Identifying provider, patient and practice factors that shape long-term opioid prescribing for cancer pain: a qualitative study of American and Australian providers.

INTRODUCTION: Prescribing long-term opioid therapy is a nuanced clinical decision requiring careful consideration of risks versus benefits. Our goal is to understand patient, provider and context factors that impact the decision to prescribe opioids in patients with cancer. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of the raw semistructured interview data gathered from 42 prescribers who participated in one of two aligned concurrent qualitative studies in the USA and Australia. We conducted a two-part analysis of the interview: first identifying all factors influencing long-term prescribing and second open coding-related content for themes. RESULTS: Factors that influence long-term opioid prescribing for cancer-related pain clustered under three key domains (patient-related, provider-related and practice-related factors) each with several themes. Domain 1: Patient factors related to provider-patient continuity, patient personality, the patient's social context and patient characteristics including racial/ethnic identity, housing and socioeconomic status. Domain 2: Provider-related factors centred around provider 'personal experience and expertise', training and time availability. Domain 3: Practice-related factors included healthcare interventions to promote safer opioid practices and accessibility of quality alternative pain therapies. CONCLUSION: Despite the differences in the contexts of the two countries, providers consider similar patient, provider and practice-related factors when long-term prescribing opioids for patients with cancer. Some of these factors may be categorised as cognitive biases that may intersect in an already disadvantaged patient and exacerbate disparities in the treatment of their pain. A more systematic understanding of these factors and how they impact the quality of care can inform appropriate interventions.

What matters most to people with metastatic uveal melanoma? A qualitative study to inform future measurement of health-related quality of life.

Metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM) is a rare cancer with poor prognosis, but novel treatments are emerging. Currently, there are no mUM-specific health-related quality of life (HRQL) questionnaires available for clinical research. We aimed to explore how mUM and its treatment affect HRQL and assess the content validity of existing questionnaires. Participants were patients with mUM and healthcare professionals involved in their care. Qualitative data were collected using semi-structured interviews and focus groups. Data collection and analysis used an integrative approach involving inductive questions/coding to elicit new concepts and deductive questions/coding based on domains of existing HRQL questionnaires. Initial interviews/focus groups focussed on HRQL questionnaires designed for patients with uveal melanoma or liver metastases. As new concepts were elicited, domains and items from other questionnaires were subsequently added. Seventeen patients and 16 clinicians participated. HRQL concerns assessed by uveal melanoma-specific questionnaires were largely resolved by the time of metastasis. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Immunotherapy Module (FACT-ICM) adequately captured most immunotherapy-related side effects during initial treatment cycles. However, most patients emphasised emotional impacts over physical ones, focussing on the existential threat posed by disease amidst uncertainty about treatment accessibility and effectiveness. Patients were also concerned with treatment burden, including time commitment, travel, need for hospitalisation, and expenses. The relative importance of HRQL issues varied over time and across treatment modalities, with no single questionnaire being sufficient. Pending further development and psychometric testing, clinical researchers may need to take a modular approach to measuring the HRQL impacts of mUM.

Management of pain in cancer patients- lessons from practices during the COVID-19: a qualitative study of cancer care providers' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has impacted health systems globally and affected managing many chronic conditions, including cancer. This study aimed to explore the perceptions of multi-disciplinary cancer care providers on how cancer pain management was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Participants were eligible if they were cancer care providers of any specialty and discipline from two tertiary hospitals in Australia. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews to explore cancer care providers' perspectives on cancer pain management within COVID-19. Thematic analysis of interview transcripts used an integrated approach that started with inductive coding before coding deductively against a behaviour framework called the COM-B Model, which proposes that 'capability', 'motivation' and 'opportunity' are requisites for any behaviour. RESULTS: Twenty-three providers participated. Five themes were developed and interpreted from the analysis of data, namely: "Telehealth enables remote access to cancer pain management but also created a digital divide", "Access to cancer pain management in the community is compromised due to the pandemic", "COVID-19 negatively impacts hospital resource allocation", "Patients were required to trade off cancer pain management against other health priorities" and "Hospital restrictions result in decreased social and psychological support for patients with cancer pain". CONCLUSIONS: The landscape of cancer pain management in the Australian health system underwent substantial shifts during the COVID-19 pandemic, with lasting impacts. Cancer care providers perceived the pandemic to have significant adverse effects on pain management across multiple levels, with repercussions for patients experiencing cancer-related pain. A more adaptive health system model needs to be established in the future to accommodate vulnerable cancer patients.

