RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Diet quality is important for people with multiple sclerosis (MS), but conflicting online information causes them confusion. People with MS want evidence-based MS-specific information to help them make healthy dietary changes, and we co-designed an asynchronous, online nutrition education program (Eating Well with MS) with the MS community. Our aim was to determine the feasibility of Eating Well with MS. METHODS: We used a single-arm pre-post design. The feasibility trial was a nine-week intervention with adults with confirmed MS. Feasibility outcomes: 1) demand (recruitment); 2) practicality (completion); 3) acceptability (Intrinsic Motivation Inventory: interest/enjoyment and value/usefulness subscales); and 4) limited efficacy testing (Diet Habits Questionnaire (DHQ); Critical Nutrition Literacy Tool (CNLT); Food Literacy Behaviour Checklist (FLBC), using intention-to-treat analysis). RESULTS: Recruitment (n = 70) exceeded the target (n = 48) within six weeks. Of the 70 enrolled, 84 % completed at least one module and 54 % completed the full program (five modules). The median interest/enjoyment rating was 5 out of 7 and median value/usefulness rating was 6 out of 7 (where 7 = 'very true'). Compared to pre-intervention, DHQ, CNLT, and FLBC scores all statistically significantly improved post-intervention. CONCLUSION: Eating Well with MS was well received by the MS community and improved their dietary behaviours; demonstrating feasibility. Our findings support the use of co-design methods when developing resources to improve dietary behaviours.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: This systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42021275421) synthesized evidence on the efficacy of cognitive rehabilitation on cognitive and functional outcomes in adult cancer survivors. METHODS: Articles were identified though PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from inception through June 30, 2023. Studies included participants ≥18 years old, diagnosed with cancer. Primary outcomes were validated measures of subjective and objective cognition. Articles were dual reviewed for eligibility and data extraction. Risk of bias was assessed with the Standard Quality Assessment Criteria for Evaluating Primary Research Papers from a Variety of Fields. RESULTS: The search yielded 3,811 articles; 65 full-text articles were reviewed; 53 articles (15 cognitive training, 14 strategy-based, 21 combinations, three inpatient rehabilitation), representing 52 unique studies, were included. Positive effects were observed in at least one objective cognitive measure in 93% of strategy training, 81% of cognitive training, 79% of combination rehabilitation interventions. Positive effects were observed in subjective cognition in 100% of strategy training, 55% of cognitive training, and 92% of combination interventions. Among studies with comparator groups, processing speed improved in 60% of cognitive training studies, while strategy training did not improve processing speed; otherwise, cognitive domain effects were similar between intervention types. Impact on functional outcomes was inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive rehabilitation appear beneficial for cancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI). Differential effects on specific cognitive domains (eg, processing speed) and subjective cognition may exist between intervention types. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Nurses should increase patient and provider awareness of the benefits of cognitive rehabilitation for CRCI.
RESUMO
Background: This study explored vaccination hesitancy, diabetes-specific COVID-19 vaccination concerns, and whether they predicted vaccination uptake in people with diabetes. Methods: Quantitative, cross-sectional, and predictive approaches were used. An online survey was conducted with people with diabetes attending four Australian health services, using convenience sampling (n = 842). The survey data collected included clinico-demographic characteristics, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, and attitudes around COVID-19 vaccine confidence and complacency. Clinico-demographic characteristics that predicted vaccination status, vaccine hesitancy, and vaccine-related attitudes were identified using regression analyses. Results: Most participants received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Younger age and type 1 diabetes were associated with lower vaccination status, and they were partially mediated through higher vaccine hesitancy. Younger age and English as a dominant language were associated with higher negative attitudes towards speed of vaccine development. Conclusions: Despite an overall high vaccination rate, general and diabetes-specific COVID-19 vaccine concerns are a barrier to uptake for some people with diabetes, particularly in those who are younger or have type 1 diabetes. A detailed understanding of concerns for particular subgroups can help tailor information to increase vaccine acceptance, particularly in the context of requiring booster doses.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Implementation of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) collection is an important priority in cancer care. We examined perceived barriers toward implementing PRO collection between centers with and without PRO infrastructure and administrators and nonadministrators. