What can a third sector organisation provide for people with breast cancer that public health services cannot? Developing support services in response to service evaluation

Baker, Barbara S.; Hoffman, Caroline; Fenlon, Deborah

doi:10.1016/j.eujim.2019.100943

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Across all cross-sectional studies at least 75% of patients indicated they were satisfied with the support services [26,[30][31][32][33]. The most common concerns were emotional and physical concerns and the wish to negotiate the need of self and family and improve coping skills [31,34].…”

Section: Results Of Individual Sources Of Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In all articles, at least 60% of participants were female. The studies were conducted in four different countries, five in the UK [ 27 – 29 , 32 , 34 ], three in Germany [ 25 , 26 , 33 ], three in the USA [ 24 , 30 , 31 ] and one in Canada [ 23 ]. The type of service evaluated differ between the studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One study chose an RCT design [23], six studies were cohort studies with pre-and post-measures [24][25][26][27][28][29] and five studies were cross-sectional with retrospective measures [30][31][32][33][34]. The study populations comprised patients with all types of cancer for eight articles [24-26, 28, 29, 31-33], three included only patients with breast cancer [27,30,34] and one solely patients with breast and colon cancer [23]. One article stated a sample size of < 100 participants [25].…”

Section: Characteristics Of Sources Of Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Eight articles reported a sample size between 101-500 participants [23,24,[26][27][28][30][31][32]. Two articles included between 501-1000 participants [29,34] and one study included 1930 participants [33]. In all articles, at least 60% PLOS ONE…”

Section: Characteristics Of Sources Of Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The type of service evaluated differ between the studies. In eight studies, the support services evaluated offered psychosocial support delivered by health care professionals with focus on psychological and/or social concerns [25,26,28,29,[31][32][33][34]. Two studies focused solely on complementary medicine [24,27] and two offered support by trained cancer survivors (volunteer mentoring) [23,30].…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Evaluations of psychosocial cancer support services: A scoping review

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background A diagnosis of cancer leaves most patients with cancer and their relatives with an increased psychological burden. Throughout the course of the illness, social, occupational or legal changes may lead to psychological distress. Psychosocial cancer support services offer psychological, social and legal support. However, little is known about the effectiveness of psychosocial support services implemented in health care. Therefore, this scoping review aims to provide an overview of current literature evaluating out-patient psychosocial support services. Methods Databases searched were PubMed, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, PsycArticle, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Cochrane, and Embase. Two independent researchers conducted the systematic search. We included studies that were published in English and assessed at least one patient reported outcome measure. Studies that assessed psychotherapy, online support or telephone counselling were excluded. The review was reported according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A search of the databases identified 2104 articles. After excluding duplicates, screening titles, abstracts and full-texts, 12 studies matching the criteria were identified. Results One study was an RCT, six were prospective with no control group and five studies were cross-sectional with one measurement point. The most common outcome measures across studies were well-being, concerns and satisfaction with the support services. Conclusion While the included studies indicate some improvements to well-being for patients with cancer, the low number and lack of high quality of studies indicate these findings should be interpreted with caution. However, high-quality research on the effectiveness of psychosocial support services is needed to determine that the interventions are effective.

show abstract

Section: Results Of Individual Sources Of Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Characteristics Of Sources Of Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Characteristics Of Sources Of Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Evaluations of psychosocial cancer support services: A scoping review

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Unmet supportive care needs of breast cancer survivors: a systematic scoping review

Fan

Wang

et al. 2023

BMC Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer in women worldwide. Though improved treatments and prolonged overall survival, breast cancer survivors (BCSs) persistently suffer from various unmet supportive care needs (USCNs) throughout the disease. This scoping review aims to synthesize current literature regarding USCNs among BCSs. Methods This study followed a scoping review framework. Articles were retrieved from Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Medline from inception through June 2023, as well as reference lists of relevant literature. Peer-reviewed journal articles were included if USCNs among BCSs were reported. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were adopted to screen articles’ titles and abstracts as well as to entirely assess any potentially pertinent records by two independent researchers. Methodological quality was independently appraised following Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools. Content analytic approach and meta-analysis were performed for qualitative and quantitative studies respectively. Results were reported according to the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews. Results A total of 10,574 records were retrieved and 77 studies were included finally. The overall risk of bias was low to moderate. The self-made questionnaire was the most used instrument, followed by The Short-form Supportive Care Needs Survey questionnaire (SCNS-SF34). A total of 16 domains of USCNs were finally identified. Social support (74%), daily activity (54%), sexual/intimacy (52%), fear of cancer recurrence/ spreading (50%), and information support (45%) were the top unmet supportive care needs. Information needs and psychological/emotional needs appeared most frequently. The USCNs was found to be significantly associated with demographic factors, disease factors, and psychological factors. Conclusion BCSs are experiencing a large number of USCNs in fearing of cancer recurrence, daily activity, sexual/intimacy, psychology and information, with proportions ranging from 45% to 74%. Substantial heterogeneity in study populations and assessment tools was observed. There is a need for further research to identify a standard evaluation tool targeted to USCNs on BCSs. Effective interventions based on guidelines should be formulated and conducted to decrease USCNs among BCSs in the future.

show abstract

Gynaecological Cancers in India: The Less Heard Perspectives of Healthcare Providers

Subbiah

Mishra

Dantas

2023

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has been mounting evidence on the role of healthcare providers in chronic illnesses such as cancer. The specific complexities in their roles to enable health are less heard. Gynaecological cancers have several undercurrents beyond the obvious. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare providers in Southern India (n = 35) and the data presented in this article were collected as a part of a larger study on the role of communication in the management of gynaecological cancers in India. Thematic analysis of the qualitative data provided information on the providers’ perspectives of gynaecological cancers. Patient numbers, cost, time, cultural norms, context, and institutional constraints in cancer care provision are just some of the factors impacting care provision. Healthcare providers are typically acknowledged for the criticality of their roles in the continuum of care. However, our research suggests that the psychological harm and challenges they themselves may face in providing that care are severely neglected. Through listening to healthcare provider voices, clear solutions emerge to better support the practice of those who are responsible for cancer care.

show abstract

What can a third sector organisation provide for people with breast cancer that public health services cannot? Developing support services in response to service evaluation

Abstract: What can a third sector organisation provide for people with breast cancer that public health services cannot? Developing support services in response to service evaluation. European

Cited by 3 publications

References 39 publications

Evaluations of psychosocial cancer support services: A scoping review

Evaluations of psychosocial cancer support services: A scoping review

Unmet supportive care needs of breast cancer survivors: a systematic scoping review

Gynaecological Cancers in India: The Less Heard Perspectives of Healthcare Providers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About