ABSTRACT
Introduction According to Braun and Clarke, thematic analysis (TA) is a family of methods that entail familiarization with the data;generating initial codes;conceptualizing, reviewing, naming, and defining themes;and writing a report. We conducted a multicentric qualitative study investigating the experiences of individuals treated for cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic in different language regions and countries. We aim to describe our procedures for selecting an approach to TA;generating codes;and conceptualizing themes and sub themes capturing common and distinct experiences across sites. Methods Our team was comprised of multilingual investigators from Switzerland and the United States. We formed site-specific workgroups to recruit local participants and conduct interviews in one of five languages. Principal challenges were to (a) ensure consistency in qualitative data collection;(b) construct shared interpretations of qualitative data while preserving context-specific nuance;and (c) develop and maintain a large data set supporting iterative analyses by multiple workgroups. Results Adopting a pragmatic worldview, we planned and conducted a codebook TA. We validated data collection materials with each workgroup;developed a codebook;analyzed data deductively and inductively;and used MAX QDA software to facilitate data management. Table 1 details our approach. Conclusions Investigators using TA in disparate contexts face unique methodological challenges. Research to establish best practices is warranted.
ABSTRACT
Introduction Literature on the impact of COVID-19 on cancer patients pointed towards an increase in uncertainty, anxiety, fear and distress. Our aim was to analyze cancer patient-reported experiences through a qualitative approach to identify their potential concerns, needs and resources during the pandemic and to evaluate their levels of distress and resilience. Methods Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted after the second wave, March to July 2021, with cancer patients from three hospitals in the French-speaking part of Switzerland. Transcripts were analyzed using an iterative thematic analysis approach. Quantitative data included measurement of distress and resilience by the NCCN distress thermometer and the 2-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale. Results Patients with lung, breast, colon cancer or melanoma were included (n=35). Mean distress score was 2 (SD=2.1) and mean resilience score was 6.7 (SD=1.3). Thematic analysis highlighted five themes evoking changes in life, concerns, cancer care, resources and vaccination. Conclusions Cancer patients from the French-speaking part of Switzerland reported relatively low distress and high resilience. Nevertheless, interviews revealed COVID-related elements having an influence on patients' lives and trajectory of care. These results allow for a better understanding of the cancer patients' experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland and provide suggestions for better support.
ABSTRACT
Introduction Cancer patients have experienced higher rates of distress than the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to provide a thorough overview of studies assessing distress and resilience reflecting distinct temporal and geographical characteristics of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A search was conducted through PubMed to identify studies that measured distress and/or resilience in cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Information about each study's country, instruments, data collection period, and scores were extracted by two researchers as part of an analysis of approaches to capture cancer patients' experiences. Reports of daily new cases per country were retrieved from the WHO database. Results We identified 13 studies that assessed distress and/or resilience from 10 countries. The Distress thermometer (n=9) and the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (n=3) were the most common measures. Data collection ranged from December 2019 to August 2021, with 7 studies conducted during the first wave (March-July 2020), 4 between July 2020- March 2021, and 2 after June 2021. Overall, the highest scores of distress were seen in the first phase of the pandemic and resilience scores were similar to the mean score described for cancer patients. Conclusions Distress values might be influenced by temporal and local circumstances. Due to the disparate evolution of the pandemic across countries, special attention should be given to describing the specific context when reporting psycho-social data.