RESUMO
Objective: Aging can introduce significant changes in health, cognition, function, social status, and emotional status among older adults affected by cancer. Little is known about how existing nurse-led interventions address the needs of older adults. The objective was to identify existing nurse-led interventions among older adults to optimize recovery and survivorship needs. Methods: A integrative systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020 Guidelines. Electronic databases (APA PsycINFO, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases) were searched using key search terms. Articles were assessed for inclusion according to a pre-determined eligibility criterion. Data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted. Findings were integrated into a narrative synthesis. Results: Twenty-one studies were included, and a total of 4253 participants were represented. There were a range of study designs: quantitative (n â= â10), randomised controlled trials (n â= â6), mixed methods studies (n â= â3), qualitative (n â= â1), and a non-randomized controlled study (n â= â1). Most participants had prostate cancer, with some representation in colorectal, lung, head and neck, renal, esophageal, and mixed cancer patient populations. Conclusions: This review shows a lack of evidence on the inclusion of geriatric assessments for older people with cancer within existing nurse-led interventions. Further research is needed to test nurse-led interventions with the inclusion of geriatric assessments and their contribution to the multidisciplinary team across the cancer care continuum for various cancer patient populations.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings are mainstay clinical management globally. Clinical guidelines state that patients should be considered for MDT review, but evidence has identified that within the specialty of uro-oncology not all patients are reviewed by an MDT. This systematic review aimed to understand the impact of uro-oncology MDT meetings on patient outcomes, to explore how patient engagement is incorporated in the process, and to identify the barriers and facilitators within an MDT. METHODS: A systematic review was reported according to PRISMA guidelines. Electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsychINFO) were searched in EBSCOhost from January 2010 to March 2021, using a range of key search words. Studies were assessed for inclusion according to a pre-defined eligibility criteria. Data extraction and quality assessment was undertaken. The findings were tabulated, and a narrative synthesis undertaken. RESULTS: 373 articles were screened, and seven studies were included. The studies were conducted in a range of international countries which provided an overview of uro-oncology MDTs in different healthcare contexts. The following themes were identified: 1) MDT and clinical outcomes, 2) structure and format, 3) patient engagement in the process, and 4) barriers and facilitators. CONCLUSION: Cancer care is constantly being challenged due to complex newer therapies, including multimodality treatments, and newer emergent broader considerations such as, oncogeriatrics, genetic counselling, and survivorship issues which should have a central place for consideration in the MDT.