Nurses' encounters with patients having end-of-life dreams and visions in an acute care setting - A cross-sectional survey study.

AIM: This study aimed to estimate the proportion of acute care nurses witnessing end-of-life dreams and visions or having these reported by a patient or relative, and to canvass their related attitudes and beliefs. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey study was conducted from February 2023 to May 2023. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Participants were medical and surgical nurses from a 200-bed acute care hospital in metropolitan Australia. RESULTS: Fifty-seven nurses participated from a workforce of 169 (34% response rate), of whom 35 (61%) reported they had encountered end-of-life dreams and visions. The nature of end-of-life dreams and visions encountered was similar to those reported in previous studies by patients and clinicians. Nurses generally held positive attitudes towards end-of-life dreams and visions but identified an unmet need for education and training on this aspect of end-of-life care. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that nurses in acute care encounter end-of-life dreams and visions in a similar proportion to oncology and long-term care but lower than in palliative care settings. Education and training regarding end-of-life dreams and visions are needed to ensure the provision of comprehensive, patient-centred end-of-life care. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution. IMPACT: Research in sub-acute and long-term care settings suggests that end-of-life dreams and visions are a common accompaniment to the dying process. No research has yet focused on the acute care setting, despite this being the place of death for the majority of people in most high-income countries. This study demonstrates that acute care nurses encounter end-of-life dreams and visions in similar proportions to oncology and long-term care nurses but lower than palliative care nurses. Acute care nurses would benefit from education and training regarding end-of-life dreams and visions to enable the provision of holistic person-centred end-of-life care. REPORTING METHOD: This study was reported using the STROBE Checklist for cross-sectional studies.

The COVID-19 Pandemic: Bereavement Experiences Between Hospital and Home Deaths in Palliative Care.

BACKGROUND: Australian COVID-19 public health measures reduced opportunities for people to communicate with healthcare professionals and be present at the death of family members/friends. AIM: To understand if pandemic-specific challenges and public health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic impacted end-of-life and bereavement experiences differently if the death, supported by palliative care, occurred in a hospital or at home. DESIGN: A cross-sectional online survey was completed by bereaved adults during 2020-2022. Analyses compared home and in-patient palliative care deaths and bereavement outcomes. Additional analyses compared health communication outcomes for those identified as persons responsible or next of kin. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Of 744 bereaved people; 69% (n = 514) had a death in hospital and 31% (n = 220) at home. RESULTS: The COVID-19 public health measures influenced people's decision to die at home. Compared to hospital deaths, the home death group had higher levels of grief severity and grief-related functional impairment. Only 37% of bereaved people received information about bereavement and support services. 38% of participants who were at least 12 months postdeath scored at a level suggestive of possible prolonged grief disorder. Levels of depression and anxiety between the two groups were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the need for health services to recognize bereavement as fundamental to palliative and health care and provide pre- and post death grief and bereavement care to ensure supports are available particularly for those managing end-of-life at home, and that such supports are in place prior to as well as at the time of the death.

Mobile-Based Application Interventions to Enhance Cancer Control and Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review.

Objective: To identify and appraise mobile-based application (mAPP) interventions that have been used to support cancer control and care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: Four electronic databases were systematically searched for studies that reported primary research findings related to mAPP interventions applied in oncology settings in LMICs. A narrative synthesis was performed using the Mhealth Index and Navigation Database as an analytical framework. Results: Twenty studies reporting 18 cancer control and care mAPPs were included in this review. Among these mAPPs, ten focused on prevention, screening and early detection of cancer, five provided information to optimise supportive and palliative care, two provided support to assist treatment-shared decision-making and one covered information for follow-up and survivorship care. Conclusion: Cancer mAPP interventions are gradually gaining attention in LMICs as they provide unique resources for empowering and strengthening the role of people with cancer in their own care. To enhance cancer control, a focus on prevention and early detection is important; however, more mAPP interventions related to cancer treatment, follow-up and survivorship are also needed to enable more cost-effective cancer care.

Assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes in Routine Cancer Clinical Care Using Electronic Administration and Telehealth Technologies: Realist Synthesis of Potential Mechanisms for Improving Health Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The routine measurement of patient-reported outcomes in cancer clinical care using electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) is gaining momentum worldwide. However, a deep understanding of the mechanisms underpinning ePROM interventions that could inform their optimal design to improve health outcomes is needed. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify the implicit mechanisms that underpin the effectiveness of ePROM interventions and develop program theories about how and when ePROM interventions improve health outcomes. METHODS: A realist synthesis of the literature about ePROM interventions in cancer clinical care was performed. A conceptual framework of ePROM interventions was constructed to define the scope of the review and frame the initial program theories. Literature searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL, supplemented by citation tracking, were performed to identify relevant literature to develop, refine, and test program theories. Quality appraisal of relevant studies was performed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. RESULTS: Overall, 61 studies were included in the realist synthesis: 15 (25%) mixed methods studies, 9 (15%) qualitative studies, 13 (21%) descriptive studies, 21 (34%) randomized controlled trials, and 3 (5%) quasi-experimental studies. In total, 3 initial program theories were developed regarding the salient components of ePROM interventions-remote self-reporting, real-time feedback to clinicians, and clinician-patient telecommunication. The refined theories posit that remote self-reporting enables patients to recognize and report symptoms accurately and empowers them to communicate these to clinicians, real-time feedback prompts clinicians to manage symptoms proactively, and clinician-patient telephone interactions and e-interactions between clinic encounters improve symptom management by reshaping how clinicians and patients communicate. However, the intervention may not achieve the intended benefit if ePROMs become a reminder to patients of their illness and are not meaningful to them and when real-time feedback to clinicians lacks relevance and increases the workload. CONCLUSIONS: The key to improving health outcomes through ePROM interventions is enabling better symptom reporting and communication through remote symptom self-reporting, promoting proactive management of symptoms through real-time clinician feedback, and facilitating clinician-patient interactions. Patient engagement with self-reporting and clinician engagement in responding to feedback are vital and may reinforce each other in improving outcomes. Effective ePROM interventions might fundamentally alter how clinicians and patients interact between clinic encounters.

The handheld fan for chronic breathlessness: Clinicians' experiences and views of implementation in clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION: The handheld fan ('fan') is useful for chronic breathlessness management, however little is known about clinicians' implementation of the fan in clinical practice. AIM: To explore clinicians' experiences and views of fan implementation. METHODS: A qualitative approach, using semi-structured interviews. Participants were purposively sampled from clinicians who had completed an on-line fan implementation survey and were willing to participate. A topic guide was developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Data were analysed using an inductive approach informed by the TDF. FINDINGS: Twelve clinicians participated (doctors n = 4; nurses n = 4; allied health professionals n = 4) from respiratory and palliative care. Analysis generated three major themes: i) Clinician knowledge and skills in fan implementation, ii) environmental constraints on fan use and iii) clinician beliefs about the consequences of fan use. Implementation by clinicians was positively influenced by having a scientific rationale for fan use presented (mechanism of action). Clinicians believed that the fan relieved breathlessness and did not carry a significant infection risk. Opportunity for fan use varied across healthcare settings; key environmental influences were COVID-19 restrictions, lack of access to resources and funding to provide fans, particularly in acute and respiratory services. Clinicians commonly encountered scepticism among patients and colleagues who felt the fan was an implausible intervention for breathlessness. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the fan is motivated by clinician beliefs about patient-benefit, a scientific rationale to counter clinician and patient scepticism, and access to fans in clinic. Funding to allow patients to be supplied with and taught how to use a fan would support uptake. Research is needed to address concerns about infection risk.