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a multinational survey of oncology practitioners on their perceived barriers to PRO implementations. Multivariable regression models evaluated for differences in perceived barriers to PRO implementation between groups, adjusted for demographic and institutional variables. RESULTS: Among 358 oncology practitioners representing six geographic regions, 31% worked at centers that did not have PRO infrastructure and 26% self-reported as administrators. Administrators were more likely to perceive concerns with liability issues (aOR, 2.00 [95% CI, 1.12 to 3.57]; P = .02) while having nonsignificant trend toward less likely perceiving concerns with disruption of workflow (aOR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.32 to 1.03]; P = .06) and nonadherence of PRO reporting (aOR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.26 to 1.08]; P = .08) as barriers. Respondents from centers without PRO infrastructure were more likely to perceive that not having access to a local PRO expert (aOR, 6.59 [95% CI, 3.81 to 11.42]; P < .001), being unsure how to apply PROs in clinical decisions (aOR, 4.20 [95% CI, 2.32 to 7.63]; P < .001), and being unsure about selecting PRO measures (aOR, 3.36 [95% CI, 2.00 to 5.66]; P < .001) as barriers. Heat map analyses identified the largest differences between participants from centers with and without PRO infrastructure in agreed-upon barriers were (1) not having a local PRO expert, (2) being unsure about selecting PRO measures, and (3) not recognizing the role of PROs at the institutional level. CONCLUSION: Perceived barriers toward PRO implementation differ between administrators and nonadministrators and practitioners at centers with and without PRO infrastructure. PRO implementation teams should consider as part of a comprehensive strategy including frontline clinicians and administrators and members with PRO experience within teams.
Assuntos
Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente , Humanos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Masculino , Neoplasias/terapia , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: To maximize functioning and well-being in people with multiple sclerosis (MS), physiotherapy consultation is recommended at the point of diagnosis and throughout the disease course. We wanted to determine whether patients with MS being managed through a large metropolitan hospital in Australia accessed physiotherapy input as part of their MS management consistent with evidence-based recommendations and to identify patients' self-reported physiotherapy requirements, including symptom management, information needs, and service delivery preferences. METHODS: Surveys were sent to 597 MS clinic patients, and 160 responded. Data were analyzed using descriptive methods to derive frequencies and percentages. The survey consisted of 16 questions plus 2 optional questions related to sociodemographics (age and postcode). RESULTS: Of 160 respondents, 142 completed all 14 nonoptional questions. One-third of participants (n = 53) were aware of the hospital MS clinic physiotherapy services, with 21.3% (n = 34) saying that they had accessed these services. Conversely, 40.1% of respondents (n = 61) reported having consulted a private physiotherapist. Combined, 52% of respondents reported seeing a physiotherapist. There was a clear preference (94.7%; n = 144) for access to the MS clinic physiotherapy service. The presence of at least 1 current MS-related physiotherapy problem was reported by 82.2 2% of respondents (n = 125). The top ways to access MS-related information were via a specialist MS website (57.6%) and a mobile app (55.6%). CONCLUSIONS: There is an unmet need for physiotherapy, and many participants may have foregone services due to unawareness. Improved awareness and uptake of physiotherapy at the point of diagnosis is needed to maximize functioning and well-being in people with MS.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Despite people with haematological malignancies being particularly vulnerable to severe COVID-19 infection and complications, vaccine hesitancy may be a barrier to optimal vaccination. This study explored attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination in people with haematological malignancies. METHODS: People with haematological malignancies at nine Australian health services were surveyed between June and October, 2021. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were collected. Attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination were explored using the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale, and the Disease Influenced Vaccine Acceptance Scale-Six. Open-ended comments were qualitatively analysed. RESULTS: A total of 869 people with haematological malignancies (mean age 64.2 years, 43.6% female) participated. Most participants (85.3%) reported that they had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Participants who were younger, spoke English as a non-dominant language, and had a shorter time since diagnosis were less likely to be vaccinated. Those who were female or spoke English as their non-dominant language reported greater vaccine side-effects concerns. Younger participants reported greater concerns about the vaccine impacting their treatment. CONCLUSION: People with haematological malignancies reported high vaccine uptake, however, targeted education for specific participant groups may address vaccine hesitancy concerns, given the need for COVID-19 vaccine boosters.
