Do Patients Feel Well Informed in a Radiation Oncology Service?

Information Needs of Patients Diagnosed with Head and Neck Cancer Undergoing Radiation Therapy: a Survey of Patient Satisfaction

Research suggests that the information needs of patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer can be particularly complex, given the frequent need for multidisciplinary treatments and resulting potential for profound functional impairments. This study was designed to identify head and neck cancer patients' reported informational needs and to evaluate their satisfaction with the written information they received. The study was divided into 2 phases: phase 1, prior to development of a new educational pamphlet, and phase 2, after its implementation. A survey was designed to evaluate several measures including content, amount, understanding, and timing of information delivery. It was distributed at two points during patients' treatment pathway for each phase: at their last radiation appointment and at their posttreatment follow-up appointment. Participant responses after the revised pamphlet indicated greater preparedness before their first treatment, as well as increased satisfaction with treatment option information. Most were satisfied with information timing, but about a third did indicate that additional information would have been helpful at variable time points. Open-ended responses demonstrated that overall, patients do still desire more information, particularly on side effect and self-care management information. While patients with head and neck cancer appear to be generally satisfied with the written information received, our findings suggest that there is still considerable variability in how the information is understood, when it should be delivered, and in which areas more would have been beneficial. These findings underscore the need to consider how best to balance available resources in order to provide more tailored yet comprehensive education for this group of patients.

Experiences of older patients with cancer from the radiotherapy pathway - A qualitative study

PURPOSE

To explore and describe experiences of older patients with cancer throughout their radiotherapy treatment, from diagnosis until follow-up after treatment.

METHODS

Individual interviews were conducted to explore different phases of radiotherapy. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Inductive content analysis was applied. Each interview was coded separately. Then to the codes were analyzed further, and an overall theme was developed.

RESULTS

Twelve older patients with cancer, (7 male, 5 female) aged ≥ 65 related their experiences from radiotherapy treatment. A main theme describes the essence of their experiences; Understanding "just enough". The theme comprises five main categories: Understandable, adapted information is crucial for trusting health services; Previous experiences influence patients' perception and understanding; Involvement of next of kin is crucial to patients' comprehension; Professional treatment decisions and well-organized treatment determines satisfaction and Experiences of cooperation and coordination of services affects dependability.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this study describe how understanding "just enough" - not too much nor too little - may assist older patients with cancer in participating in treatment decisions, preventing false beliefs, feeling reassured during treatment and in navigating the complex health care system. Next of kin are important assets for older patients with cancer in understanding "just enough". Cancer nurses may map comprehension of information, as well as reveal patients' previous experiences.

Exploring the cancer patients' experiences during external radiotherapy: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative and quantitative evidence

PURPOSE

To investigate the subjective experience of adult cancer patients undergoing external radiotherapy and provide evidence for better practices in radiotherapy services.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA Statement Guidelines. Qualitative and mixed studies were identified through five electronic databases (CINAHL, PsychINFO, Medline, Scopus and Web of Science), between March and April 2020, using defined criteria. Methodological quality assessment was conducted, and the data integrated into a thematic synthesis.

RESULTS

Of the 886 studies identified, 13 met our inclusion criteria. Patients experiences were described into four main themes: (1) Time, (2) Physical Environment, (3) Treatment Concerns and (4) Radiotherapy Team. Time refers to waiting time and treatment time; Physical Environment states temperature in the treatment room and equipment; Treatment Concerns included side effects, daily activities, positioning and immobilization and treatment preparation (e.g., bladder filling); radiotherapy team comprised patients support; response to patients needs and recognized team. The generating analytical phase of thematic analysis allowed us to recognize that the effectiveness of the radiotherapy team operates as a facilitator of the patients' experience. In contrast, time in the waiting room, the treatment preparation when is required, and the positioning and immobilization, specifically for the neck and head patients, act as barriers.

CONCLUSION

Four distinct themes were identified to be positively and negatively associated with patients' experience during external radiotherapy. The evidence provides valuable recommendations to improved radiotherapy services organization, as well as to the delivery of more patient-centred care adjusted to the concerns and needs of patients.

How informed is our consent? Patient awareness of radiation and radical prostatectomy complications

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate patient's recall of pretreatment counseling for radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy for the treatment of prostate cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients presenting to our reconstructive urology clinic for the management of the complications of prostate cancer treatment was conducted over 24 months. Patients treated with only surgery or radiotherapy were included in the study. Patients were asked a standard series of questions to assess their recall of their pre-prostate cancer treatment counseling.

RESULTS

We identified 206 patients that met inclusion criteria. Of those, 153 underwent radical prostatectomy and 53 patients received radiation therapy. Median age at presentation was 72 years in the surgery group and 75 in the radiation therapy group. Mean time since treatment was 8.8 years in those that recalled being counseled and 9.9 years in those who did not (p=0.21). In the surgery group, the adverse effects experienced by 119 (77.8%) patients recalled, and counselled were related to the risk of treatment. In the surgical patients that had records with documentation of pretreatment counseling, 41/48 (85.4%) endorsed recall. In the surgery group, 117 (76.5%) stated that their treating physician was aware of their complication. In the radiation group, 5 patients (9.4%) endorsed recall (p<0.0001). In the subgroup of radiation patients with documentation of pre-treatment counseling, no patients endorsed recall. In the surgery group, 117 (76.5%) patients stated that their treating physicians were aware of their complication, while in the radiation group, only 16 (30.2%) of treating physicians were aware of the complications (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Patient recall of potential complications of prostate cancer treatment is poor. It's unclear if this is secondary to poor recall, selective memory loss or inadequate counseling.