Search

Abstract Background A conceptual model of effective symptom management was previously developed from interviews with multidisciplinary healthcare professionals (HCP) working in English hospices. Here we aimed to answer the question; does a HCP data-derived model represent the experience of patients and carers of people with advanced cancer? Methods Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with six patients with advanced cancer and six carers to gain an in-depth understanding of their experience of symptom management. Analysis was based on the framework method; transcription, familiarisation, coding, applying analytical framework (conceptual model), charting, interpretation. Inductive framework analysis was used to align data with themes in the existing model. A deductive approach was also used to identify new themes. Results The experience of patients and carers aligned with key steps of engagement, decision making, partnership and delivery in the HCP-based model. The data aligned with 18 of 23 themes. These were; Role definition and boundaries, Multidisciplinary team decision making, Availability of services/staff, Clinician-Patient relationship/rapport, Patient preferences, Patient characteristics, Quality of life versus treatment need, Staff time/burden, Psychological support -informal, Appropriate understanding, expectations, acceptance and goals- patients, Appropriate understanding, expectations, acceptance and goals-HCPs, Appropriate understanding, expectations, acceptance and goals- family friends, carers, Professional, service and referral factors, Continuity of care, Multidisciplinary team working, Palliative care philosophy and culture, Physical environment and facilities, Referral process and delays. Four additional patient and carer-derived themes were identified: Carer Burden, Communication, Medicines management and COVID-19. Constructs that did not align were Experience (of staff), Training (of staff), Guidelines and evidence, Psychological support (for staff) and Formal psychological support (for patients). Conclusions A healthcare professional-based conceptual model of effective symptom management aligned well with the experience of patients with advanced cancer and their carers. Additional domains were identified. We make four recommendations for change arising from this research. Routine appraisal and acknowledgement of carer burden, medicine management tasks and previous experience in healthcare roles; improved access to communication skills training for staff and review of patient communication needs. Further research should explore the symptom management experience of those living alone and how these people can be better supported.

For some children and young people (CYP) with long-term physical health conditions (LTPHCs) attending school can be difficult. There is a lack of evidence documenting their school attendance experiences, how schools manage absence for these children, and subsequent effects. This study utilised an existing dataset from eighty-nine 11–18-year-olds in mainstream secondary schools in the United Kingdom across 11 LTPHCs that provided first-hand accounts about the children’s experiences of school. Data pre-coded “attendance” were subject to thematic analysis to explore issues emerging. Findings showed attendance patterns varied, with some CYP missing little and others significant amounts of education. Children with LTPHCs wanted to attend school and did their best to navigate education alongside health. School systems for attendance were inconsistent and adversarial. Remedial and supportive action emerged as lacking, and children felt it was their personal responsibility to make up for lost time and missed work when absent. Decisions on whether they attended school, coupled with practices promoting high attendance had detrimental consequences for CYP with LTPHCs educationally, emotionally and socially. Overall, children with LTPHCs felt punished, stigmatised, unfairly treated, unequal and excluded. Results have implications for education, health, and policy practitioners to better plan and target attention so that the LTPHC cohort are treated sensitively and equitably and afforded their entitlement to education when they cannot go to school for health reasons often outside of their control.

Abstract Background Individuals living with and beyond cancer are at heightened risk of adverse psychological and social outcomes and experiences. In March 2020, the COVID-19 global pandemic presented a unique set of social circumstances with the potential to exacerbate the challenges faced by this population. The purpose of this study was to investigate the experiences of people living with and beyond cancer during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic and assess the impact on psychological and social aspects of their lives. Methods From a pool of participants from a larger health behaviours study thirty participants were purposively sampled for characteristics including: diagnostic group (breast, prostate and colorectal cancers), gender, time since diagnosis and age. Semi-structured interviews were conducted via telephone to discuss their experience of living through the pandemic. A thematic analysis was conducted using a needs-based approach to detail the fundamental needs expressed by this population in relation to their mental health and quality of life during the pandemic. Results Three fundamental needs underpinned the experiences expressed by participants: the need to feel safe; particularly in relation to risk of contracting COVID-19 and their ongoing cancer monitoring; the need to feel connected; to the people, places, activities and practices of everyday life; and the need to make the most out of life; specifically in context of having already endured cancer and cancer treatment. Participant experiences are described in relation to how they impacted each of these three needs. Conclusions People living with and beyond cancer have past and ongoing experiences that make them vulnerable to adverse psychosocial reactions and outcomes. Support for this population needs to provide greater clarity of risk, clearer guidelines specific to their personal circumstances, and regular updates on scheduling of important follow up care and monitoring.

