VAN MOSSEL C., LEITZ L., SCOTT S., DAUDT H., DENNIS D., WATSON H., ALFORD M., MITCHELL A., PAYEUR N., COSBY C., LEVI‐MILNE R. & PURKIS M.E. (2012) European Journal of Cancer Care21, 296–320
Information needs across the colorectal cancer care continuum: scoping the literature
Because cancer care requires a multifaceted approach, providing useful and timely information to people with colorectal cancer may be fragmented and inconsistent. Our interest was in examining what has and has not captured the attention of researchers speaking to the information needs of people with colorectal cancer. We followed Arksey and O'Malley's framework for the methodology of scoping review. Focusing solely on colorectal cancer, we analysed 239 articles to get a picture of which information needs and sources of information, as well as the timing of providing information, were attended to. Treatment‐related information received the most mentions (26%). Healthcare professionals (49%) were mentioned as the most likely source of information. Among articles focused on one stage of the care continuum, post‐treatment (survivorship) received the most attention (16%). Only 27% of the articles consulted people with colorectal cancer and few attended to diet/nutrition and bowel management. This study examined the numerical representation of issues to which researchers attend, not the quality of the mentions. We ponder, however, on the relationship between the in/frequency of mentions and the actual information needs of people with colorectal cancer as well as the availability, sources and timing of information.
Background: Health agencies across the world have echoed the recommendation of the U.S. Institute of Medicine (iom) that survivorship care plans (scps) should be provided to patients upon completion of treatment. To date, reviews of scps have been limited to the United States. The present review offers an expanded scope and describes how scps are being designed, delivered, and evaluated in various countries. Methods: We collected scps from Canada, the United States, Europe, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand. We selected for analysis the scps for which we could obtain the actual scp, information about the delivery approach, and evaluation data. We conducted a content analysis and compared the scps with the iom guidelines. Results: Of 47 scps initially identified, 16 were analyzed. The scps incorporated several of the iom’s guidelines, but many did not include psychosocial services, identification of a key point of contact, genetic testing, and financial concerns. The model of delivery instituted by the U.K. National Cancer Survivorship Initiative stands out because of its unique approach that initiates care planning at diagnosis and stratifies patients into a follow-up program based on self-management capacities. Summary: There is considerable variation in the approach to delivery and the extent to which scps follow the original recommendations from the iom. We discuss the implications of this review for future care-planning programs and prospective research. A holistic approach to care that goes beyond the iom recommendations and that incorporates care planning from the point of diagnosis to beyond completion of treatment might improve people’s experience of cancer care.
tailored to address physical activity, cam, and diet. Lifestyle programs offered throughout the cancer trajectory and beyond treatment completion might be well received by people with crc.
The use of nutritional and psychosocial screening tools is warranted and needs to be emphasized more in oncology settings. There appears to be a relationship between psychosocial issues and increased nutritional risk which should be taken into account when considering cancer care interventions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.