RESUMO
People with multiple sclerosis (MS) have a higher prevalence of osteoporosis, falls and fractures. Guidelines for MS populations targeting the management of osteoporosis, fracture and falls risk may help reduce the burden of musculoskeletal disease in this population. We aimed to systematically review current guidelines regarding osteoporosis prevention, screening, diagnosis and management in people with MS. In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic review of scientific databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase and Scopus) was performed (n = 208). In addition, websites from MS organisations and societies were screened for clinical guidelines (n = 28). Following duplicate removal, screening and exclusions (n = 230), in total six guidelines were included in this review. Three of the identified guidelines were specific to managing osteoporosis in MS, while two linked vitamin D to bone health and one was focused on the effect of acute glucocorticoid use for MS exacerbations on bone health. All guidelines were found to contain inadequate recommendations for osteoporosis screening, management and treatment in people with MS given the evidence of higher prevalence of osteoporosis at an earlier age and compounding risk factors in this population. Early diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis in people with MS is necessary as fractures lead to significant morbidity and mortality. Development of structured clinical guidelines directed at specific healthcare services will ensure screening, appropriate management, and care of bone health in people with MS.
Assuntos
Fraturas Ósseas , Esclerose Múltipla , Osteoporose , Humanos , Acidentes por Quedas/prevenção & controle , Densidade Óssea , Esclerose Múltipla/complicações , Esclerose Múltipla/epidemiologia , Esclerose Múltipla/terapia , Osteoporose/tratamento farmacológico , Fraturas Ósseas/epidemiologia , Fraturas Ósseas/etiologia , Fraturas Ósseas/prevenção & controleRESUMO
BACKGROUND: People with multiple sclerosis (MS) are often prescribed medications associated with adverse effects on bone health. However, it is unclear whether these medications incur decreases in areal bone mineral density (aBMD) and higher fracture risk in this population. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of commonly used medications on aBMD and fracture risk among people with MS. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched from their inception until February 5, 2023. We included randomized controlled trials as well as cross-sectional, retrospective, and prospective studies investigating whether glucocorticoids, immunomodulators, antidepressants, anticonvulsants, anxiolytics, opioids, or antipsychotics influenced aBMD or fracture risk in people with MS. Data were pooled using random effects meta-analyses to determine hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs. RESULTS: We included 22 studies (n = 18,193). Six studies were included in the meta-analyses of glucocorticoid use and aBMD, whereas 2 studies were included in the medication use and fracture risk meta-analyses. No studies assessed the effect of antidepressants, anxiolytics, anticonvulsants, opioids, and antipsychotics on aBMD, and no studies assessed the effect of immunomodulators on fracture risk. Glucocorticoid use was significantly negatively associated with femoral neck aBMD (correlation = -0.21 [95% CI = -0.29 to -0.13]), but not with lumbar spine aBMD (correlation = -0.21 [95% CI = -0.50 to 0.12]). There were no differences in fracture risk between users of glucocorticoids (HR = 1.71 [95% CI = 0.04 to 76.47]), antidepressants (HR = 1.84 [95% CI = 0.09 to 38.49]), or anxiolytics (HR = 2.01 [95% CI = 0.06 to 64.22]), compared with nonusers. CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence is insufficient to support a relationship between greater fracture risk for people with MS taking glucocorticoid, antidepressant, or anxiolytic medication, compared with nonusers, and it is unclear whether these medications are associated with bone loss in people with MS, beyond that in the general population. Additional high-quality studies with homogenous methodology exploring how medications influence aBMD and fracture risk in people with MS are required.
Assuntos
Ansiolíticos , Fraturas Ósseas , Esclerose Múltipla , Humanos , Densidade Óssea , Estudos Prospectivos , Anticonvulsivantes/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estudos Transversais , Glucocorticoides/efeitos adversos , Esclerose Múltipla/tratamento farmacológico , Fraturas Ósseas/epidemiologia , Antidepressivos/efeitos adversos , Fatores ImunológicosRESUMO
PURPOSE: Clinical practice guidelines recommend altering neurotoxic chemotherapy treatment in patients experiencing intolerable chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). The primary objective of this survey was to understand patient's perspectives on altering neurotoxic chemotherapy treatment, including their perceptions of the benefits of preventing irreversible CIPN and the risks of reducing treatment efficacy. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was distributed via social networks to patients who were currently receiving or had previously received neurotoxic chemotherapy for cancer. Survey results were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Following data cleaning, 447 participants were included in the analysis. The median age was 57 years, 93% were white, and most were from the UK (53%) or USA (38%). Most participants who were currently or recently treated expected some CIPN symptom resolution (86%), but 45% of those who had completed treatment more than a year ago reported experiencing no symptom resolution. Participants reported that they would discontinue chemotherapy treatment for less severe CIPN if they knew their symptoms would be permanent than if symptoms would disappear after treatment. Most patients stated that the decision to alter chemotherapy or not was usually made collaboratively between the patient and their treating clinician (61%). The most common reason participants were reluctant to talk with their clinician about CIPN was fear that treatment would be altered. Participants noted a need for improved understanding of CIPN symptoms and their permanence, better patient education relating to CIPN prior to and after treatment, and greater clinician understanding and empathy around CIPN. CONCLUSIONS: This survey highlights the importance of shared decision-making, including a consideration of both the long-term benefits and risks of altering neurotoxic chemotherapy treatment due to CIPN. Additional work is needed to develop decision aids and other communication tools that can be used to improve shared decision making and help patients with cancer achieve their treatment goals.
Assuntos
Antineoplásicos , Neoplasias , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso Periférico , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Estudos Transversais , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso Periférico/diagnóstico , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Resultado do Tratamento , Qualidade de VidaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To synthesize current evidence on the association between anticipatory anxiety, defined as apprehension-specific negative affect that may be experienced when exposed to potential threat or uncertainty, and cancer screening to better inform strategies to maximize participation rates. METHODS: Searches related to cancer screening and anxiety were conducted in seven electronic databases (APA PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL), with potentially eligible papers screened in Covidence. Data extraction was conducted independently by multiple authors. Barriers to cancer screening for any type of cancer and relationships tested between anticipatory anxiety and cancer screening and intention were categorized and compared according to the form and target of anxiety and cancer types. RESULTS: A total of 74 articles (nparticipants = 119,990) were included, reporting 103 relationships tested between anticipatory anxiety and cancer screening and 13 instances where anticipatory anxiety was reported as a barrier to screening. Anticipatory anxiety related to a possible cancer diagnosis was often associated with increased screening, while general anxiety showed no consistent relationship. Negative relationships were often found between anxiety about the screening procedure and cancer screening. CONCLUSION: Anticipatory anxiety about a cancer diagnosis may promote screening participation, whereas a fear of the screening procedure could be a barrier. Public health messaging and primary prevention practitioners should acknowledge the appropriate risk of cancer, while engendering screening confidence and highlighting the safety and comfort of screening tests.
Assuntos
Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Neoplasias , Humanos , Ansiedade/diagnóstico , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , IncertezaRESUMO
Purpose of Review: The association of multiple sclerosis (MS) with depression has been well documented; however, it frequently remains undiagnosed, untreated, or undertreated, with consequences to the person, family, and economy. The aim of this study was to determine the quality, scope, and consistency of available guidelines and consensus statements to guide clinicians managing people with comorbid MS and depression. Recent Findings: Based on our systematic search of the literature, 6 guidelines and consensus statements met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 4 presented recommendations on depression screening in MS and 5 offered recommendations for treatment. Despite most guidelines presenting evidence-based recommendations, they were generally of low-quality evidence overall. Inconsistencies identified across guidelines and consensus statements included variations in recommendation for routine screening and which screening tool to use. Most guidelines lacked detail, often referring to general population guidelines without describing to what extent they can be applied to people with MS. Summary: The findings of this review highlight the need to develop high-quality, comprehensive clinical practice guidelines with clear recommendations that can be globally implemented by healthcare clinicians working with people with MS.
