What are the mechanisms underlying the delivery of survivorship care information in Australia? A realist review.

OBJECTIVE: Quality survivorship information is an essential component of cancer care. However, survivors often report not receiving this information and healthcare professionals report limited practical guidance on how to effectively deliver survivorship information. Therefore, this study used realist review methods to identify mechanisms reported within the published literature for communicating survivorship information and to understand the contextual factors that make these mechanisms effective. METHODS: Full-text papers published in CINAHL, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Academic Search Ultimate were included. Studies included in this review were conducted in Australia between January 2006 and December 2023, and reported on how information regarding survivorship care was communicated to adult cancer survivors living in the community. This review utilized realist methodologies: text extracts were converted to if-then statements used to generate context-mechanism-outcome theories. RESULTS: Fifty-one studies were included and six theories for mechanisms that underpin the effective delivery of survivorship information were formed. These include: (1) tailoring information based on the survivors' background, (2) enhancing communication among providers, (3) employing dedicated survivorship staff, (4) providing survivorship training, (5) reducing the burden on survivors to navigate their care, and (6) using multiple modalities to provide information. CONCLUSIONS: Findings can inform practical guidance for how survivorship care information is best delivered in practice. Clinicians can apply this guidance to improve their individual interactions with cancer survivors, as can policymakers to develop healthcare systems and procedures that support effective communication of cancer survivorship information.

Co-designing planning interventions to facilitate participation in mail-out bowel cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Population mail-out bowel cancer screening programs save lives through prevention and early detection; however, their effectiveness is constrained by low participation rates. Many non-participants are "intenders"; that is, they intend to screen but fail to do so, often forgetting or procrastinating. This study aimed to co-design interventions to increase screening participation among intenders in the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program. METHODS: Three semi-structured interviews, and one online cross-sectional survey, were conducted between August 2021 and December 2022. Interviews with people who had completed and returned their latest screening kit ("completers") were first conducted to identify the planning strategies they had used. Using survey data, logistic regressions were conducted to analyse strategies predictive of participants having returned their latest bowel cancer screening kit. Then, intenders were interviewed to explore their opinions of these strategies and worked with researchers to adapt these strategies into prototype interventions to facilitate screening participation. All interviews were analysed using the framework approach of codebook thematic analysis. RESULTS: Interview participants who returned their kit shared their effective planning strategies, such as putting the kit in a visible place or by the toilet, planning a time at home to complete the kit, and using reminders. Survey participants who reported using such strategies were more likely to have completed their screening kit compared to those who did not. Prototype interventions developed and endorsed by intenders included providing a prompt to place the kit or a sticker near the toilet as a reminder, a deadline for kit return, the option to sign up for reminders, and a bag to store the sample in the fridge. CONCLUSIONS: These novel, consumer-led interventions that are built upon the needs and experience of screening invitees provide potential solutions to improve participation in population bowel cancer screening.

The Barriers to Bowel Cancer Screening Scale: Examining Structural Validity, Measurement Invariance, and Criterion Validity.

OBJECTIVE: The success of national cancer screening programs, such as the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) in Australia, depends on public participation, which is currently an alarming 43.5% for the NBCSP. Understanding the barriers that impede screening participation requires valid measurement instruments. This study aims to cross-validate such an instrument with a new, large, and varied sample, as well as assess measurement invariance across subsamples at a greatest risk of nonparticipation (ie, testing whether the scale functions in similar ways across groups). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional sample of 1158 participants from the target screening population (50-74 years) provided demographic information, responses to the Barriers to Home Bowel Screening (BB-CanS) scale, and information on their previous screening participation. RESULTS: Both the full and the brief versions of the BB-CanS scale showed good model fit for the full sample and for gender and age subsamples. Despite the inter-factor correlations being high, the unidimensional and bi-factor models exhibited poorer fit. Improvement in fit was observed with scale refinement involving the removal of 7 items. All versions of the BB-CanS scale were invariant across gender and age subsamples. Age and gender differences emerged across several barriers and variance in all 4 barriers significantly predicted prior screening participation. CONCLUSION: The BB-CanS scale is a valid measure of 4 highly correlated barriers to home bowel cancer screening: disgust relating to screening, avoidance of test outcomes, practical difficulty (or challenges), and the need for a sense of greater autonomy. All versions of the instrument measure the equivalent construct across age and gender groups. Observed differences in barriers across at-risk groups provide targets for future intervention.

Experiences of participants in a clinical trial of a novel radioactive treatment for advanced prostate cancer: A nested, qualitative longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVES: Qualitative studies nested within clinical trials can provide insight into the treatment experience, how this evolves over time and where improved supportive care is required. The purpose of this qualitative study is to describe the lived experiences of men with advanced prostate cancer participating in the TheraP trial; a randomised trial of 177Lu-PSMA-617 compared with cabazitaxel chemotherapy. METHODS: Fifteen men with advanced prostate cancer were recruited from the TheraP clinical trial with interviews conducted at three timepoints during the trial. An interpretative phenomenological approach was used, and interviews analysed using thematic analysis. This research paper reports the results from the mid-point, conclusion and follow up interviews, focusing specifically on participants' experiences of trial participation. RESULTS: Three themes were identified representing the lived experiences of men with advanced prostate cancer participating in the TheraP trial: (1) facing limited options; (2) anticipating outcomes and (3) coping with health changes. CONCLUSIONS: Men who enrol in clinical trial of anti-neoplastic treatments for prostate cancer need targeted psychological and supportive care that includes attention to unique aspects of the experience of having prostate cancer and being in a clinical trial. As part of their trial experience, men with advanced prostate cancer need to be regularly assessed for survivorship needs, fully informed, supported and referred to services for regular care and support across the trajectory of their disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03392428. Registered on 8 January 2018 (ANZUP1603).