Perspectives of inpatients with palliative care needs, their families, clinicians and key stakeholders on measuring quality of hospital care via patient experience measures: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Globally there are high numbers of patients with palliative care needs receiving care in hospitals. Patient reported experience measures (PREMs) provide useful data to guide improvement work. How to implement PREMs within palliative care populations is unclear. AIM: To explore the perspectives of inpatients with palliative care needs, their family members, and the clinical team regarding the use of a generic PREM as compared with a PREM designed for people with palliative care needs and related implementation factors. DESIGN: A qualitative study was undertaken using semi-structured interviews and focus groups and integrated thematic analysis. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Inpatients with palliative care needs, their family members, and clinical team members were recruited from three wards in an Australian metropolitan hospital. RESULTS: Twenty-seven interviews and three focus groups were conducted. Six themes emerged: (1) PREMs for people with palliative care needs ought to be tailored to the needs of this population; (2) PREMs should appraise whether the needs of families have been met in addition to those of patients; (3) PREMs for inpatients with palliative care needs ought to be easy to use, brief and incorporate space for free text alongside each question; (4) Implementation of PREMs for people with palliative care needs ought to consider who administers these, when and how often; (5) PREM data need to be specific enough to inform process change and/or care provision; (6) Patients and families require meaningful feedback to encourage PREM completion. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides practical guidance for PREM selection and implementation to inform improvements to care for inpatients with palliative care needs.

Defining research priorities and needs in cancer symptoms for adults diagnosed with cancer: an Australian/New Zealand modified Delphi study.

PURPOSE: This study asked consumers (patients, carers) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) to identify the most important symptoms for adults with cancer and potential treatment interventions. METHODS: A modified Delphi study was conducted involving two rounds of electronic surveys based on prevalent cancer symptoms identified from the literature. Round 1 gathered information on participant demographics, opinions and/or experience on cancer symptom frequency and impact, and suggestions for interventions and/or service delivery models for further research to improve management of cancer symptoms. In Round 2, respondents ranked the importance of the top ten interventions identified in Round 1. In Round 3, separate expert panels of consumers and healthcare professionals (HCPs) attempted to reach consensus on the symptoms and interventions previously identified. RESULTS: Consensus was reached for six symptoms across both groups: fatigue, constipation, diarrhoea, incontinence, and difficulty with urination. Notably, fatigue was the only symptom to reach consensus across both groups in Round 1. Similarly, consensus was reached for six interventions across both groups. These were the following: medicinal cannabis, physical activity, psychological therapies, non-opioid interventions for pain, opioids for breathlessness and cough, and other pharmacological interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Consumers and HCPs prioritise differently; however, the symptoms and interventions that reached consensus provide a basis for future research. Fatigue should be considered a high priority given its prevalence and its influence on other symptoms. The lack of consumer consensus indicates the uniqueness of their experience and the need for a patient-centred approach. Understanding individual consumer experience is important when planning research into better symptom management.

Practice points for lymphoedema care in low- and middle- income countries developed by nominal group technique.

BACKGROUND: Lymphoedema is a common, distressing, and debilitating condition affecting more than 200 million people globally. There is a small body of evidence to guide lymphoedema care which underpins several lymphoedema clinical practice guidelines developed for high-income countries (HIC). Some of these recommendations are unlikely to be feasible in low-resource settings. AIM: To develop practice points for healthcare workers that optimise lymphoedema care in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). METHODS: A nominal group technique (NGT) was undertaken to gain consensus on which content from HIC guidelines was important and feasible to include in practice points for LMIC, and other important advice or recommendations. Participants included experts, clinicians, and volunteers involved in lymphoedema care in LMIC. The NGT followed five key stages: silent 'ideas' generation, round-robin rationale, clarification, refinement and verification. The first, fourth and fifth stages were completed via email, and the second and third during a video meeting in order to generate a series of consensus based prevention, assessment, diagnosis, and management of lymphoedema in LMIC practice points. RESULTS: Of sixteen participants invited, ten members completed stage 1 of the NGT (ideas generation), of whom six contributed to stages 2 (round-robin) and 3 (clarification). All those who completed stage 1 also completed stages 4 (refinement) and 5 (verification). Practice points unanimously agreed on included Complex Decongestive Therapy (CDT) and good skin care, with management to be determined by lymphoedema stage. For podoconiosis-endemic areas, the use of socks and shoes was identified as very important in the prevention of non-filarial lymphoedema and other lymphoedema-causing conditions. Participants indicated that diagnosing lymphoedema using the lymphoscintigraphy and Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescent lymphography was not possible due to unavailability and cost in LMIC. Surgical procedures for lymphoedema management were unanimously eliminated due to the unavailability of technology, limited workforce, and expensive cost in LMIC. CONCLUSION: The consensus-based practice points generated by this project provide healthcare workers with guidance on caring for people with lymphoedema in LMIC. Further development of workforce capacity is needed.

