that SCSN workload is increasing and in one third of hospital trusts, the work was reported to outstrip the staffing available to manage the volume of work. Regional variations in SCSN resource, workload and job role, as well as availability of certain skin cancer services were identified, providing valuable information to healthcare commissioners concerned with service improvement.

Project description:BackgroundPatient engagement helps to improve health outcomes and health care quality. However, the overall relationships among patient engagement measures and health outcomes remain unclear. This study aims to integrate expert knowledge and survey data for the identification of measures that have extensive associations with other variables and can be prioritized to engage patients.MethodsWe used the 2014 International Health Policy Survey (IHPS), which provided information on elder adults in 11 countries with details in patient characteristics, healthcare experiences, and patient-physician communication. Patient engagement or support was measured with eight variables including patients' treatment choices, involvement, and treatment priority setting. Three types of care were identified: primary, specialist and chronic illness care. Specialists were doctors specializing in one area of health care. Chronic illness included eight chronic conditions surveyed. Expert knowledge was used to assist variable selection. We used Bayesian network models consisting of nodes that represented variables of interest and arcs that represented their relationships.ResultsAmong 25,530 participants, the mean age was 68.51 years and 57.40% were females. The distributions of age, sex, education, and patient engagement were significantly different across countries. For chronic illness care, written plans provided by professionals were linked to treatment feasibility and helpfulness. Whether professionals contacted patients was associated with the availability of professionals they could reach for chronic illness care. For specialist care, if specialists provided treatment choices, patients were more likely to be involved and discuss about what mattered to them.ConclusionThe strategies to engage patients may depend on the types of care, specialist or chronic illness care. For the study on the observational IHPS data, network modeling is useful to integrate expert knowledge. We suggest considering other theory-based patient engagement in major surveys, as well as engaging patients in their healthcare by providing written plans and actively communicating with patients for chronic illnesses, and encouraging specialists to discuss and provide treatment options.

Project description:BackgroundDigital tools are increasingly used on a population level as a weight loss strategy for people living with overweight and obesity. Evidence supports the feasibility of digital tools for the management of obesity in a community setting, but there is only emerging evidence for the feasibility of such tools in specialist weight management services. No study has assessed the uptake of digital tools among patients awaiting their first appointment with a specialist weight management service.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to understand interest, acceptance, and engagement with a digital behavioral change platform to support specialist weight management.MethodsThis was an observational study registered as a service innovation. All patients on the waiting list for a first appointment in the tier 3 weight management service at University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire National Health Service (NHS) Trust were eligible to access the NHS-approved digital tool. Data on interest and engagement with the digital tool were collected. Routine clinical data were used to describe patient demographics. Focus groups were held to explore patients' views on the use of digital tools as part of a specialist weight management service.ResultsA total of 199 patients on the waiting list were informed about the available digital tool. Just over a half (n=102, 51.3%) of patients were interested in using the app, with over one-third (n=68, 34%) of all patients engaging with the app. Overall, a third of patients on the waiting list (n=63, 32%) did not respond to the invite and 34 (17%) of patients expressed no interest in the app. Emotional eating and higher BMI was associated with interest in the Gro Health app. Male gender was associated with reduced engagement with the app. There were no differences in interest in the Gro Health app according to age, ethnicity, metabolic measures of glycemia, and lipid profile.ConclusionsIt is feasible to offer digital tools such as Gro Health to patients awaiting their first appointment with specialist weight management services. Future research should explore barriers and facilitators of engagement with digital tools. Additionally, there is a need to further evaluate the effectiveness of such tools in specialist weight management services.

Dataset Information

Management of bone health in patients with cancer: a survey of specialist nurses.

Publications

Management of bone health in patients with cancer: a survey of specialist nurses.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets