The psychological distress of gastrointestinal cancer patients and its association with quality of life among different genders.

BACKGROUND: Psychological distress is a prevalent unpleasant experience faced by many cancer patients. However, the psychological distress among gastrointestinal (GI) cancer patients is scarcely explored. Moreover, the association between psychological distress and quality of life in different genders has yet to be explored. AIMS: To explore the psychological distress among GI cancer patients and examine its association with quality of life among different genders. METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional study. A total of 237 gastrointestinal cancer patients completed the distress thermometer and the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-General. RESULTS: The mean score of psychological distress of the participants was 3.04 (SD = 2.90). A greater proportion of female gastrointestinal cancer patients (52.8%) had clinically relevant psychological distress compared to males (35.9%). The quality of life was negatively associated with their psychological distress (B = - 1.502, 95%CI: - 2.759 to - 0.245, p = 0.019) among gastrointestinal cancer patients. Such association was stronger among males compared to females in gastrointestinal cancer patients (Interaction term, B = - 1.713, 95%CI: - 3.123 to - 0.303, p = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that healthcare providers should attach their attention to gastrointestinal cancer patients' psychological distress, especially females. Longitudinal studies could adopted to track the changes in psychological distress and its association with quality of life over time among different genders. In future intervention studies, the focus of psychological interventions needs to be gender-specific.

Development of a supportive care framework for breast cancer survivor's unmet needs: A modified Delphi study.

AIM: To establish a supportive care framework for addressing unmet needs among breast cancer survivors, providing practical guidance for healthcare providers to assess and manage these needs, ultimately enhancing the health outcomes and quality of life of breast cancer survivors. DESIGN: We conducted a two-round Delphi survey to gather expert opinions regarding the unmet needs supportive care framework for breast cancer survivors. METHODS: Initial framework identification and inquiry questionnaire creation was achieved via literature search and expert group discussions, which included 15 experts from nursing practice, clinical medicine, nursing management and nursing education was conducted using a Delphi survey. To establish consensus, a two-round Delphi poll was done, using criteria based on the mean (≥4.0), coefficient of variation (CV < 0.25) and percentage for entire score (≥20%). RESULTS: Experts reached a consensus, leading to six care modules, and 28 care entries: Tumour Detection Support (three care entries), Management of Complications of Antitumor Therapy (seven care entries), Healthy Lifestyle Management (five care entries), Sexual and Fertility Support (four care entries), Psychosocial Support (four care entries) and Resource and Linkage Support (five care entries). CONCLUSION: To address breast cancer survivors' unmet needs, a supportive framework was developed to actively enhance their health outcomes. However, further refinement and feasibility testing using mobile devices or artificial intelligence are required. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE: This pioneering framework prioritises addressing unmet needs and equips healthcare providers to assess and manage these needs effectively, facilitating the implementation of programs aimed at improving the well-being of breast cancer survivors. REPORTING METHOD: This study was guided by a modified guideline for the Conducting and Reporting of Delphi Studies (CREDES) (Palliative Medicine, 31(8), 684, 2017). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No Patient or Public Contribution. TRIAL AND PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The Delphi study methodology does not require registration.