Mobile health (mHealth) interventions in prostate cancer survivorship: a scoping review.

PURPOSE: This scoping review explores the application of mHealth technology in prostate cancer (CaP) management along the survivorship continuum. METHODS: The scoping review was conducted using the five-step framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley. Using predefined criteria, we screened citations from Embase, EBSCOHost, Cochrane Library, PubMed, ProQuest, SCOPUS, and Web of Science for primary studies published before December 2021. We selected studies that explored the application of mHealth technology in CaP management and survivorship. Evidence from 14 eligible studies was summarized using narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Fourteen studies published between 2015 and 2021 were included. Ten mHealth apps were identified with only one still in use. Most apps were explored for their supportive care roles during radiotherapy (n = 9) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) (n = 1) treatment, mainly to assess outcomes (n = 1) and manage patient-reported symptoms (n = 5). One study deployed mHealth to facilitate recovery after surgery. Very few studies (n = 3) applied mHealth for lifestyle management (i.e., physical activity). Barriers to app usage included connectivity issues, end-user familiarity with the app, login hurdles, and time constraints. Facilitators of app usage included apps being downloaded for participants, devices provided for participants, and the ability to connect with providers through the platform. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: The improving survival rates from CaP suggest that men are now living longer with unfavorable treatment side effects such as reduced sexual functioning, pain, and fatigue. Hence, mHealth represents new hope in men's illness trajectory. However, current application in patients' care pathways remains poor, particularly in the active phase of CaP management. Efforts must be accelerated to explore individual and healthcare-level drivers of mHealth use. The feasibility and descriptive nature of current studies point to a lack of attention to actual implementation and scale-up issues in research considering mHealth application in CaP, hence accounting partly for the gap in research/practice.

Timeliness of diagnosis of breast and cervical cancers and associated factors in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: Addressing the barriers to early breast and cervical cancer diagnosis in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) requires a sound understanding and accurate assessment of diagnostic timeliness. This review aimed to map the current evidence on the time to breast and cervical cancer diagnosis and associated factors in LMICs. DESIGN: Scoping review. SOURCES: MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, Scopus and CINAHL. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies describing the time to diagnosis and associated factors in the context of breast and cervical cancer in LMICs published from 1 January 2010 to 20 May 2021. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently screened all abstracts and full texts using predefined inclusion criteria. The review was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. Evidence was narratively synthesised using predefined themes. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies conducted across 24 LMICs were included in the review, most (24/26) of which focused on breast cancer. Studies varied considerably in their conceptualisation and assessment of diagnostic time, events, intervals and delays, with a minority of the studies reporting the use of validated methods and tools. Patient-related intervals and delays were more frequently evaluated and reported than provider-related and health system-related intervals and delays. Across studies, there were variations in the estimated lengths of the appraisal, help-seeking, patient and diagnostic intervals for both cancers and the factors associated with them. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the significant burden of breast and cervical cancer in LMICs, there is limited information on the timeliness of diagnosis of these cancers. Major limitations included variations in conceptualisation and assessment of diagnostic events and intervals. These underscore the need for the use of validated and standardised tools, to improve accuracy and translation of findings to better inform interventions for addressing diagnostic delays in LMICs.

A scoping review examining the integration of exercise services in clinical oncology settings.

BACKGROUND: Addressing questions surrounding the feasibility of embedding exercise service units in clinical oncology settings is imperative for developing a sustainable exercise-oncology clinical pathway. We examined available literature and offered practical recommendations to support evidence-based practice, policymaking, and further investigations. METHODS: Four thousand eight hundred sixty-three unique records identified in Embase, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Web of Science Core Collection, and ProQuest (Health and Medicine) were screened for studies that recruited cancer patients, assessed the co-location of exercise service and cancer treatment units, and reported findings on service implementation. Evidence from six studies providing data from over 30 programs was integrated using narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Service implementation was relatively modest across the included studies. Exercise services were delivered by physiotherapists, exercise physiologists, and kinesiologists and funded mainly through grants and private donations, with staff salaries accruing as the major expense. Service penetration, adoption, and acceptability were generally low. However, studies recorded high clinician/patient satisfaction. Major barriers to service integration were limited funding, lack of detailed implementation plan, and low organizational buy-in. Common reasons for non-utilization, missed sessions, and dropouts were lack of interest, unwellness, hospital readmission, disease progression, and adverse skeletal events. CONCLUSION: Implementing exercise services in clinical oncology settings seems an effective approach for increasing access to exercise-based rehabilitation for individuals on cancer treatment. While this model appears feasible for patients/clinicians, efforts are required to optimize service integration both in the short and long term. Key priorities include seeking [local] actions to address issues relating to funding and organizational buy-in. Important considerations may include developing an implementation plan to guide the implementation process, expanding the patient core management team to include staff from the exercise rehabilitation unit, and exploring the role of patient feedback in increasing clinician participation (e.g., treating oncologists and nurses) in the referral process. Future research should consider effective strategies to promote patients' sense of self-efficacy and behavioral control and, further, the place of audit and feedback in improving exercise service delivery and overall service implementation.

Cancer service delivery and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review.

Background: The impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on health systems is widely reported worldwide. However, what remains unclear is the relative extent of the pandemic's effects on cancer management in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). This review provides an up-to-date synthesis of the literature to inform post-pandemic policy and practice efforts in the region. Methods: Sources searched for published research include MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, African Index Medicus, African Wide Information and Web of Science. Using predefined criteria, the retrieved citations were screened for primary research describing the direct and indirect impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the cancer care and service delivery landscape in SSA since March 2020. Evidence was summarised using narrative synthesis. Results: Fourteen studies reporting findings from 19 SSA countries were included in this review. Studies were conducted mostly in the first wave of the pandemic (between March and July 2020) (10/14). The most commonly reported impact on cancer treatment (including surgery) were cancellations, delays and modifications (11/14). Half (7/14) of the studies reported on the impact of the pandemic on cancer care resource availability and service restructuring. Other notable impacts included temporary suspension, total cancellations or alterations in cancer screening (3/14) and diagnostic (3/14) services or programmes. Disruptions in cancer research and outreach activities were also reported (3/14). The availability and maintenance of cancer healthcare depended on multiple factors like availability of clinical supplies, existing oncology workforce, adequate supply of personal protective equipment and local pandemic mitigation measures. Notably, no studies reported on the impact of the pandemic on psychosocial support programmes, physiotherapy and other rehabilitation care for cancer patients. Conclusion: Changes in cancer care and service delivery due to the COVID-19 pandemic varied considerably across countries in SSA. This review underscores the need for urgent actions to mitigate current setbacks while recommending evidence-based and contextualised approaches to revitalising cancer care in the post-pandemic era.