Aims: Perthes’ disease is an idiopathic avascular necrosis of the developing femoral head, often causing deformity that impairs physical function. Current treatments aim to optimize the joint reaction force across the hip by enhancing congruency between the acetabulum and femoral head. Despite a century of research, there is no consensus regarding the optimal treatment. The aim of this study was to describe the experiences of children, their families, and clinicians when considering the treatment of Perthes’ disease. Methods: A qualitative study gathered information from children and their families affected by Perthes’ disease, along with treating clinicians. Interviews followed a coding framework, with the interview schedule informed by behavioural theory and patient and public involvement. Transcripts were analyzed using the framework method. Results: A total of 24 interviews took place, with 12 child/family dyads and 12 clinicians from UK NHS centres. Interviews identified widespread variation of routine care. Children/their families recounted positive experiences when included in the decision-making process for treatment. There is a strong desire from clinicians and children/families for consistent guidance from everyone involved in care, which should be based on clinical consensus. Conclusion: This is the first study to describe how children/families and clinicians experienced receiving or providing treatment in Perthes’ disease. The results indicate the need for robust evidence to support treatment decisions. Children and families valued feeling involved in the clinical decision-making process. Clinicians acknowledged the central importance of providing patient-centred care, particularly in the absence of robust evidence to guide the optimal treatment decisions. This study will inform a future Delphi project to develop clinical consensus guidelines for the treatment of Perthes’ disease. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(10):735–741.

Abstract Background Evidence suggests resources and services benefit from being developed in collaboration with the young people they aim to support. Despite this, patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) with young people is often tokenistic, limited in engagement and not developmentally tailored to young people. Our paper aims to build knowledge and practice for meaningfully engaging with young people in research design, analysis and as research participants. Methods We report the participatory processes from the INSCHOOL project, examining long-term health conditions and schooling among 11–18 year olds. Young people were consulted at the inception of the project through a hospital-based youth forum. This began a partnership where young people co-designed study documents, informed the recruitment process, developed creative approaches to data collection, participated in pilot interviews, co-analysed the qualitative data and co-presented results. Results PPIE advisors, participants and researchers all benefitted from consistent involvement of young people throughout the project. Long-term engagement allowed advisors and researchers to build rapport and facilitated openness in sharing perspectives. PPIE advisors valued being able to shape the initial aims and language of the research questions, and contribute to every subsequent stage of the project. Advisors co-designed flexible data collection methods for the qualitative project that provided participants with choices in how they took part (interviews, focus groups, written tasks). Further choice was offered through co-designed preparation activities where participants completed one of four creative activities prior to the interview. Participants were therefore able to have control over how they participated and how they described their school experiences. Through participatory analysis meetings advisors used their first-hand experiences to inform the creation of themes and the language used to describe these themes. PPIE in every stage of the process helped researchers to keep the results grounded in young people’s experience and challenge their assumptions as adults. Conclusions Young people have much to offer and the INSCHOOL project has shown that researchers can meaningfully involve young people in all aspects of research. Consistent PPIE resulted in a project where the voices of young people were prioritised throughout and power imbalances were reduced, leading to meaningful participant-centred data.

Abstract Background Excess weight and an unhealthy diet are risk factors for many cancers, and in high income countries, both are more prevalent among low income families. Dietary interventions targeting primary-school aged children (under 11) can improve healthy eating behaviours, but most are not designed to support the translation of skills learnt in the classroom to the home setting. This paper assessed attitudes and approaches to cooking and eating at home, and the potential to enhance engagement in healthy eating through the COOKKIT intervention. Methods COOKKIT is an intervention to deliver weekly cooking classes and supportive materials for low-income families to maintain healthy eating at home. Preliminary qualitative interviews were conducted with teachers and parent–child dyads from a range of primary schools in the UK to explore attitudes, barriers and facilitators for healthy eating and inform the development of COOKKIT. Following implementation, ten children (8–9 y/o) participated in post-intervention focus groups, alongside interviews with teaching staff and parents. Results Thematic analysis identified five themes under which to discuss the children’s experience of food, cooking and the impact of COOKKIT: Involving children in planning and buying food for the family; Engaging children in preparing meals at home; Trying to eat healthy meals together in the midst of busy lives; Role-modelling; and Balancing practicalities, information and engagement when delivering cooking classes. Conclusions Results suggest COOKKIT provides engaging and easy to follow in-school resources for children and school staff with take-home kits facilitating continued engagement and reinforcing lessons learned in the home environment. Importantly, participants highlighted the combination of healthy eating information, applied practical skills and low costs could support families to continue following the COOKKIT advice beyond the intervention, suggesting further evaluation of COOKKIT is warranted.