Description of patient reported experience measures (PREMs) for hospitalised patients with palliative care needs and their families, and how these map to noted areas of importance for quality care: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The global need for focused improvements in palliative care within the acute hospital setting is well noted. A large volume of evidence exists detailing what hospitalised patients with palliative care needs and their families note as important for high quality care. Patient Reported Experience Measures (PREMs) are one mechanism that hospitals could use to inform improvement work. To date there has not been a review of PREMs available for hospitalised patients with palliative care needs and/or their family, nor how they align with noted priorities for high quality care. AIM: To identify and describe PREMs designed for hospitalised patients with palliative care needs and their families; and their alignment with patient and family identified domains for high quality care. DESIGN: A systematic review. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search of CINAHL, Medline and PsycInfo was conducted up to September 23, 2022 and supplemented by handsearching article reference lists and internet searches. PREMs written in English and designed for patients with palliative care needs in acute hospitals were eligible for inclusion. Included PREMs were described by: summarising key characteristics; and mapping their items to domains noted to be important to hospitalised patients with palliative care needs and their families informed by outcomes from a published study completed in 2021. Evidence for psychometric properties were reviewed. RESULTS: Forty-four PREMs with 827 items were included. Items per PREM varied from 2 to 85 (median 25, IQR 13-42). Two-thirds (n = 534, 65%) of the items were designed for families and a third (n = 283, 34%) for hospitalised patients, and very few (n = 10, 1%) for both. Sixty-six percent of items measured person-centred care, 30% expert care and 4% environmental aspects of care. Available PREMs address between 1 and 11 of the 14 domains of importance for quality palliative care. PREMs had a median of 38% (IQR 25.4-56.3) of items >Grade 8 measured by the Flesch-Kincaid readability test, with Grade 8 or lower recommended to ensure health information is as accessible as possible across the population. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst 44 PREMs are available for hospitalised patients with palliative care needs or their families, a varied number of items are available for some domains of care provision that are important, compared to others. Few are suitable for people with lower levels of literacy or limited cognitive capacity due to illness.

Treatment patterns and out-of-hospital healthcare resource utilisation by patients with advanced cancer living with pain: An analysis from the Stop Cancer PAIN trial.

BACKGROUND: About 70% of patients with advanced cancer experience pain. Few studies have investigated the use of healthcare in this population and the relationship between pain intensity and costs. METHODS: Adults with advanced cancer and scored worst pain ≥ 2/10 on a numeric rating scale (NRS) were recruited from 6 Australian oncology/palliative care outpatient services to the Stop Cancer PAIN trial (08/15-06/19). Out-of-hospital, publicly funded services, prescriptions and costs were estimated for the three months before pain screening. Descriptive statistics summarize the clinico-demographic variables, health services and costs, treatments and pain scores. Relationships with costs were explored using Spearman correlations, Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests, and a gamma log-link generalized linear model. RESULTS: Overall, 212 participants had median worst pain scores of five (inter-quartile range 4). The most frequently prescribed medications were opioids (60.1%) and peptic ulcer/gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) drugs (51.6%). The total average healthcare cost in the three months before the census date was A$6,742 (95% CI $5,637, $7,847), approximately $27,000 annually. Men had higher mean healthcare costs than women, adjusting for age, cancer type and pain levels (men $7,872, women $4,493, p<0.01) and higher expenditure on prescriptions (men $5,559, women $2,034, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this population with pain and cancer, there was no clear relationship between healthcare costs and pain severity. These treatment patterns requiring further exploration including the prevalence of peptic ulcer/GORD drugs, and lipid lowering agents and the higher healthcare costs for men. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12615000064505. World Health Organisation unique trial number U1111-1164-4649. Registered 23 January 2015.