RESUMO
Background: People with chronic illnesses have increased morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19 infection. The influence of a person's serious and/or comorbid chronic illness on COVID-19 vaccine uptake is not well understood. Aim: To undertake an in-depth exploration of factors influencing COVID-19 vaccine uptake among those with various serious and/or chronic diseases in the Australian context, using secondary data analysis of a survey study. Methods: Adults with cancer, diabetes and multiple sclerosis (MS) were recruited from 10 Australian health services to undertake a cross-sectional online survey (30 June to 5 October 2021) about COVID-19 vaccine uptake, vaccine hesitancy, confidence and complacency and disease-related decision-making impact. Free-text responses were invited regarding thoughts and feelings about the interaction between the participant's disease, COVID-19, and vaccination. Qualitative thematic analysis was undertaken using an iterative process and representative verbatim quotes were chosen to illustrate the themes. Results: Of 4683 survey responses (cancer 3560, diabetes 842, and MS 281), 1604 (34.3%) included free-text comments for qualitative analysis. Participants who provided these were significantly less likely to have received a COVID-19 vaccination than those who did not comment (72.4% and 86.2%, respectively). People with diabetes were significantly less likely to provide free-text comments than those with cancer or MS (29.0%, 35.1% and 39.9%, respectively). Four key themes were identified from qualitative analysis, which were similar across disease states: (1) having a chronic disease heightened perceived susceptibility to and perceived severity of COVID-19; (2) perceived impact of vaccination on chronic disease management and disease-related safety; (3) uncertain benefits of COVID-19 vaccine; and (4) overwhelming information overload disempowering patients. Conclusions: This qualitative analysis highlights an additional layer of complexity related to COVID-19 vaccination decision making in people with underlying health conditions. Appreciation of higher susceptibility to severe COVID-19 outcomes appears to be weighed against uncertain impacts of the vaccine on the progression and management of the comorbid disease. Interactions by clinicians addressing individual factors may alleviate concerns and maximise vaccine uptake in people with significant underlying health conditions.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: People with multiple sclerosis (MS) are susceptible to severe COVID-19 outcomes. They were included as a priority group for the Australian COVID-19 vaccine roll-out in early 2021. However, vaccine hesitancy remains a complex barrier to vaccination in this population group, which may be partly related to disease relapse concerns following COVID-19 vaccination. This study examined the COVID-19 vaccination status, intent, hesitancy, and disease-related beliefs in people with MS. METHODS: An online survey was conducted with people with MS receiving care at two Australian health services between September and October 2021. It collected sociodemographic and disease-specific characteristics and responses to validated scales that assessed vaccine hesitancy and general and MS-related vaccine beliefs. RESULTS: Of the 281 participants [mean age 47.7 (SD 12.8) years; 75.8% females], most (82.9%) had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Younger participants were less likely to be vaccinated, as were those within 1-5 years of disease duration. After controlling for age, disease duration was not associated with vaccination status. Unvaccinated participants were more likely to report less willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, higher vaccine complacency and lower vaccine confidence, greater MS-related vaccine complacency, and higher MS and treatment interaction concerns. CONCLUSIONS: People with MS reported a high vaccination rate, despite general and MS-specific COVID-19 vaccine concerns. Greater MS-specific concerns were reported by those who indicated that their MS was not well-controlled and their MS impacted their daily activities. By understanding the factors that influence vaccine hesitancy and their interplay with MS disease course and treatment concerns, this can inform tailored interventions and educational messages to address these concerns in people with MS. Clinicians, governments, and community organisations are key partners in delivering these interventions and messages, as ongoing booster doses are needed for this vulnerable population.
RESUMO
Addressing a person in the context of their disease must be done respectfully. As a person with multiple sclerosis (MS), my preference is to be referred to as such. Some people with MS refer to themselves as MSers, MS warriors, MS sufferers, and that's fine. A person with MS can refer to themselves in the context of their disease in the manner they choose. People without MS should use terminology most respectful and acceptable to the broadest of the minority. Academics sometimes use persons with MS to refer to an infinite number of people. Not only is this incorrect but use of persons has broadly fallen out of favour in recent decades. In this personal viewpoint I discuss these issues from a lived experience perspective.