Introduction COVID-19 catalysed a rapid move to provide care away from the hospital using online communication platforms. Technology enabled care (TEC) continues to be an important driver in progressing future healthcare services. Due to the complex and chronic nature of conditions seen within paediatric rheumatology, TEC may lead to better outcomes. Despite some growth in published literature into the adoption of TEC in paediatric rheumatology, there is limited synthesis. The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive understanding and evaluation of the adoption of TEC by patients in paediatric rheumatology services, to establish best practices.Methods and analysis This proposed mixed-methods systematic review will be conducted by searching a wide variety of healthcare databases, grey literature resources and associated charities and societies, for articles reported in English language. Data extraction will include population demographics, technology intervention, factors affecting adoption of intervention and consequent study outcomes. A parallel-results convergent synthesis design is planned, with independent syntheses of quantitative and qualitative data, followed by comparison of the findings of each synthesis using a narrative approach. Normalisation process theory will be used to identify, characterise and explain implementation factors. The quality of included articles will be assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool for research papers and the Authority, Accuracy, Coverage, Objectivity, Date, Significance checklist for grey literature. Overall confidence in quality and strength of evidence will be assessed using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research tool.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval is not required due to the nature of this mixed-methods systematic review. The findings will be disseminated via a peer-reviewed journal, relevant conferences and any other methods (eg, via NHS Trust or NIHR YouTube channels) as advised by paediatric rheumatology patients.PROSPERO registration number CRD42023443058.

Objectives This study explored cancer pain management practices and clinical care pathways used by healthcare professionals (HCPs) to understand the barriers and facilitators for standardised pain management in oncology outpatient services (OS).Design Data were collected using semistructured interviews that were audio-recorded and transcribed. The data were analysed using thematic analysis.Setting Three NHS trusts with oncology OS in Northern England.Participants Twenty HCPs with varied roles (eg, oncologist and nurse) and experiences (eg, registrar and consultant) from different cancer site clinics (eg, breast and lung). Data were analysed using thematic analysis.Results HCPs discussed cancer pain management practices during consultation and supporting continuity of care beyond consultation. Key findings included : (1) HCPs’ level of clinical experience influenced pain assessments; (2) remote consulting impeded experienced HCPs to do detailed pain assessments; (3) diffusion of HCP responsibility to manage cancer pain; (4) nurses facilitated pain management support with patients and (5) continuity of care for pain management was constrained by the integration of multidisciplinary teams.Conclusions These data demonstrate HCP cancer pain management practices varied and were unstructured. Recommendations are made for a standardised cancer pain management intervention: (1) detailed evaluation of pain with a tailored self-management strategy; (2) implementation of a structured pain assessment that supports remote consultations, (3) pain assessment tool that can support both experienced and less experienced clinicians. These findings will inform the development of a cancer pain management tool to integrate within routine oncology OS.

Abstract Background Pain, breathlessness and fatigue are some of the most challenging symptoms to manage in patients with advanced disease. Specialist palliative care leads to better symptom management, but factors contributing to successful symptom management in this context have not been explored. Our aim was to understand what facilitates effective symptom management in specialist palliative care within UK hospices and investigate what barriers are experienced. Methods This was a grounded theory study using qualitative semi-structured focus groups and interviews. Participants were recruited from multidisciplinary specialist palliative care teams (doctors, nurses, healthcare assistants, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, complementary therapists, social workers and chaplains) working in inpatient, outpatient and community services provided by five hospices in the United Kingdom. Results We present a novel qualitative data-derived model of effective symptom management in specialist palliative care. We describe a co-ordinated, multi-faceted, sequential approach involving a process of engagement, partnership, decision-making, and delivery. Interventions to manage symptoms are less effective in psychologically distressed patients. Our data highlights that families of patients have a key role in determining effectiveness of symptom management interventions A holistic approach by a co-ordinated, multi-disciplinary team, including support to recognise and minimise psychological distress might facilitate more effective symptom management. Barriers to symptom management include team discordance and lack of understanding about symptom management by patient and families. Conclusions Shared decision-making between patients and professionals and co-ordination of care by a multi-disciplinary team are key components of effective symptom management. Actions to address psychological distress and evaluate the understanding and expectations of patients and their families would enable more effective symptom management. A more effective multi-disciplinary approach would be facilitated by discussion within teams about role competencies and boundaries.

