Rehabilitation and palliative care for socioeconomically disadvantaged patients with advanced cancer: a scoping review

Reasons for non-participation in cancer rehabilitation: a scoping literature review

BACKGROUND

Rehabilitation plays an important role in addressing the many challenges of living with cancer, but a large proportion of people with cancer do not participate in available cancer rehabilitation. Hence, reasons for non-participation in cancer rehabilitation need to be explored.

OBJECTIVE

The present study undertakes a scoping review of research examining reasons for non-participation in cancer rehabilitation among people with cancer.

DESIGN

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus and CINAHL for articles published until July 2023. Included studies were hand searched for relevant references and citations.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Method: Studies with qualitative, quantitative or mixed-method design.

POPULATION

Studies targeting adults (> 18) living with cancer, not participating in rehabilitation. Program type: The review included all studies defining program as rehabilitation but excluded clinical trials.

OUTCOME

Studies examining reasons for non-participation in available rehabilitation.

DATA EXTRACTION

The extracted data included author(s)/year of publication, aim, population, information, rehabilitation type and main reasons for non-participation.

RESULTS

A total of nine studies were included (n = 3 quantitative, n = 2 qualitative, n = 4 mixed methods). Reasons for non-participation included physical, psychosocial and practical aspects. The main reason across studies was 'no need for public support' related to receiving sufficient support from family and friends. All studies focused on individual reasons, and structural conditions were rarely present.

CONCLUSION

Research within this field is sparse. Future research should explore how individual reasons for non-participation relate to structural conditions, especially among people in socially disadvantaged positions living with cancer.

Nurse navigation, symptom monitoring and exercise in vulnerable patients with lung cancer: feasibility of the NAVIGATE intervention

We developed the Navigate intervention to improve survival among vulnerable lung cancer patients. In this intervention-only study, we examined feasibility in terms of recruitment, retention, attendance, adherence, and acceptability to specify adjustments to study procedures and intervention components prior to a randomized trial. The Navigate intervention includes nurse navigation, patient-reported outcomes, and physical exercise. Patients ≥ 18 years old, diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer at any stage, with performance status ≤ 2, eligible for cancer treatment and vulnerable according to a screening instrument were included. The recruitment goal of eligible patients was 40% while the retention goal was 85%. The predefined cut-offs for sufficient attendance and adherence were ≥ 75%. Acceptability was evaluated by semi-structured interviews with participants, nurse navigators, and physiotherapists. Seventeen (56%) out of 30 screened patients were considered vulnerable and eligible for the study, 14 (82%) accepted participation, and 3 (21%) were subsequently excluded due to ineligibility, leaving 11 patients. Four patients dropped out (36%) and four patients died (36%) during follow-up and 3 (27%) were retained. All 11 patients participated in nurse sessions (mean 16, range 1-36) with 88% attendance and dialogue tools being applied in 68% of sessions. Ninety-one percent of patients responded to PROs (mean of 9 PROs, range 1-24) with 76% of the PRO questionnaires used (attendance) and 100% adherence (completion of all questions in PRO questionnaires), and 55% participated in exercise sessions with 58% attendance and 85% adherence. We identified important barriers primarily related to transportation, but overall acceptability was high. The Navigate intervention was feasible with high participation, acceptability and satisfactory adherence. Retention and exercise attendance were low, which resulted in adjustments.Trial registration: The feasibility study was initiated prior to the multicenter randomized controlled trial registered by ClinicalTrials.gov (number: NCT05053997; date 23/09/2021).

Barriers and facilitators to cancer rehabilitation for patients with head and neck or lung cancer-a scoping review mapping structural and healthcare professionals' perspectives

PURPOSE

Rehabilitation can positively affect quality of life, functional status, and physiological status for patients with head and neck or lung cancer. However, barriers and facilitators regarding access, referral, and participation in rehabilitation have not been outlined in the literature either from a healthcare professional or from a structural perspective. Therefore, the objective of this paper was to identify and map barriers and facilitators from structural and healthcare professionals' perspectives in relation to access, referral, and participation in rehabilitation for patients with head and neck or lung cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two systematic searches were conducted in five databases mapping peer-reviewed research literature.