Assuntos
Esclerose Múltipla , Autoimagem , Humanos , Esclerose Múltipla/psicologiaRESUMO
Patients with underlying comorbidities are particularly vulnerable to poor outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection. Despite the context-specific nature of vaccine hesitancy, there are currently no scales that incorporate disease or treatment-related hesitancy factors. We developed a six-item scale assessing disease-related COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and concerns (The Disease Influenced COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance Scale-Six: DIVAS-6). A survey incorporating the DIVAS-6 was completed by 4683 participants with severe and/or chronic illness (3560 cancer; 842 diabetes; 281 multiple sclerosis (MS)). The survey included the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale, demographic, disease-related, and vaccination status questions. The six items loaded onto two factors (disease complacency and vaccine vulnerability) using exploratory factor analysis and exploratory structural equation modeling. The two factors were internally consistent. Measurement invariance analysis showed the two factors displayed psychometric equivalence across the patient groups. Each factor significantly correlated with the two Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine scales, showing convergent validity. The summary score showed acceptable ability to discriminate vaccination status across diseases, with the total sample providing good-to-excellent discriminative ability. The DIVAS-6 has two factors measuring COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and concerns relating to potential complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection due to underlying disease (disease complacency) and vaccine-related impact on disease progression and treatment (vaccine vulnerability). This is the first validated scale to measure disease-related COVID-19 vaccine concerns and has been validated in people with cancer, diabetes, and MS. It is quick to administer and should assist with guiding information delivery about COVID-19 vaccination in medically vulnerable populations.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Vaccination is the cornerstone of the global public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Excess morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 infection is seen in people with cancer. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has been observed in this medically vulnerable population, although associated attitudes and beliefs remain poorly understood. METHODS: An online cross-sectional survey of people with solid organ cancers was conducted through nine health services across Australia. Demographics, cancer-related characteristics and vaccine uptake were collected. Perceptions and beliefs regarding COVID-19 vaccination were assessed using the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale and the Disease Influenced Vaccine Acceptance Scale-6. RESULTS: Between June and October 2021, 2691 people with solid organ cancers completed the survey. The median age was 62.5 years (SD = 11.8; range 19-95), 40.9% were male, 71.3% lived in metropolitan areas and 90.3% spoke English as their first language. The commonest cancer diagnoses were breast (36.6%), genitourinary (18.6%) and gastrointestinal (18.3%); 59.2% had localized disease and 56.0% were receiving anti-cancer therapy. Most participants (79.7%) had at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Vaccine uptake was higher in people who were older, male, metropolitan, spoke English as a first language and had a cancer diagnosis for more than six months. Vaccine hesitancy was higher in people who were younger, female, spoke English as a non-dominant language and lived in a regional location, and lower in people with genitourinary cancer. Vaccinated respondents were more concerned about being infected with COVID-19 and less concerned about vaccine safety and efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: People with cancer have concerns about acquiring COVID-19, which they balance against vaccine-related concerns about the potential impact on their disease progress and/or treatment. Detailed exploration of concerns in cancer patients provides valuable insights, both for discussions with individual patients and public health messaging for this vulnerable population.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Evidence supports the role of prescribed exercise for cancer survivors, yet few are advised to exercise by a healthcare practitioner (HCP). We sought to investigate the gap between HCPs' knowledge and practice from an international perspective. METHODS: An online questionnaire was administered to HCPs working in cancer care between February 2020 and February 2021. The questionnaire assessed knowledge, beliefs, and practices regarding exercise counselling and referral of cancer survivors to exercise programs. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 375 participants classified as medical practitioners (42%), nurses (28%), exercise specialists (14%), and non-exercise allied health practitioners (16%). Between 35 and 50% of participants self-reported poor knowledge of when, how, and which cancer survivors to refer to exercise programs or professionals, and how to counsel based on exercise guidelines. Commonly reported barriers to exercise counselling were safety concerns, time constraints, cancer survivors being told to rest by friends and family, and not knowing how to screen people for suitability to exercise (40-48%). Multivariable logistic regression models including age, gender, practitioner group, leisure-time physical activity, and recall of guidelines found significant effects for providing specific exercise advice (χ2(7) = 117.31, p < .001), discussing the role of exercise in symptom management (χ2(7) = 65.13, p < .001) and cancer outcomes (χ2(7) = 58.69, p < .001), and referring cancer survivors to an exercise program or specialist (χ2(7) = 72.76, p < .001). CONCLUSION: Additional education and practical support are needed to equip HCPs to provide cancer survivors with exercise guidelines, resources, and referrals to exercise specialists.
