Search

Based on recent shifts in reimbursement for cancer treatment from fee-for-service to bundled and value-based payment, this concluding article summarizes data from these papers and the large body of literature on caregiving to suggest how caregiving research might be redirected to link the formal with the informal systems to achieve higher-quality and lower-cost care. Caregiver dyads, the tasks of care, and strategies for training are presented. Articles in this issue of Seminars in Oncology Nursing , the larger body of caregiving literature, and the Oncology Care Model driving bundled payments and value-based care. Research on informal caregiving for cancer patients should begin to reframe the rich body of evidence available toward a focus on caregivers reactions to the tasks of care, the training necessary for caregivers to perform them, and how each contributes to quality care at lower costs and appropriate outcomes given patients' stage of disease and goals of treatment. Oncology systems must take a more active role in including patients and their families as partners to manage treatments and side effects to achieve the best possible patient outcomes. They must be able to evaluate the patient and the caregiver to determine what tasks they will be able to perform, and then make sure they have the training and resources to carry out those tasks. Training could be done by social media and through communication using patient portals that could be expanded through the electronic medical records to include caregiver portals, enabling caregiver questions and reports of patients' conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Changes in the nature and structure of healthcare pathways have implications for healthcare professionals' jurisdictional boundaries. The introduction of treatment focused BRCA1 and 2 genetic testing (TFGT) for newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer offers a contemporary example of pathway change brought about by technological advancements in gene testing and clinical evidence, and reflects the cultural shift towards genomics. Forming part of an ethnographically informed study of patient and practitioner experiences of TFGT at a UK teaching hospital, this paper focuses on the impact of a proposal to pilot a mainstreamed TFGT pathway on healthcare professionals' negotiations of professional jurisdiction. Based upon semi-structured interviews (n = 19) with breast surgeons, medical oncologists and members of the genetics team, alongside observations of breast multidisciplinary team meetings, during the time leading up to the implementation of the pilot, we describe how clinicians responded to the anticipated changes associated with mainstreaming. Interviews suggest that mainstreaming the breast cancer pathway, and the associated jurisdictional reconfigurations, had advocates as well as detractors. Medical oncologists championed the plans, viewing this adaptation in care provision and their professional role as a logical next step. Breast surgeons, however, regarded mainstreaming as an unfeasible expansion of their workload and questioned the relevance of TFGT to their clinical practice. The genetics team, who introduced the pilot, appeared cautiously optimistic about the potential changes. Drawing on sociological understandings of the negotiation of professional jurisdictions our work contributes a timely, micro-level examination of the responses among clinicians as they worked to renegotiate professional boundaries in response to the innovative application of treatment-focused BRCA testing in cancer care – a local and dynamic process which we refer to as an 'oncogenetic taskscape in the making'. Highlights • A micro-level examination of clinicians' work assembling an 'oncogenetic taskscape'. • Mainstreaming genomic testing requires changes to professional jurisdictions. • Technology's clinical relevance informs clinicians' acceptance of mainstreaming. • Clinical implementation of new technology requires inter-professional collaboration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Advances in research and technology coupled with an increased cancer incidence and prevalence have resulted in significant expansion of cancer nurse role, in order to meet the growing demands and expectations of people affected by cancer (PABC). Cancer nurses are also tasked with delivering an increasing number of complex interventions as a result of ongoing clinical trials in cancer research. However much of this innovation is undocumented, and we have little insight about the nature of novel interventions currently being designed or delivered by cancer nurses. Objectives To identify and synthesise the available evidence from clinical trials on interventions delivered or facilitated by cancer nurses. Data sources and review methods A systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCT), quasi-RCTs and controlled before and after studies (CBA) of cancer nursing interventions aimed at improving the experience and outcomes of PABC. Ten electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, Epistemonikos, CDSR, DARE, HTA, WHO ICTRP) were searched between 01 January 2000 and 31 May 2016. No language restrictions were applied. Bibliographies of selected studies and relevant Cochrane reviews were also hand-searched. Interventions delivered by cancer nurses were classified according to the OMAHA System. Heat maps were used to highlight the volume of evidence available for different cancer groups, intervention types and stage of cancer care continuum. Results The search identified 22,450 records; we screened 16,169 abstracts and considered 925 full papers, of which 214 studies (247,550 participants) were included in the evidence synthesis. The majority of studies were conducted in Europe (n = 79) and USA (n = 74). Interventions were delivered across the cancer continuum from prevention and risk reduction to survivorship, with the majority of interventions delivered during the treatment phase (n = 137). Most studies (131/214) had a teaching, guidance or counselling component. Cancer nurse interventions were targeted at primarily breast, prostate or multiple cancers. No studies were conducted in brain, sarcoma or other rare cancer types. The majority of the studies (n = 153) were nurse-led and delivered by specialist cancer nurses (n = 74) or advanced cancer nurses (n = 29), although the quality of reporting was poor. Conclusions To the best of our knowledge, this is the first review to synthesise evidence from intervention studies across the entire cancer spectrum. As such, this work provides new insights into the nature of the contribution that cancer nurses have made to evidence-based innovations, as well as highlighting areas in which cancer nursing trials can be developed in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sexual health and sexual minority status are often undiscussed during oncology visits. Yet, these topics should be addressed in older cancer patients in order to help mitigate the sexual side effects of cancer treatment and to acknowledge – and, at times, help provide – the social support older patients need during their cancer journey. This paper describes 4 tips on how cancer healthcare providers can broach the topics of sexual health and sexual minority status in an oncology clinic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ageism towards older adults with cancer may impact treatment decisions, healthcare interactions, and shape health/psychosocial outcomes. The purpose of this review is twofold: (1) To synthesize the literature on ageism towards older adults with cancer in oncology and (2) To identify interventions that address ageism in the healthcare context applicable to oncology. We conducted a scoping review following Arksey and O ' Malley and Levac methods and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We conducted an exhaustive multi-database search, screening 30,926 titles/abstracts. Following data abstraction, we conducted tabular, narrative, and textual synthesis. We extracted data on 133 papers. Most (n = 44) were expert opinions, reviews, and letters to editors highlighting the negative impacts of ageism, expressing the need for approaches addressing heterogeneity of older adults, and calling for increased clinical trial inclusion for older adults. Qualitative studies (n = 3) described healthcare professionals ' perceived influence of age on treatment recommendations, whereas quantitative studies (n = 32) were inconclusive as to whether age-related bias impacted treatment recommendations/outcomes or survival. Intervention studies (n = 54) targeted ageism in pre/post-licensure healthcare professionals and reported participants ' improvement in knowledge and/or attitudes towards older adults. No interventions were found that had been implemented in oncology. Concerns relating to ageism in cancer care are consistently described in the literature. Interventions exist to address ageism; however, none have been developed or tested in oncology settings. Addressing ageism in oncology will require integration of geriatric knowledge/interventions to address conscious and unconscious ageist attitudes impacting care and outcomes. Interventions hold promise if tailored for cancer care settings. 249/250. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The aim of this paper is to describe the development of an inter-professional screening instrument for cancer patients' cognitive resources, knowledge expectations and inter-professional collaboration within patient education. Design and methods: Four empirical datasets during 2012-2014 were analyzed in order to identify main categories, subcategories and items for inter-professional screening instrument. Findings: Our inter-professional screening instrument integrates the critical moments of cancer patient education and the knowledge expectation types obtained from patient datasets to assessment of patients' cognitive resources, knowledge expectations and comprehension; and intra; and inter-professional. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Care at the end-of-life in the United States has expanded in the past decade in large part due to structural changes such as increased access to hospice care, the integration of palliative care, policy mandates, and financial incentives. Despite these shifts, research shows that appropriate end-of-life care continues to be underutilized. This paper uses conversation analytic (CA) and ethnographic methods to examine doctor-patient interactions among a sample of 14 Stage IV cancer patients and the way decisions unfold about next steps in treatment during a moment that larger policy changes began to take place following passage of the Affordable Care Act. This work reveals that, despite structures designed to better facilitate end-of-life care transitions for patients in late life, doctors continue to demonstrate interactional hesitancy in discussing the possibility of a patient's end-of-life in treatment discussions and an orientation to the treatment imperative. Examining doctor-patient interaction as one key trouble source in end-of-life care implementation shows in situ evidence that the treatment imperative supersedes the structural shifts supporting less medical intervention in late life. • Despite policies supporting end-of-life care, doctors are hesitant to offer such treatment. • Doctors demonstrate pursuit of the treatment imperative in recommending treatment. • Analyzing micro-interactions offers critical insights into institutional inertia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]