Search

The present paper reports on a qualitative research project designed to expose the presently unrecognised minutiae of community nurses’ work with cancer patients at home, and to identify the ways in which these, combined to form comprehensive care episodes, contribute to physical and psychosocial well-being. The project was conducted in two locations in New South Wales, Australia, one metropolitan and one rural. The research model focused on particular nurse–patient encounters, and involved pre- and post-encounter interviews with nurses, post-encounter interviews with patients and carers, and observation of the encounters themselves. Participants included generalist community nurses, cancer patients being cared for at home, and their primary carers where appropriate. This research demonstrates that regular contact with generalist community nurses is associated with a strong sense of security about the immediate situation for home-based cancer patients and their primary carers. This sense of security is a significant component of patient and carer physical and psychosocial well-being, and may have implications for health services utilisation. In the present paper, the authors outline the factors underpinning this sense of security, and argue that these findings contribute important new knowledge that is vital for contemporary debates about role responsibilities and continuity of care for cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives.Cancer is the second biggest killer of Aboriginal Australians. For some cancers, the mortality rate is more than three times higher in Aboriginal people than for non-Aboriginal people. The Aboriginal Patterns of Cancer Care Study explored barriers to and facilitators of cancer diagnosis and treatment among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in New South Wales. Design.Our team – which includes both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal researchers – conducted in-depth interviews between 2009 and 2010 with Aboriginal people with cancer, their carers and health professionals who care for them. In this paper, we identify recurrent patterns of ‘discursive framing’ in the 16 interviews with health care professionals. We are particularly interested in how these frames assisted participants in constructing a professional position on what ‘cultural difference’ means for the design and delivery of cancer care services to Aboriginal people. Results.Despite geographical, organisational, disciplinary and cultural diversity, these interview participants consistently drew upon six discursive frames, which we have interpreted as eitherelidinga discussion ofdifference(‘everyone is the same’ and ‘everyone is different’) orfacilitatingthat discussion (‘different priorities,’ ‘different practices’ and ‘making difference safe’). An additional strategy appeared to actively resist either of these positions but then tended to ultimately prioritise the eliding frames. Conclusions.While none of our participants were dismissive of the idea that cultural identity might matter to Aboriginal people, their reliance upon familiar narratives about what that means for cancer care services has the potential to both symbolically and practically exclude the voices of a group of people who may already feel disenfranchised from the mainstream health care system. Critically unpacking the ‘taken for granted’ assumptions behind how health care professionals make sense of cultural difference can enrich our understanding of and response to the care needs of indigenous people affected by cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Abstract: We examined whether not having been asked by their clinicians about how involved cancer patients would like to be in their treatment decisions is related to discordance between patients’ preferred and perceived involvement in treatment decision‐making. This was a cross‐sectional survey of adult cancer patients recruited from five medical and radiation oncology outpatient clinics in Australia. Discordance of patients’ preferred and perceived decision‐making roles was assessed via an adapted version of the Control Preferences Scale. Logistic regression modelling was conducted to assess the relationship between role discordance and whether patients were not asked but wanted to be asked about how involved they would like to be in deciding on their treatment. Of 423 study participants, almost a third (n = 128, 31%) reported discordance between their preferred and perceived involvement in their treatment decisions. Of those reporting discordance, 72% (n = 92) were less involved than they would have liked to have been. Not being asked about their preferences for involvement in treatment decisions, despite wanting this, was associated with discordance between patients’ preferred and perceived involvement in treatment decision‐making (p < 0.04). To achieve patient‐centred care, it is vital that clinicians seek patients’ views about how involved they would like to be in deciding on their cancer treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite growing numbers of patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy in outpatient settings and the corresponding increase in care demands on family and close friends, little is known about the experiences of those informal carers supporting people with cancer during their chemotherapy trajectories. Using an interpretivist theoretical framework, this study explored the experiences of primary support persons of chemotherapy outpatients through in-depth interviews with 17 participants nominated as their primary support persons by people receiving chemotherapy at a large tertiary hospital in Australia. The study demonstrates that primary support persons of chemotherapy outpatients face distinct challenges, being at the frontline of treatment and managing side effects with minimal support at home. This role involves sensitive provision of complex medical and social care in circumstances that profoundly challenge the everyday worlds of both patient and carer. From the moment of diagnosis, informal carers in this context face the 'double whammy' of needing to 'manage' the cancer diagnosis experience as well as the chemotherapy trajectory experience. This study points to the significant level of responsibility that primary support persons take on, and the extent to which patients and clinicians rely on their support and management skills. It also points, however, to the lack of recognition they receive for assuming this role, and their sense of frustration in the face of this invisibility. The conceptualisation of the informal carer role as a 'shadowing' role explicitly represents the protective, vigilant, but almost invisible, support role described by the participants in this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]