Built environments for inpatient stroke rehabilitation services and care: a systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVES: To identify, appraise and synthesise existing design evidence for inpatient stroke rehabilitation facilities; to identify impacts of these built environments on the outcomes and experiences of people recovering from stroke, their family/caregivers and staff. DESIGN: A convergent segregated review design was used to conduct a systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were searched for articles published between January 2000 and November 2020. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies investigating the impact of the built environment of inpatient rehabilitation facilities on stroke survivors, their family/caregivers and/or staff. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two authors separately completed the title, abstract, full-text screening, data extraction and quality assessment. Extracted data were categorised according to the aspect of the built environment explored and the outcomes reported. These categories were used to structure a narrative synthesis of the results from all included studies. RESULTS: Twenty-four articles were included, most qualitative and exploratory. Half of the included articles investigated a particular aspect of the built environment, including environmental enrichment and communal areas (n=8), bedroom design (n=3) and therapy spaces (n=1), while the other half considered the environment in general. Findings related to one or more of the following outcome categories: (1) clinical outcomes, (2) patient activity, (3) patient well-being, (4) patient and/or staff safety and (5) clinical practice. Heterogeneous designs and variables of interest meant results could not be compared, but some repeated findings suggest that attractive and accessible communal areas are important for patient activity and well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Stroke rehabilitation is a unique healthcare context where patient activity, practice and motivation are paramount. We found many evidence gaps that with more targeted research could better inform the design of rehabilitation spaces to optimise care. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020158006.

Identification of low health and cancer literacy in oncology patients: a cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVE: Health literacy is a significant public health concern, particularly given the increased complexity of chronic disease health management and health system navigation, and documented associations between low health literacy and poor health outcomes. This study therefore aimed to identify the proportion and characteristics of outpatients visiting a specialist cancer hospital who report low health literacy and/or low cancer health literacy. METHOD: This study used a cross-sectional survey administered verbally with patients attending a specialist cancer hospital located in Melbourne, Australia over a two-week period. Process data on conducting health literacy screening within a clinical setting was collected. RESULTS: Those identified with inadequate general health literacy were different to those identified with low cancer-specific health literacy, although overall both proportions were low. Cross-sectional screening of patients was difficult, despite utilising verbal surveying methods designed to increase capacity for participation. CONCLUSION: Health literacy screening using the tools selected was not useful for identifying or describing patients with low health literacy in this setting, given the disparity in those categorised by each measure. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Until the theoretical construct of health literacy is better defined, measurement of health literacy may not be clinically useful.

Identifying priorities for cancer caregiver interventions: protocol for a three-round modified Delphi study.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer is often considered a chronic disease, and most people with cancer have a caregiver, often a family member or friend who provides a significant amount of care during the illness trajectory. Caregivers are frequently in need of support, and a range of interventions have been trialled to improve outcomes. Consensus for optimal ways to support caregivers is not known. The aim of this protocol paper is to describe procedures for a modified Delphi study to explore expert consensus about important factors when developing caregiver interventions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Online modified Delphi methodology will be used to establish consensus for important caregiver intervention factors incorporating the Patient problem, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome framework. Round 1 will comprise a free-text questionnaire and invite the panel to contribute factors they deem important in the development and evaluation of caregiver interventions. Round 2 is designed to determine preliminary consensus of the importance of factors generated in round 1. The panel will be asked to rate each factor using a 4-point Likert-type scale. The option for panellists to state reasoning for their rating will be provided. Descriptive statistics (median scores and IQR) will be calculated to determine each item's relative importance. Levels of consensus will be assessed based on a predefined consensus rating matrix. In round 3, factors will be recirculated including aggregate group responses (statistics and comment summaries) and panellists' own round 2 scores. Panellists will be invited to reconsider their judgements and resubmit ratings using the same rating system as in round 2. This will result in priority lists based on the panel's total rating scores. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics for this study has been gained from the Deakin University Human Ethics Advisory Group. It is anticipated that the results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented in a variety of forums.

Implementation of a Multidisciplinary Model of Care for Women With Metastatic Breast Cancer: Challenges and Lessons Learned.

INTRODUCTION: The present study examined the feasibility and effects of integrating a multidisciplinary team (MDT) model of care for women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) into a large Australian cancer center. The challenges encountered and lessons learned are described. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the present prospective, longitudinal, mixed-methods implementation study, the MDT model included face-to-face consultations with a breast care nurse and social worker, followed by a MDT case discussion and face-to-face delivery of a personalized management plan. Data were collected to describe the cohort of women living with MBC who had attended a specialist breast cancer service and their supportive care needs. RESULTS: A total of 62 women with median age of 60 years (interquartile range [IQR], 37-82 years) participated. The median interval from the first breast cancer diagnosis was 5.7 years (IQR, 2.0-11.6 years), and the median interval from the diagnosis of MBC was 2.0 years (IQR, 0.9-3.6 years). The MDT care model required new resources and cross-sector participation. However, the participants indicated a preference for personalized needs assessment and care planning at the diagnosis of MBC. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight the challenges of implementing and evaluating an MDT care model for women with MBC. The model coordinated MDT collaboration to strengthen the delivery of complex care plans. Investment in cross-sector partnerships to optimize care coordination for women with MBC was needed.

Common dedication to facilitating good dying experiences: Qualitative study of end-of-life care professionals' attitudes towards voluntary assisted dying.

BACKGROUND: Debate about appropriate and ethically acceptable end-of-life choices is ongoing, which includes discussion about the legalization of voluntary assisted dying. Given health professionals' role in caring for patients at the end life, their stance towards assisting a person with dying can have implications for policy development and implementation in jurisdictions where law changes are being considered. AIM: To explore end-of-life care professionals' attitudes towards voluntary assisted dying 6 months prior to vote on legalization. DESIGN: Qualitative study using textual data collected through semi-structured interviews. Purposive sampling strategy used to collect a broad representation of perspectives. Audio-recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim and subjected to qualitative descriptive analysis techniques. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 16 health professionals with experience in caring for people with life-limiting illness. RESULTS: Participants reported two overarching positions grounded in differing moral philosophies with compelling arguments both for and against legalization of voluntary assisted dying. A third and common line of argument emerged from areas of shared concern and uncertainty about the practical consequences of introducing voluntary assisted dying. While a diversity of opinion was evident, all participants advocated for more public education and funding into end-of-life care services to make high-quality care equitable and widely available. CONCLUSION: Common dedication to reducing suffering and facilitating good dying experiences exists among experts despite their divergent views on voluntary assisted dying. Ongoing engagement with stakeholders is needed for practical resolution in the interest of developing health policy for best patient care.