Assuntos
Neoplasias , Encaminhamento e Consulta , Humanos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Exercício Físico , Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Aconselhamento , Neoplasias/terapiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To assess smoking habits, nicotine use, exposure to passive smoking, awareness of associated harms, and experiences with and preferences for smoking cessation support among people with multiple sclerosis (MS). DESIGN: Online survey, convenience sampling. SETTING: Community setting, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Adults living in Australia with probable or diagnosed MS were recruited via social media and newsletters to participate in 2020. RESULTS: Of the 284 participants in our convenience sample, 25.7% were current smokers (n=73) and 38.0% were former smokers (n=108). Awareness of the harms of smoking on MS onset (n=68, 24.3%) and progression (n=116, 41.6%) was low. Almost a quarter (n=67, 23.8%) of participants were regularly exposed to passive smoke, and awareness of associated harm was also low (n=47, 16.8%). Among current smokers, 76.1% (n=54) had tried quitting and 73.2% considered quitting within 6 months (n=52). Many participants reported perceived short-term benefits of smoking, and long-term benefits of quitting, on MS symptoms and general well-being (short-term n=28, 40.0%; long-term n=28, 82.4%). While most participants reported that their neurologist (n=126, 75.4%) or other healthcare providers (n=125, 74.9%) had assessed smoking status, very few neurologists (n=3, 1.8%) or other healthcare providers (n=14, 8.4%) had provided help with quitting. Most current smokers preferred speaking about smoking to a neurologist (n=36, 52.2%) or general practitioner (n=41, 59.4%). Almost 60% of the current smokers wanted additional cessation information specific to MS (n=41, 59.4%), and 45.5% said this information would motivate them to quit smoking (n=30). CONCLUSIONS: Our convenience sample, which may not be representative, indicated an urgent need for regular evidence-based smoking cessation supports for people with MS. Most participants felt they would benefit from smoking cessation advice. MS clinicians, in collaboration with patient organisations, smoking cessation services and general practitioners, should make smoking cessation promotion with people with MS a priority.
Assuntos
Esclerose Múltipla , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar , Poluição por Fumaça de Tabaco , Adulto , Austrália/epidemiologia , Humanos , Nicotina , Fumar/epidemiologiaRESUMO
As COVID-19 vaccinations became available and were proven effective in preventing serious infection, uptake amongst individuals varied, including in medically vulnerable populations. This cross-sectional multi-site study examined vaccine uptake, hesitancy, and explanatory factors amongst people with serious and/or chronic health conditions, including the impact of underlying disease on attitudes to vaccination. A 42-item survey was distributed to people with cancer, diabetes, or multiple sclerosis across ten Australian health services from 30 June to 5 October 2021. The survey evaluated sociodemographic and disease-related characteristics and incorporated three validated scales measuring vaccine hesitancy and vaccine-related beliefs generally and specific to their disease: the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale and the Disease Influenced Vaccine Acceptance Scale-Six. Among 4683 participants (2548 [54.4%] female, 2108 [45.0%] male, 27 [0.6%] other; mean [SD] age, 60.6 [13.3] years; 3560 [76.0%] cancer, 842 [18.0%] diabetes, and 281 [6.0%] multiple sclerosis), 3813 (81.5%) self-reported having at least one COVID-19 vaccine. Unvaccinated status was associated with younger age, female sex, lower education and income, English as a second language, and residence in regional areas. Unvaccinated participants were more likely to report greater vaccine hesitancy and more negative perceptions toward vaccines. Disease-related vaccine concerns were associated with unvaccinated status and hesitancy, including greater complacency about COVID-19 infection, and concerns relating to vaccine efficacy and impact on their disease and/or treatment. This highlights the need to develop targeted strategies and education about COVID-19 vaccination to support medically vulnerable populations and health professionals.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Depression is common in people with multiple sclerosis (MS), with lifetime prevalence estimates between 25 and 50%. Depression is commonly underdiagnosed and undertreated in people with MS. This qualitative study assessed current practices, as well as facilitators and required resources to improve detection and management of depression in people with MS. METHODS: MS clinicians living in Australia were recruited through MS healthcare provider clinics and networks for online interviews. Interviews were transcribed and coded in NVivo for framework analysis. RESULTS: Participants included 15 MS specialists: nine nurses and six neurologists. Participants appreciated that depression was a common symptom of MS, and that untreated depression impacted patients' wellbeing, medication adherence, capacity for self-care, employment, and interpersonal relationships. Participants did not routinely screen for depression and noted that they lack the time and skills to manage depression once identified, most often recommending patients see their general practitioner. Clinicians recognised that people with MS commonly experience barriers to identifying and managing depressive symptoms, however few clinics provide information or discussion about depression as a symptom of MS with patients. CONCLUSION: Participants indicated a need for evidence-based guidance, more education and training to improve practices including screening for depression, and an urgent need for local referral pathways to affordable and accessible mental health services for people with MS. Findings suggest a need for better collaborative management of depression and improvement of systematic practices related to depression information, screening and treatment support.