Older women’s experience with breast cancer treatment: A systematic review of qualitative literature

Abstract

Background The experience of older women during breast cancer treatment is insufficiently described by quantitative studies. This study aimed to systematically review qualitative data describing factors that influence older women’s (≥65 years old) experience with breast cancer treatment. Methods A systematic review was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA) principles. MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and EMBASE were searched (inception – 2020). Quality assessment of essential item reporting was performed using the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) criteria. Common ideas were coded, thematically organized, and synthesized within a theoretical framework. Results Of 7,773 studies identified, twelve were included. The median SRQR score was 13.4 (range 11.3–15.9) (maximum score: 21). Data synthesis revealed that older women experienced breast cancer as a journey with challenges during each phase. During diagnosis, they delayed seeking medical help despite symptoms. Age and experience gave them perspective on the impact of their diagnosis. During decision-making, preconceptions and personal values determined choices. In the treatment phase, women experienced medical and social barriers to care. During the post-treatment phase, many experienced treatment adverse effects, but could move on or compartmentalize as coping mechanisms. Conclusion Older women with breast cancer have unique challenges specific to each phase of their treatment journey. Older women may benefit from proactive treatment discussions with health care providers to address their specific needs, individualize care, and assist with cancer care navigation.

Percepción sobre el apoyo social recibido tras el diagnóstico de cáncer de mama: La experiencia dos años después del diagnóstico

“…El abordaje de dichos cambios supone un reto para la mujer sobre todo cuando desarrolla trabajos físicos (Paul et al, 2016;Vanderpool et al, 2013). Por último, las mujeres más mayores del estudio deben hacer frente a las consecuencias de la enfermedad en el contexto propio del envejecimiento (Angarita et al, 2020). Por tanto, los resultados muestran como la falta de apoyo instrumental en la fase de seguimiento favorece las desigualdades sociales y las mujeres con menos ingresos y más edad serán más susceptible de no poder atender las consecuencias de la enfermedad (Dialla et al, 2012;Puigpinós-Riera et al, 2018).…”

The life experiences of living liver donors: A qualitative meta‐synthesis

“…Each item was rated either 1 (if they met the criteria) or 0 (if they did not meet the criteria), and the summative score was suggested for individual studies. Study quality was rated as high (scores from 16 to 21), medium (scores from 11 to 15), or low (scores < 11; Angarita et al, 2020). Both researchers independently conducted the quality assessment and reached a consensus through discussion (Table 1).…”

“…Study quality was rated as high (scores from 16 to 21), medium (scores from 11 to 15), or low (scores < 11; Angarita et al, 2020).…”

Geriatric Breast Cancer: Staging, Molecular Surrogates, and Treatment. A Review & Meta-analysis

“…Unless there are significant barriers, therapeutic indifference or undertreatment should be avoided, and adequate therapy should be provided [ 31 ]. Proactive discussions about treatment with healthcare providers may benefit older women by addressing their unique needs, personalizing cancer care, and easing the healthcare system process [ 32 ]. Older women receive less preventative or adjuvant treatment and due to underrepresentation in clinical trials, older women with BC are poorly evaluated and treated [ 30 ].…”