RESULTS

In total, 17 studies of 3918 potential sources were included. Seven themes were identified. Four themes concerned access: Understanding Patients' Resources; Collaboration Determining Access; Education, Knowledge, and Evidence Impact Access to Rehabilitation; and Resources Affecting Availability to Rehabilitation Services. Two themes concerned referral: Referral Criteria; and Elements Affecting Referral Pathway. One theme concerned participation: Factors Influencing Participation.

CONCLUSION

From structural and healthcare professionals' perspectives, barriers and facilitators impact access, referral and participation in rehabilitation. However, the findings on facilitators were limited; only one theme addressed participation and two findings concerned patients with low socioeconomic status.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONHealthcare professionals should be mindful that a diverse array of barriers and facilitators may impact the rehabilitation pathway for patients with head, neck, and lung cancer.Engagement by healthcare professionals and structural initiatives are needed to ensure comprehensive access to information concerning rehabilitation options.Local guidelines should be developed to prescribe methods for informing and guiding patients towards suitable rehabilitation options.It is important that healthcare professionals take the individual patient's resources into account when navigating aspects of access, referral, and participation in rehabilitation.

Rehabilitation interventions for young adult cancer survivors: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To map existing research concerning rehabilitation interventions for young adult cancer survivors (YACS) that address at least one factor from the biopsychosocial health model.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA SOURCES

Searches were performed in EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane in January 2022 and updated in March 2023, and grey literature between February and April 2022.

METHODS

The review followed Joanna Briggs Institute's methodology for scoping reviews. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies evaluating interventions for YACS of any cancer who had completed primary treatment and were between 18 and 39 years old at diagnosis were included. Two authors independently screened studies for eligibility, and standardised forms were used for data extraction. Descriptive statistics, narrative summaries and thematic analysis were used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

The search revealed 5706 records, of which 70 were full-text screened. The 20 included studies represented a heterogeneous group of 444 young adults with different cancer types, mean age above 25, and an overrepresentation of females. Most studies were feasibility and pilot studies. The 20 studies consisted of 14 unique interventions focusing primarily on one dimension of the biopsychosocial health model like biological or psychological factors. In the 14 interventions, the most frequent intervention element was peer-to-peer support (n = 12). The interventions were often delivered online (n = 9), lasting 3-12 months (n = 8). A wide variety of theories, providers and outcome measures were used.

CONCLUSION

The results show that current research on multicomponent, biopsychosocial and age-specific rehabilitation for YACS remains at an early stage.

Rural Palliative Care Telemedicine for Advanced Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review

Context: Telemedicine offers the opportunity to provide remote palliative care for patients to control symptoms and improve quality of life, even for patients with advanced diseases. Objectives: Establish a telemedicine model of rural palliative care for advanced cancer patients with difficulties in accessing standard care. Methods: This review comports with the minimum standards described in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) and uses the palliative care literature review iterative method (PALETTE) proposed by Zwakman et al in 2018. Results: Three hundred, ninety-two articles were identified in PubMed and EMBASE databases and alternative search engines such as Google Scholar and OpenGrey. A telemedicine delivery model was developed for patients with limited access to standard care, which consists of identifying the candidate population, establishing the most convenient telemedicine modality, agreeing with patients and caregivers on palliative care needs, and evaluating the interventions effectiveness. Conclusion: Telemedicine is a revolutionary tool to provide palliative care to advanced cancer patients whose clinical condition or location prevent them from accessing conventional care.

NAVIGATE: improving survival in vulnerable patients with lung cancer through nurse navigation, symptom monitoring and exercise - study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION AND AIM

