An evaluation of the provision of oncology rehabilitation services via telemedicine using a participatory design approach.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has fundamentally impacted the delivery of healthcare services globally. In line with UK government guidelines on social distancing, the use of telemedicine was implemented to facilitate the ongoing provision of cancer rehabilitation. PURPOSE: We sought to evaluate and co-design telemedicine services to meet the complex needs of our patients and carers at a tertiary cancer centre. METHODS: Experience-based co-design methodology was adapted to include virtual methods. Staff members (n = 12) and patients (n = 11) who had delivered or received therapies services at our UK cancer centre since March 2020 were recruited to take part in one-to-one virtual interviews. Patient interviews were video recorded, analysed and edited to a 30-min "trigger film". Patient and staff virtual events were undertaken thereafter. A joint virtual patient and staff event occurred. Staff and patients watched the trigger film and as partners, agreed areas for change and developed groups for service co-design. RESULTS: Positive aspects regarding telemedicine provision were highlighted including reduced financial and time burden on patients, and increased flexibility for both staff and patients. The key concerns included digital exclusion, safety, communication and patient choice. Four co-design groups have been established to enact changes in these priority areas. CONCLUSION: Using a participatory design approach, we have worked in partnership with patients and staff to ensure the safe, acceptable and effective delivery of rehabilitation services with integrated telemedicine.

Holistic needs assessment and care plans for women with gynaecological cancer: do they improve cancer-specific health-related quality of life? A randomised controlled trial using mixed methods.

OBJECTIVES: Holistic needs assessment (HNA) and care planning are proposed to address unmet needs of people treated for cancer. We tested whether HNA and care planning by an allied health professional improved cancer-specific quality of life for women following curative treatment for stage I-III gynaecological cancer. METHODS: Consecutive women were invited to participate in a randomised controlled study (HNA and care planning vs usual care) at a UK cancer centre. Data were collected by questionnaire at baseline, 3 and 6 months. The outcomes were 6-month change in European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 (version 3), global score (primary) and, in EORTC subscales, generic quality of life and self-efficacy (secondary). The study was blinded for data management and analysis. Differences in outcomes were compared between groups. Health service utilisation and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) (from Short Form-6) were gathered for a cost-effectiveness analysis. Thematic analysis was used to interpret data from an exit interview. RESULTS: 150 women consented (75 per group); 10 undertook interviews. For 124 participants (61 intervention, 63 controls) with complete data, no statistically significant differences were seen between groups in the primary endpoint. The majority of those interviewed reported important personal gains they attributed to the intervention, which reflected trends to improvement seen in EORTC functional and symptom scales. Economic analysis suggests a 62% probability of cost-effectiveness at a £30 000/QALY threshold. CONCLUSION: Care plan development with an allied health professional is cost-effective, acceptable and useful for some women treated for stage I-III gynaecological cancer. We recommend its introduction early in the pathway to support person-centred care.

Musculoskeletal techniques for clinically stable adults with cystic fibrosis: a preliminary randomised controlled trial.

AIMS: To assess the sensitivity of selected outcome measures to any change resulting from treatment of adults with cystic fibrosis with physiotherapy musculoskeletal techniques, use the data for sample size calculations for future studies and assess the acceptability of the methods to potential participants. DESIGN: Preliminary, prospective, single-blind, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Specialist cystic fibrosis centre. PARTICIPANTS: Adults recruited from a cystic fibrosis outpatient clinic. INTERVENTIONS: The control group received normal optimal physiotherapy care and the intervention group received weekly musculoskeletal treatment for 6 weeks in addition to normal optimal physiotherapy care. OUTCOME MEASURES: Recorded at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 weeks. The outcome measures were posture (thoracic index), chest wall excursion, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), visual analogue scale for pain, modified shuttle test and Cystic Fibrosis Quality of Life Questionnaire--Section One (physical functioning). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics [using medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs)] and linear regression mixed model. RESULTS: From a total of 20 subjects, 10 were randomised to each group. Fifty percent of subjects were male, with a median age of 27 years (IQR 25 to 34), median FEV(1) of 1.75 l (IQR 1.4 to 2.4) and median body mass index of 20.8 (IQR 20.0 to 23.5). Baseline differences between groups in thoracic index and modified shuttle test made any differences difficult to interpret, but the results for thoracic index and chest wall excursion at the third rib in the treatment group showed a trend towards improvement. The usefulness of FEV1, the visual analogue scale for pain and the Cystic Fibrosis Quality of Life Questionnaire as measures is unclear. CONCLUSION: Further musculoskeletal studies in people with cystic fibrosis should consider using thoracic index and a measure of lung function in addition to FEV1. The musculoskeletal techniques appear to be acceptable to people with cystic fibrosis, and do not seem to have associated adverse effects.