Search

Introduction: Radiotherapy (RT) stands as one of the main cancer treatments. The impact of RT and cancer treatment can have a physical and psychological impact on patients and their carers. To gain patient's trust, and ensure they feel valued, information should be provided before, during, and after RT. Patient and public involvement (PPI) has been lacking, and increased engagement with PPI groups could improve this. This rapid review aims to analyse the literature, and describe and report patient perception, experience, and satisfaction regarding the information received concerning their course of RT. Methods: To allow the synthesis of results, a pragmatic decision was made to use a rapid review approach to analyse the literature, providing more timely information to inform future work. This rapid review utilised systematic review methods and was conducted according to a pre-defined protocol including clear inclusion criteria (PROSPERO registration: CRD42023415916).Electronic databases CINAHL, AMED, Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO were searched using a comprehensive search for published studies from January 2012 to November 2023. Two independent reviewers applied the eligibility criteria. Evidence from literature was extracted and transcribed into qualitative data and Braun and Clarke’s six-step thematic analysis (TA) was employed to determine themes by one reviewer and checked by a second [26]. Due to the heterogeneity of the included literature, the analysis of this review is presented primarily through narrative synthesis. Results: Sixty eight articles met the inclusion criteria for this review. Emerging themes included; a desire for information based on patient characteristics, information format, patient preparedness, timing e.g. timing of information and changing priorities over time, health care professional (HCP) involvement, barriers to information, and motivators for better information delivery. Conclusions: Several factors can influence a patient’s desire for information, from whom and when they receive it, to what format they would prefer to receive it. There is benefit to be gained in employing PPI and patient advocacy to inform future studies that aim to further understand the themes that emerged from this review. Such studies can therefore inform HCPs in providing patient-specific information and support by utilising multiple teaching strategies available to them.

Abstract Background A robust evidence base is required to assist healthcare commissioners and providers in selecting effective and sustainable approaches to improve cancer diagnosis and treatment. Such evidence can be difficult to build, given the fast-paced and highly pressured nature of healthcare delivery, the absence of incentives, and the presence of barriers in conducting pragmatic yet robust research evaluations. Cancer Research UK (CRUK) has played an active part in building the evidence base through its funding of programmes to identify, evaluate and scale-up innovative approaches across the UK. The aim of this paper is to describe and explain the research design and intended approach and activities for two cancer services improvement projects in Scotland funded by CRUK. Methods A hybrid effectiveness-implementation study design will assess both the efficiency of the new pathways and their implementation strategies, with the aim of generating knowledge for scale-up. A range of implementation, service and clinical outcomes will be assessed as determined by the projects’ Theories of Change (ToCs). A naturalistic case study approach will enable in-depth exploration of context and process, and the collection and synthesis of data from multiple sources including routine datasets, patient and staff surveys, in-depth interviews and observational and other data. The evaluations are informed throughout by a patient/public representatives’ group, and by small group discussions with volunteer cancer patients. Discussion Our approach has been designed to provide a holistic understanding of how (well) the improvement projects work (in relation to their anticipated outcomes), and how they interact with their wider contexts. The evaluations will help identify barriers, facilitators, and unanticipated consequences that can impact scalability, sustainability and spread. By opting for a pragmatic, participatory evaluation research design, we hope to inform strategies for scaling up successful innovations while addressing challenges in a targeted manner.