Search

Palliative care is increasingly important in the prison setting, but information about the quality and accessibility of this care is extremely limited. Developing and implementing standardised quality indicators will provide transparency, accountability, and a platform for quality improvement at both local and national levels.

Following the publication of the original article [1], it has been reported that Dr. Jane Phillips should also be affiliated to affiliation 1. Moreover, the following sentences in the Introduction section should be updated from However, the reality of the many barriers to release near the end of life [6–8] necessitates the provision of high quality primary palliative care within prisons…. …While the basic palliative care needs of many of these people are managed internally by correctional healthcare providers, [9] providing care to those with complex or escalating palliative care needs is more challenging in the prison environment [10]. into However, many barriers prevent this from often occuring, [6–8] necessitating the provision of high quality primary palliative care within prisons…. …While the basic palliative care needs of many of these people are managed internally by correctional healthcare providers, [9] providing care to those with more complex or escalating palliative care needs is challenging in the prison environment [10]. The original article has been updated.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the acceptability of a nurse-led prostate cancer survivorship intervention adapted for virtual delivery and tailored to post-surgical care, in a regional Australian hospital and health service. METHODS: A qualitative exploratory study using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). RESULTS: Twenty-two participants took part in a semistructured interview comprising men who had completed the program (n = 16) and health professionals/service stakeholders involved in program delivery (n = 6). Acceptability of this virtual prostate cancer survivorship care program was very high across all constructs of the TFA, from the perspectives of both program recipients and those delivering the program. The quality of care received was seen as superior to what men had experienced previously (burden, opportunity costs). The time afforded by the regularly scheduled video-consultations allowed men to come to terms with the recovery process in their own time (self-efficacy), and provided an ongoing sense of support and access to care outside the consultation (ethicality). Clinically, the program improved care co-ordination, expedited identification of survivorship care needs, and met service priorities of providing quality care close to home (burden, perceived effectiveness). CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study suggest virtual post-surgical care delivered via videoconferencing is highly acceptable to prostate cancer survivors in a regional setting. Future research exploring virtual program implementation at scale and long-term patient and service outcomes is warranted.

BACKGROUND: Among sarcomas, which are rare cancers, many types are exceedingly rare; however, a definition of ultra-rare cancers has not been established. The problem of ultra-rare sarcomas is particularly relevant because they represent unique diseases, and their rarity poses major challenges for diagnosis, understanding disease biology, generating clinical evidence to support new drug development, and achieving formal authorization for novel therapies. METHODS: The Connective Tissue Oncology Society promoted a consensus effort in November 2019 to establish how to define ultra-rare sarcomas through expert consensus and epidemiologic data and to work out a comprehensive list of these diseases. The list of ultra-rare sarcomas was based on the 2020 World Health Organization classification, The incidence rates were estimated using the Information Network on Rare Cancers (RARECARENet) database and NETSARC (the French Sarcoma Network's clinical-pathologic registry). Incidence rates were further validated in collaboration with the Asian cancer registries of Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. RESULTS: It was agreed that the best criterion for a definition of ultra-rare sarcomas would be incidence. Ultra-rare sarcomas were defined as those with an incidence of approximately ≤1 per 1,000,000, to include those entities whose rarity renders them extremely difficult to conduct well powered, prospective clinical studies. On the basis of this threshold, a list of ultra-rare sarcomas was defined, which comprised 56 soft tissue sarcoma types and 21 bone sarcoma types. CONCLUSIONS: Altogether, the incidence of ultra-rare sarcomas accounts for roughly 20% of all soft tissue and bone sarcomas. This confirms that the challenges inherent in ultra-rare sarcomas affect large numbers of patients.

Background: A primary brain cancer diagnosis is a distressing, life changing event. It adversely affects the quality of life for the person living with brain cancer and their families (‘carers’). Timely access to evidence-based information is critical to enabling people living with brain cancer, and their carers, to self-manage the devastating impacts of this disease. Method: A systematic environmental scan of web-based resources. A depersonalised search for online English-language resources published from 2009 to December 2019 and designed for adults (> 25 years of age), living with primary brain cancer, was undertaken using the Google search engine. The online information was classified according to: 1) the step on the cancer care continuum; 2) self-management domains (PRISMS taxonomy); 3) basic information disclosure (Silberg criteria); 4) independent quality verification (HonCode); 5) reliability of disease and treatment information (DISCERN Sections 1 and 2); and readability (Flesch-Kincaid reading grade). Results: A total of 119 online resources were identified, most originating in England (n = 49); Australia (n = 27); or the USA (n = 27). The majority of resources related to active treatment (n = 76), without addressing recurrence (n = 3), survivorship (n = 1) or palliative care needs (n = 13). Few online resources directly provided self-management advice for adults living with brain cancer or their carers. Just over a fifth (n = 26, 22%) were underpinned by verifiable evidence. Only one quarter of organisations producing resources were HonCode certified (n = 9, 24%). The median resource reliability as measured by Section 1, DISCERN tool, was 56%. A median of 8.8 years of education was required to understand these online resources. Conclusions: More targeted online information is needed to provide people affected by brain cancer with practical self-management advice. Resources need to better address patient and carer needs related to: rehabilitation, managing

Background

Method

Results

Conclusions

Background: Access to palliative care in the community enables people to live in their preferred place of care, which is often home. Community palliative care services struggle to provide timely 24-h services to patients and family. This has resulted in calls for ‘accessible and flexible’ models of care that are ‘responsive’ to peoples’ changing palliative care needs. Digital health technologies provide opportunities to meet these requirements 24-h a day. Aim: To identify digital health technologies that have been evaluated for supporting timely assessment and management of people living at home with palliative care needs and/or their carer(s), and the evidence-base for each. Design: A systematic review of systematic reviews (‘meta-review’). Systematic reviews evaluating evidence for virtual models of palliative or end-of-life care using one or more digital health technologies were included. Systematic reviews were evaluated using the Risk of Bias Tool for Systematic Reviews. A narrative approach was used to synthesise results. Data sources:Medline, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Database of systematic reviews were searched for English-language reviews published between 2015 and 2020. Results: The search yielded 2266 articles, of which 12 systematic reviews met criteria. Sixteen reviews were included in total, after four reviews were found via handsearching. Other than scheduled telehealth, video-conferencing, or after-hours telephone support, little evidence was found for digital health technologies used to deliver virtual models of palliative care. Conclusions: There are opportunities to test new models of virtual care, beyond telehealth and/or video conferencing, such as 24-h command centres, and rapid response teams.