Identifying modifiable features of home bowel cancer screening kits to facilitate use: consumer perspectives.

OBJECTIVES: Despite the widely publicised health benefits of participation in bowel cancer screening, only 43.5% of recipients participate in the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP). Through consultation with kit recipients, this study aimed to identify features of home bowel screening kits that could be modified to increase their use. METHOD: Participants (n = 25) were presented with nine different bowel cancer screening kits and asked to identify features of each kit that might prevent or promote their use. Responses were coded using content analysis, and a narrative synthesis is presented summarising preferences relating to each element of the kit. RESULTS: Six modifiable elements were identified: collection tool, collection sheet, specimen container, instruction, packaging and processes. Participant preferences were for collection devices that limited the users' proximity to faecal matter, smaller packaging, simpler processes and step-by-step pictorial instructions. Responses regarding aesthetics, the amount of information included and receiving immediate results were mixed. CONCLUSIONS: Findings provide several consumer-driven recommendations, which are to be tested in future research aimed at improving the acceptability and usability of kits distributed in population bowel cancer screening programs.

Advanced prostate cancer experimental radioactive treatment-clinical trial decision making: patient experiences.

OBJECTIVES: Nested qualitative studies within clinical trials provide the opportunity to better understand participant experiences of participation and identify areas where improved support is required. The purpose of this qualitative study is to describe the lived experiences of men with advanced prostate cancer participating in the TheraP trial; a randomised trial of 177Lu-PSMA-617 compared with cabazitaxel chemotherapy. METHODS: Fifteen men with advanced prostate cancer were recruited from the TheraP clinical trial and interviewed at three time points during the trial. Interviews were inductively analysed using thematic analysis. This research paper reports the results from the baseline interview at commencement of the trial, focusing specifically on participants' enrolment experiences. RESULTS: Four themes were identified representing the lived experiences of men with advanced prostate cancer deciding to participate in the TheraP trial: (1) hoping to survive; (2) needing to feel informed; (3) choosing to participate and (4) being randomised. The process of deciding to enrol in a clinical trial is filled with indecision, emotional difficulties and focused on a desire to live. CONCLUSIONS: For men with advanced prostate cancer, the experience of deciding to enrol in a clinical trial is principally driven by a desire to survive but interlinked with the need to make an informed decision as participants in this study expressed a preference for allocation to the experimental arm. Men seeking to enrol in clinical trials of new prostate cancer treatments would benefit from improved informational and decision support. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03392428, ANZUP1603.

Deciding to Enrol in a Cancer Trial: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials are essential for the advancement of cancer treatments; however, participation by patients is suboptimal. Currently, there is a lack of synthesized qualitative review evidence on the patient experience of trial entry from which to further develop decision support. The aim of this review is to synthesise literature reporting experiences of participants when deciding to enrol in a cancer clinical trial in order to inform practice. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies were conducted to describe the experiences of adult cancer patients who decided to enrol in a clinical trial of an anti-cancer treatment. RESULTS: Forty studies met eligibility criteria for inclusion. Three themes were identified representing the overarching domains of experience when deciding to enrol in a cancer trial: 1) need for trial information; (2) trepidation towards participation; and (3) justifying the decision. The process of deciding to enrol in a clinical trial is one marked by uncertainty, emotional distress and driven by the search for a cure. CONCLUSION: Findings from this review show that decision support modelled by shared decision-making and the quality of a shared decision needs to be accompanied by tailored or personalised psychosocial and supportive care. Although the decision process bears similarities to theoretical processes outlined in decision-making frameworks, there are a lack of supportive interventions for cancer patients that are adapted to the clinical trial context. Theory-based interventions are urgently required to support the specific needs of patients deciding whether to participate in cancer trials.

Risk of postoperative pulmonary complications in adult surgical patients with metabolic syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is defined as an accumulation of risk factors that include chronic hypertension, dyslipidaemia, insulin resistance and obesity and leads to an increased risk for diabetes, cardiovascular disease and stroke. MetS is widespread and estimated to affect up to a quarter of the global population. Patients with MetS who undergo surgery are associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications when compared with patients with a non-MetS profile. An emerging body of literature points to MetS being associated with a greater risk of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) in the surgical patient. PPC are associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality, Intensive care unit (ICU) admission, length of stay (ICU and hospital), health care costs, resource usage, unplanned re-intubation and prolonged ventilatory time. METHODS/DESIGN: We will search for relevant studies in the following electronic bibliographic databases: EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Scopus as well as scan the reference lists of included studies for potential additional literature. Two authors will independently screen titles and abstracts to identify potentially relevant studies for inclusion based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The Cochrane Collaboration Review Manager (Review Manager 5) statistical software will be used to conduct this systematic review and meta-analysis and generate forest plots to demonstrate comparison of findings across studies included for meta-analysis. Subgroup and sensitivity analysis will be performed to assess the heterogeneity of included studies. A descriptive synthesis of the statistical data will be provided to summarise the results and findings of the systematic review and meta-analysis. DISCUSSION: This review will be the first to report and summarise the risk for and incidence of PPC in adult patients with MetS undergoing surgery across a range of surgical specialities. The results have the potential to inform the development of evidenced-based interventions to improve the management of PPC in the surgical patient with MetS. Findings from this systematic review and meta-analysis will inform a subsequent Delphi study on priorities and responses to PPC in patients with MetS. We will also disseminate our results through publication in scientific peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations and promotion throughout our network of surgical safety champions in clinical settings. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019120279.