Low socioeconomic position (SEP) has been shown to be strongly associated with impaired lung cancer survival. Barriers related to receiving recommended treatment among patients with lung cancer with low SEP may include adverse health behaviour and limited physical and psychosocial resources influencing the ability to react on high-risk symptoms and to navigate the healthcare system. To address the underlying factors that drive both decisions of treatment, adherence to treatment and follow-up in vulnerable patients with lung cancer, we developed the Navigate intervention. The aim of this randomised controlled trial is to investigate the effect of the intervention on survival (primary outcome), lung cancer treatment adherence, health-related quality of life and other psychosocial outcomes as well as health costs and process evaluation (secondary outcomes) in a study population of vulnerable patients with lung cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This two-armed multicentre randomised trial will recruit patients from five lung cancer clinics in Denmark identified as vulnerable according to a screening instrument with nine clinical and patient-reported vulnerability criteria developed for the study. We will enrol 518 vulnerable patients >18 years old diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer at all stages with a performance status <2. Participants will be randomly allocated to either standard treatment and intervention or standard treatment alone. The Navigate intervention is based on principles from motivational interviewing and includes three components of nurse navigation, systematic monitoring of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and physical exercise in a person-centred delivery model. Data will be collected at baseline and 3, 6, 12 months after randomisation using questionnaires, clinical data and physical function tests.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics Committee, Region Zealand (SJ-884/EMN-2020-37380) and the Data Protection Agency in Region Zealand (REG-080-2021) approved the trial. Participants will provide written informed consent. Results will be reported in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05053997.

Identification of socially vulnerable cancer patients - development of a register-based index (rSVI)

BACKGROUND

Social vulnerability is a complex construct which is beyond relying on single measures. If socially vulnerable patients should be identified, we need a composite measure capturing the patient's overall circumstances. This study presents the development of a social vulnerability index (rSVI) for cancer patients based on administrative data from population-based registers.

METHODS

All patients, who died from cancer within 5 years after the cancer diagnosis during 2013-2018 (n = 44,187), were identified and divided in four subcohorts according to survival; index cohort surviving 3-5 years (n = 3044 surviving 3-5 years), cohort 1 (n = 27,170 surviving < 1 year), cohort 2 (n = 9450 surviving 1-2 years), and cohort 3 (n = 4523 surviving 2-3 years). Variables from ten registries on health and social issues were linked to each individual patient. Variables of interest were weighted to construct the rSVI using the index-cohort. rSVI was subsequently tested on the three other cohorts for validation.

RESULTS

The rSVI included weighted values for marital status, ethnicity, education, income, unemployment, psychiatric comorbidity, and somatic comorbidity. The validity of the rSVI was supported by the expected trend in proportions of vulnerable patients when applied on the other cohorts. Single social measures appeared insufficient in identification of vulnerable patients when compared with the rSVI.

CONCLUSION

The rSVI provides a tool for identification of socially vulnerable cancer patients using administrative data. The index requires further validation in other patient groups and is tested against other measures of vulnerability. Future perspectives are to use the rSVI as predictor of advanced cancer patients' use of healthcare services.

Cancer rehabilitation and palliative care for socially vulnerable patients in Denmark: an exploration of practices and conceptualisations

Background:

Despite a tax-funded, needs-based organisation of the Danish health system, social inequality in cancer rehabilitation and palliative care (PC) has been noted repeatedly. Little is known about how best to improve access and participation in cancer rehabilitation and PC for socio-economically disadvantaged and socially vulnerable patients.

Aim:

To gather, synthesise and describe practice-orientated development studies presented in Danish-language publications and examine the underpinning conceptualisations of social inequality and vulnerability; explore related views of stakeholders working in the field.

Methods:

The study comprised a narrative review of Danish-language literature on practice-orientated development studies which address social inequality and vulnerability in cancer rehabilitation and PC and an online stakeholder consultation workshop with Danish professionals and academics working in the field.

Results:

Two themes characterise the included publications (n = 8): types of interventions; conceptualisations of social inequality and vulnerability; three themes were identified in the workshop data: focus and type of interventions; organisation of cancer care; and vulnerability of the healthcare system. The publications and the workshop participants (n = 12) favoured approaches which provide additional individualised resources throughout the cancer trajectory for this patient group. The terms social inequality and social vulnerability are largely used interchangeably, and associated with low income and no or little education yet qualified with multiple descriptors, which reflect the diverse socio-economic situations professionals encounter in cancer patients and their psychosocial needs.

Conclusion:

Addressing social inequality and vulnerability in cancer rehabilitation and PC in Denmark entails practical and conceptual challenges. Of importance is individualised support and the integration of rehabilitation and PC into standardised care pathways. To conceive of social vulnerability as a layered, dynamic, relational and contextual concept reflects current practice in identifying the diversity of cancer patients who may benefit from additional support in accessing and participating in rehabilitation and PC.