Guidelines Relevant to Diagnosis, Assessment, and Management of Lymphedema: A Systematic Review.

Significance: Lymphedema is a common, distressing and debilitating condition with various etiologies. Effective diagnosis, assessment, and management rely on evidence-based clinical practice guidelines ("guidelines"). This study aims to describe and compare international guidelines on lymphedema diagnosis, assessment, and management. Recent Advances: The review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). Systematic searches of electronic literature databases and the web were completed in December 2020 for lymphedema guidelines published in English since 2000. Quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE)-II reporting checklist. Synthesis took a narrative approach to compare guideline recommendations and associated levels of evidence. Critical Issues: This systematic review of 1,564 articles and 159 web pages yielded 14 guidelines. All guidelines were from high-income countries. Ten focused exclusively on lymphedema, and four on cancer. Most (n = 13) guidelines recommended an integrated medical, psychological assessment, and physical examination, with a limb volume measurement of >10% in the affected limb compared, confirming a lymphedema diagnosis. Recommended management involved Complex Decongestive Therapy (CDT) followed by self-management using skincare, self-lymphatic drainage massage, exercise, and compression. Future Directions: The underlying etiology of lymphedema appeared to make little difference to guideline recommendations regarding care. High-quality guidelines are available to guide lymphedema care. However, their suitability for low-resource settings is unclear.

Cultural factors affecting Chinese migrants' perceptions and responses to cancer pain and its pharmacological management: A convergent mixed-method study.

INTRODUCTION: Studies identified barriers of pain reporting and use of analgesics impeding Chinese cancer patients to achieve optimal pain relief. No research has yet explored these issues in Chinese migrants, where cultural differences may exacerbate the barriers. OBJECTIVES: To explore cultural factors influencing Chinese migrants' perspectives to cancer pain and its pharmacological management. METHOD: Informed by Leininger's Cultural Care Theory, focus groups and a short version of Barrier Questionnaire-Taiwan (S-BQT) were conducted in Mandarin or Cantonese, with 24 Chinese migrants receiving ambulatory cancer and/or palliative care services in Sydney, Australia. Integrated thematic analysis, descriptive statistics, and meta-inference were adopted for data analysis and integration. RESULTS: Participants suffered uncontrolled cancer pain negatively affecting their physical and psychosocial well-being. Most experienced moderate to severe pain, but only a third used opioids. Most adopted non-pharmacological approaches and half used Traditional Chinese Medicine. Participants scored a mean S-BQT of 3.28 (standard deviation ± 0.89). Three themes and seven sub-themes contributed to higher barriers of pharmacological pain management: (1) Philosophical health beliefs (cancer pain are self-provoked and body can self-heal); (2) Cultural values and beliefs (cancer pain is inevitable, and Chinese people express pain differently to local people); and (3) Conflicting views on the use of opioids (culture-related negative medication beliefs, Western biomedical model-related opioid fears, and opioids extend life for people with terminal cancer pain). CONCLUSIONS: Chinese migrants' responses to cancer pain and attitudes towards opioids are complex. Culturally congruent strategies are needed to overcome culture-related barriers and improve quality of cancer pain care in this population.

