Inequalities in access to neuro-oncology supportive care and rehabilitation: A survey of healthcare professionals' perspectives.

Background: Neuro-oncology patients and caregivers should have equitable access to rehabilitation, supportive-, and palliative care. To investigate existing issues and potential solutions, we surveyed neuro-oncology professionals to explore current barriers and facilitators to screening patients' needs and referral to services. Methods: Members of the European Association of Neuro-Oncology and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Brain Tumor Group (EORTC-BTG) were invited to complete a 39-item online questionnaire covering the availability of services, screening, and referral practice. Responses were analyzed descriptively; associations between sociodemographic/clinical variables and screening/referral practice were explored. Results: In total, 103 participants completed the survey (67% women and 57% medical doctors). Fifteen professions from 23 countries were represented. Various rehabilitation, supportive-, and palliative care services were available yet rated "inadequate" by 21-37% of participants. Most respondents with a clinical role (n = 94) declare to screen (78%) and to refer (83%) their patients routinely for physical/cognitive/emotional issues. Survey completers (n = 103) indicated the main reasons for not screening/referring were (1) lack of suitable referral options (50%); (2) shortage of healthcare professionals (48%); and (3) long waiting lists (42%). To improve service provision, respondents suggested there is a need for education about neuro-oncology-specific issues (75%), improving the availability of services (65%) and staff (64%), developing international guidelines (64%), and strengthening the existing evidence-base for rehabilitation (60%). Conclusions: Detecting and managing neuro-oncology patients' and caregivers' rehabilitation, supportive,- and palliative care needs can be improved. Better international collaboration can help address healthcare disparities.

[Regional variation in usage of TTF (Optune)]. / Regional variation i användningen av TTF vid glioblastombehandling.

The standard treatment of glioblastoma, an aggressive brain tumour, includes radiotherapy combined with temozolomide. Based on a randomised trial, showing five months increased survival, TTF has been introduced in the management of patients with good performance status. Data from the Swedish national quality registry for CNS tumours have been analysed for TTF usage. The results demonstrate that 65 percent of the patients accepted treatment with TTF. More than half of the treated patients interrupted treatment due to low compliance or their own wish. Median treatment time was 164 days, with a range from 0 to 774 days. There was a large variation between different regions in how many patients were offered TTF treatment. A non-significant trend to better survival was seen for the group of TTF-treated patients compared to individually matched controls. In summary, TTF is a new treatment for glioblastoma, with potential to prolong survival also in real world patients. Today, the treatment is not offered equally to all patients, despite national guidelines.

Measuring patient experiences of person-centred care: Translation, cultural adaption and qualitative evaluation of item candidates for use in England and Sweden.

BACKGROUND: To facilitate change for person-centred care, there is a need to invest in measures to assess if and how healthcare systems are delivering care based on the principles of person-centred care. This paper describes the first phase in developing an item bank to measure patients' experiences of person-centred care. AIM: The aim was to translate, culturally adapt and evaluate candidate items to measure person-centred care from the patient's perspective. METHODS: The Centre for person-centred care at Gothenburg university and the UK Person-centred and coordinated care model informed our conceptual framework. The initial pool of item candidates originated from a previous systematic review where 855 items were identified. In this study, a mixed method design was used involving persons with experience as patients, caregivers, healthcare professionals and researchers in person-centred care or questionnaire design (n = 84). The item analysis included two validation rounds using web questionnaires, a focus group and cognitive interviews. RESULTS: From the initial pool, 155 items covering core domains and subdomains of person-centred and coordinated care were selected for translation and qualitative item analysis. After translation, 44 items were excluded (duplicates). After the first validation round, 21 items were rephrased and 35 were excluded (due to low ratings, lack of comprehensibility, were duplicates or too specifically phrased). To reflect the ethical basis of person-centred care, rewordings were also made to encompass the patient as an active partner in care and where communication and information goes two-ways and care is co-created. After the second round, 11 items were rephrased and 25 items were excluded (for being redundant/repetitive). Six new items were added (covering access to care, patient capabilities, mental well-being and identifying goals). CONCLUSION: We have developed a first set of 57 items to proceed towards developing an item bank to measure the patient experiences of person-centred care.

Moving from clinician-defined to patient-reported outcome measures for survivors of high-grade glioma.

BACKGROUND: Persons with high-grade glioma face both neurological and cancer-related symptoms from the tumor itself and its treatment affecting their daily lives. Survival alone is not an adequate outcome, the quality of the survivorship experience needs to be regarded with equal importance. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures can be used to evaluate treatment effects and symptom management interventions. PURPOSE: The aim of this review was to identify the use, challenges, and potential of PRO measures in survivors of high-grade glioma. METHODS: A narrative expert opinion review was performed on the subject. In addition to our own experiences we searched PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO for brain tumor-specific PRO measures used in the population of adult patients with high-grade glioma, both original articles and reviews were included. RESULTS: There are several PRO measures that have been validated for patients with primary brain tumors including high-grade glioma. PRO measures are used both in clinical trials to evaluate the effect of treatment on health-related quality of life, and in daily clinical practice for holistic needs assessment and symptom management. Common PRO measures used for patients with high-grade glioma are European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer general instrument for patients with cancer together with brain tumor module, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Brain, and MD Anderson Symptom Inventory for Brain Tumor. Neurologic and cognitive disorders often occur in patients with high-grade glioma, which affects patients' ability to self-report over time, making it more challenging in this population. PRO as a primary outcome seems underutilized. CONCLUSION: For clinical research, PRO measures need to be used together with other clinical outcome measures rather than replacing traditional outcome measures. Moving to more use of PRO measures in survivorship care has potential to improve patient-caregiver-healthcare team communication, symptom management, and quality of care. Implementing PROs in survivorship care should also involve caregivers and a response based on the results.