The COVID-19 pandemic created an urgent need for high-quality rapid research. One clinical challenge was how to minimise the risk of transmission in the hospital setting. The CLEAN study conducted a rapid evaluation of the potential utility of a spray-based disinfectant in a hospital setting. The study was undertaken between December 2020 and March 2021 and involved the implementation of the spray in 10 different clinical areas in one UK teaching hospital. A mixed-methods approach was adopted (including observations, surveys, and qualitative interviews) informed by the theories for understanding the implementation of new healthcare technologies. The evaluation found that while the spray had a number of perceived benefits when added to existing disinfection processes, other factors limited its potential utility. These findings informed a number of recommendations for future adoption within hospital settings. This paper describes and reflects on the rapid methodology that allowed us to undertake the study and deliver results in a short space of time. We experienced a number of pressures during set-up and fieldwork due to the challenging conditions caused by the pandemic, and the methodological approach had to evolve throughout the study because of the changing clinical context. The involvement of clinicians from the research setting as full members of the research team was key to the rapid delivery of the research. They provided an essential link to the implementation environment, and their experiential knowledge of the setting added an important perspective to the analysis. Balancing their involvement with their clinical roles was challenging, however, as was coordinating a large and diverse team of interviewers in such a short space of time. Overall, the study highlighted the value of rapid research to inform urgent healthcare decisions in a pandemic. Although our experience suggests that conducting such research requires some practical and methodological trade-offs, we found that there were also numerous benefits of using rapid methods and identified various opportunities to ensure their robustness.

Abstract Background An estimated 17,000 patients are treated annually in the UK with radical radiotherapy (RT) for pelvic cancer. New treatment approaches in RT have increased survivorship and changed the subjective toxicity profile for patients who experience acute and long-term pelvic-related adverse events (AE). Multi-disciplinary follow-up creates difficulty for monitoring and responding to these events during treatment and beyond. Originally developed for use in systemic oncology therapy eRAPID (electronic patient self-Reporting of Adverse-events: Patient Information and aDvice) is an online system for patients to report AEs from home. eRAPID enables patient data to be integrated into the electronic patient records for use in clinical practice, provides patient management advice for mild and moderate AE and advice to contact the hospital for severe AE. The system has now been developed for pelvic RT patients, and we aim to test the intervention in a pilot study with staff and patients to inform a future randomised controlled trial (RCT). Methods Eligible patients are those attending St James’s University hospital cancer centre and The Christie Hospital Manchester undergoing pelvic radiotherapy+/−chemotherapy/hormonotherapy for prostate, lower gastrointestinal and gynaecological cancers. A prospective 1:1 randomised (intervention or usual care) parallel group design with repeated measures and mixed methods will be employed. We aim to recruit 168 patients following recommendations for sample size estimates for pilot studies. Participants using eRAPID will report AE (at least weekly) from home weekly for 6 weeks and 6 weeks post-treatment (12-week total) then at 18 and 24 weeks. Hospital staff will review eRAPID reports and use information during consultations. Notifications will be sent to the relevant clinical team when severe symptoms are reported. We will measure patient-reported outcomes using validated questionnaires (Functional Assessment in Cancer Therapy Scale-General (FACT-G), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ-C30), process of care impact (hospital records of patient contacts and admissions) and economic variables (EQ5D-5L, patient use of resources)). Staff and patient experiences will be explored via semi-structured interviews. Discussion The objectives are to establish feasibility, recruitment, integrity of the system and attrition rates, determine effect sizes and aid selection of the primary outcome measure for a future RCT. We will also refine the intervention by exploring staff and patient views. The overall goal of this complex intervention is to improve the safe delivery of cancer treatments, enhance patient care and standardise documentation of AE within the clinical datasets. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02747264.