Preferences of patients with palliative care needs and their families for engagement with service improvement work within the hospital setting: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: There is growing recognition of the importance of involving patients and families with lived experiences of illness in healthcare service quality improvement, research and implementation initiatives. Ensuring input from people with palliative care needs is important, but how to enable this is not well understood. AIM: To seek the perspectives of Australian patients with palliative care needs, and their family members, to elicit their views on how to best contribute to inpatient palliative care quality improvement initiatives. DESIGN: An exploratory qualitative study, using semi-structured interviews. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Eligible participants were adult patients with palliative care needs receiving care within a hospital setting, and their family members. Recruitment occurred through: five hospitals in New South Wales, Australia; and snowballing. RESULTS: Fifty participants took part (21 patients and 29 family members). Results confirmed four themes: (1) Mechanisms for providing feedback about care quality need to be supportive and individualised; (2) The clinician-patient/family power imbalance makes real time feedback challenging to provide; (3) Willingness to contribute varies according to diagnosis, timing and role and (4) Face to face feedback is preferred for health service improvement work. CONCLUSIONS: Enabling meaningful consumer input to quality improvement requires careful consideration due to the unique requirements of the palliative care population. Embedding tailored outcome and experience measures to inform real-time care provision coupled with focussed opportunities for input into service improvement may best foster improvements in inpatient palliative care, founded in what matters most for people requiring this care.

Patient and carer experiences of pain care in an Australian regional comprehensive cancer care setting: a qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Pain is a common and distressing symptom in people living with cancer that requires a patient-centred approach to management. Since 2010, the Australian Government has invested heavily in developing regional cancer centres to improve cancer outcomes. This study explored patient and carer experiences of care from a regional cancer centre with specific reference to cancer pain management. METHODS: A qualitative approach was used with semi-structured telephone interviews. Participants were outpatients at a regional cancer centre in New South Wales who had reported worst pain of 2 or more on a 0-10 numerical rating scale, and their carers. Questions explored experiences of pain assessment and management, and perceptions of how these were affected by the regional setting. Researchers analysed data using a deductive approach, using Mead and Bower's (2000) framework of factors influencing patient-centred care. RESULTS: Eighteen telephone interviews were conducted with 13 patients and 5 carers. Participants perceived that living in a regional setting conferred advantages to the patient-centredness of care via influences at the levels of professional context, the doctor-patient relationship, and consultation. These influences included established and ongoing relationships with a smaller number of care providers who were members of the community, and heightened accessibility in terms of travel/parking, flexible appointments, and ample time spent with each patient. The first of these factors was also perceived to contribute to continuity of care between specialist and primary care providers. However, one negative case reported disagreement between providers and a difficulty accessing specialist pain services. Several participants also reported a preference, and unmet need, for non-pharmacological rather than pharmacological pain management. CONCLUSION: While much research has focused on lack of services and poorer outcomes for people with cancer in rural areas, the Australian regional setting may offer benefits to the patient-centredness of cancer pain management and continuity of care. More research is needed to better understand the benefits and trade-offs of cancer care in regional versus urban settings, and how each can learn from the other. An unmet need for non-pharmacological rather than pharmacological pain management is among the most consistent findings of qualitative studies of patient/carer preferences across settings.

Efficacy of medicinal cannabis for appetite-related symptoms in people with cancer: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Anorexia (loss of appetite) is a prevalent and distressing symptom in people with cancer, with limited effective interventions. Medicinal cannabis has shown promise in improving appetite-related symptoms in people with cancer. AIM: To assess the efficacy of medicinal cannabis for improving appetite-related symptoms in people with cancer, considering measures and outcomes, interventions and toxicity. DESIGN: Systematic review with narrative approach to synthesis and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, CENTRAL), websites and trials registries were searched from inception to February 2021. Included studies were randomised controlled trials (RCT) in English peer-reviewed journals comparing medicinal cannabis with placebo and/or another intervention. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. RESULTS: Five studies were included that compared medicinal cannabis interventions (dronabinol, nabilone and cannabis extract) either with placebo (n = 4) or megestrol acetate (n = 1). Measures and trial endpoints varied, but efficacy was demonstrated in one trial only, in which dronabinol significantly improved chemosensory perception and other secondary outcomes (taste of food, premeal appetite, proportion of calories consumed as protein) compared with placebo. Cannabis interventions were generally well tolerated across studies, regardless of the product or dose, although the comprehensive measurement of toxicities was limited. CONCLUSION: Evidence from RCTs that medicinal cannabis increases appetite in people with cancer is limited. Measures, outcomes and interventions were variable, and toxicities have not been comprehensively evaluated. Future research should carefully consider biological mechanisms to guide more nuanced selection of endpoints and interventions, including product, dose and administration.

