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.

Defining Expertise in Cancer Nursing Practice.

BACKGROUND: Thirty-five years ago, Benner defined an expert nurse as one who applies deep knowledge and experience across different contexts and clinical situations. Since that time, there has been little exploration of expertise in cancer nursing. OBJECTIVES: To explore and describe characteristics of expert cancer nurses and to consider whether Benner's typology of an expert nurse remains relevant in today's complex oncology settings. METHODS: An exploratory, descriptive study using audio-recorded focus group methodology was undertaken. Audio-recordings were transcribed, and an inductive thematic analysis approach applied to the data. Nurses also documented key characteristics of expert practice on Post-it notes to illustrate dominant characteristics. RESULTS: Twenty-four registered nurses from a comprehensive cancer center in Australia took part in 1 of 3 focus groups. Seven key themes were identified: knowledge, leadership, adaptability, communication, motivation, patient-centered care, organization, and culture. Key word cloud characteristics included knowledge, compassion, motivation, experience, and communication. CONCLUSIONS: Many of the expert characteristics identified in this study reflect traits common to other nursing specialty groups. Of particular relevance to cancer nurses was "adaptability," reflecting the complexity of contemporary cancer care and reaffirming Benner's definition of an expert nurse as one who can fluidly connect knowledge and experience to unfamiliar practice contexts. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Understanding characteristics of expert cancer nurses may help inform and support professional practice advancement and guide future research about select characteristics of expert cancer nurses to patient- and system-level outcomes.

Corrigendum to: Cancer patients' use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis.

ObjectivesAccess to medicinal cannabis is a timely and important issue in cancer care. Recent legislative changes in Australia have increased access to medicinal cannabis, but the views of people with cancer on this topic are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to explore the prevalence of the use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis among people with cancer.MethodsA cross-sectional study was performed using an anonymous, 15-item study-specific paper-based survey. The survey was administered over a 2-week period in August 2017 in the waiting rooms of a specialist cancer hospital.ResultsIn all, 339 patients completed the survey (mean (±s.d.) age 59±15 years; 52% male). Fourteen respondents (4%) were currently using cannabis medicinally. Only one of these respondents had a prescription for their cannabis product. Most respondents would consider using a medicinal cannabis product if recommended by their doctor (n=271; 80%).ConclusionThis study is the first of its kind to survey the use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis in a broad sample of Australian people with cancer. Few respondents were currently using cannabis for medicinal purposes, but an overwhelming majority were in favour of increasing access and would consider using a prescribed product.What is known about the topic?Cannabis may have a wide variety of medicinal uses, particularly in the cancer setting. Currently, people with cancer in Victoria have limited access to medicinal cannabis despite recent legislative changes.What does this paper add?In a general sample of people with cancer, few were using cannabis for medicinal purposes, but most were in favour of widening access and would consider using a product their doctor prescribed.What are the implications for practitioners?Despite supporting access, patients indicated that the recommendations of doctors and increasing the evidence base are necessary requirements to their use of medicinal cannabis.

Cancer patients' use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis.

Objectives Access to medicinal cannabis is a timely and important issue in cancer care. Recent legislative changes in Australia have increased access to medicinal cannabis, but the views of people with cancer on this topic are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to explore the prevalence of the use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis among people with cancer. Methods A cross-sectional study was performed using an anonymous, 15-item study-specific paper-based survey. The survey was administered over a 2-week period in August 2017 in the waiting rooms of a specialist cancer hospital. Results In all, 339 patients completed the survey (mean (±s.d.) age 59±15 years; 52% male). Fourteen respondents (4%) were currently using cannabis medicinally. Only one of these respondents had a prescription for their cannabis product. Most respondents would consider using a medicinal cannabis product if recommended by their doctor (n=271; 80%). Conclusion This study is the first of its kind to survey the use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis in a broad sample of Australian people with cancer. Few respondents were currently using cannabis for medicinal purposes, but an overwhelming majority were in favour of increasing access and would consider using a prescribed product. What is known about the topic? Cannabis may have a wide variety of medicinal uses, particularly in the cancer setting. Currently, people with cancer in Victoria have limited access to medicinal cannabis despite recent legislative changes. What does this paper add? In a general sample of people with cancer, few were using cannabis for medicinal purposes, but most were in favour of widening access and would consider using a product their doctor prescribed. What are the implications for practitioners? Despite supporting access, patients indicated that the recommendations of doctors and increasing the evidence base are necessary requirements to their use of medicinal cannabis.

A Cross-sectional Survey of Health Professionals' Attitudes toward Medicinal Cannabis Use as Part of Cancer Management.

This study aimed to evaluate the attitudes of health professionals toward the use of medicinal cannabis as part of the management of patients with cancer. A prospective, cross-sectional study was conducted using an anonymous survey, emailed out to health professionals at a public metropolitan hospital in Australia. One hundred and thirty-five responses were received. 62% of survey respondents reported that patients inquire about medicinal cannabis. More than half of the health professionals stated being insufficiently informed about access to medicinal cannabis (74%), about its evidence base (59%), and about potential drug interactions (65%). Thirty-four percent would recommend medicinal cannabis to their patients with cancer, 20% would not, and 46% were unsure. Comments indicated concerns about lack of clinician knowledge, drug efficacy, side effects and drug interactions. The results show that health professionals feel insufficiently informed about access to, and use of, medicinal cannabis as part of cancer management. More information and education are required for health professionals to consider medicinal cannabis as part of care provided to their patients with cancer.