Improving care for cancer-related and other forms of lymphoedema in low- and middle-income countries: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Lymphoedema is a common, distressing and debilitating condition that can be related to cancer and its treatment or other conditions. Little is known about current practices in the diagnosis, assessment and management of lymphoedema in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). AIM: To describe current practices in diagnosing, assessing and managing cancer-related and other forms of lymphoedema in LMIC, and related barriers and facilitators. METHODS: An exploratory-descriptive qualitative study. Participants were lymphoedema experts or health care professionals identified via published lymphoedema papers and professional organizations respectively. Sampling was purposive to ensure a diversity of perspectives and experience. Data collection was via semi-structured telephone/video interviews, and questions canvassed participants' experiences and perceptions of lymphoedema care in LMIC. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Analysis proceeded via inductive coding before mapping codes to the World Health Organization's (WHO) Innovative Care for Chronic Conditions Framework. RESULTS: Nineteen participants were interviewed, most of whom were physiotherapists (n = 11). Ten participants worked permanently in a LMIC, while the remainder were based in a high-income country (HIC) and had been involved in initiatives to improve lymphoedema care across multiple LMIC. Participants indicated that management of cancer versus non-cancer related lymphoedema was similar, but that pathways to care were more straight-forward for those receiving cancer care, leading to earlier diagnosis. Key facilitators to optimizing lymphoedema care in LMIC included: 1) joining forces to overcome lymphoedema-related stigma; 2) building workforce capabilities; and 3) partnering with patients and families to support self-management. Ideas for building workforce included developing health professional knowledge, supporting a commitment to multidisciplinary team care, and adapting HIC guidelines for lymphoedema care to LMIC. Partnering with patients and families to support self-management involved following the person-centred approach, establishing clear communication, promoting adherence to management, adapting management to available resources, and involving patient family and friends in lymphoedema care. CONCLUSION: Raising community and health professional awareness regarding lymphoedema and its management is a key first step to improving care outcomes. Resources for clinicians and patients/families developed for lymphoedema care in HIC need to be adapted for low resource settings.

Implementing the battery-operated hand-held fan as an evidence-based, non-pharmacological intervention for chronic breathlessness in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): a qualitative study of the views of specialist respiratory clinicians.

INTRODUCTION: The battery-operated hand-held fan ('fan') is an inexpensive and portable non-pharmacological intervention for chronic breathlessness. Evidence from randomised controlled trials suggests the fan reduces breathlessness intensity and improves physical activity in patients with a range of advanced chronic conditions. Qualitative data from these trials suggests the fan may also reduce anxiety and improve daily functioning for many patients. This study aimed to explore barriers and facilitators to the fan's implementation in specialist respiratory care as a non-pharmacological intervention for chronic breathlessness in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: A qualitative approach was taken, using focus groups. Participants were clinicians from any discipline working in specialist respiratory care at two hospitals. Questions asked about current fan-related practice and perceptions regarding benefits, harms and mechanisms, and factors influencing its implementation. Analysis used a mixed inductive/deductive approach. RESULTS: Forty-nine participants from nursing (n = 30), medical (n = 13) and allied health (n = 6) disciplines participated across 9 focus groups. The most influential facilitator was a belief that the fan's benefits outweighed disadvantages. Clinicians' beliefs about the fan's mechanisms determined which patient sub-groups they targeted, for example anxious or palliative/end-stage patients. Barriers to implementation included a lack of clarity about whose role it was to implement the fan, what advice to provide patients, and limited access to fans in hospitals. Few clinicians implemented the fan for acute-on-chronic breathlessness or in combination with other interventions. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the fan in specialist respiratory care may require service- and clinician-level interventions to ensure it is routinely recommended as a first-line intervention for chronic breathlessness in patients for whom this symptom is of concern, regardless of COPD stage.