ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Autism spectrum disorder (hereafter, autism) is a common neurodevelopmental condition. Core traits can range from subtle to severe and fluctuate depending on context. Individuals can present for diagnostic assessments during childhood or adulthood. However, waiting times for assessment are typically lengthy, and many individuals wait months or even years to be seen. Traditionally, there has been a lack of standardization between services regarding how many and which multidisciplinary health professionals are involved in the assessment and the methods (diagnostic tools) that are used. The COVID-19 pandemic has affected routine service provision because of stay-at-home mandates and social distancing guidelines. Autism diagnostic services have had to adapt, such as by switching from conducting assessments in person to doing these fully via telehealth (defined as the use of remote technologies for the provision of health care) or using blended in-person or telehealth methods. OBJECTIVE: This study explored health professionals' experiences of and perspectives about conducting telehealth autism diagnostic assessments, including barriers and facilitators to this, during the COVID-19 pandemic; potential telehealth training and supervision needs of health professionals; how the quality and effectiveness of telehealth autism diagnostic services can be enhanced; and experiences of delivering postdiagnostic support remotely. METHODS: A total of 45 health professionals, working in varied settings across England, participated in one-off, in-depth semistructured qualitative interviews. These were conducted via videoconferencing or telephone. Altogether, participants represented 7 professional disciplines (psychiatry, medicine, psychology, speech and language therapy, occupational therapy, nursing, and social work). The data were then analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Thematic analysis indicated the following 7 themes: practicalities of telehealth, telehealth autism diagnostic assessments, diagnostic conclusions, clinical considerations, postdiagnostic support, future ways of working, and health professionals' experiences and needs. Overall, telehealth autism diagnostic assessments were deemed by many participants to be convenient, flexible, and efficient for some patients, families, and health professionals. However, not all patients could be assessed in this way, for example, because of digital poverty, complex clinical presentation, or concerns about risk and safeguarding. Working remotely encouraged innovation, including the development of novel assessment measures. However, some participants expressed significant concerns about the validity and reliability of remotely assessing social communication conditions. CONCLUSIONS: A shift to telehealth meant that autism diagnostic services remained operational during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, this method of working has potentially affected the parity of service, with people presenting with clinical complexity having to potentially wait longer to be seen or given a diagnostic opinion. There is also a lack of standardization in the provision of services. Further research should identify evidence-based ways of enhancing the timeliness, accessibility, and robustness of the autism diagnostic pathway, as well as the validity and reliability of telehealth methods.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most common forms of cancer amongst males. Men's coping responses are an important determinant of functioning and adjustment to this disease. Previous qualitative research exists in this area, but the current review sought to systematically review and summarise these studies. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to identify studies concerned with men's coping strategies in their attempts to live with PCa. A search of relevant electronic databases was conducted to identify studies that met inclusion criteria for this review. Methodological quality assessment was also undertaken for each included study. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-one publications were identified for initial screening, and 18 studies were included in the review. A total of five coping strategy categories or 'meta-themes' were identified across included studies. These categories were labelled 'avoidance, minimisation, and withdrawal', 'directing cognition and attention', 'reframing masculinity and seeking support', 'retain pre-illness identity and lifestyle', and 'symptom/side-effect management'. CONCLUSIONS: A range of coping strategies were reported by men with PCa. Some of these strategies appear to be partially influenced by gender roles and masculinities. Coping meta-themes reported in this review have also been found in other research on men's coping. Strategies relating to flexible interpretation of gender roles/masculinities may be a particularly relevant category of coping responses due to the hypothesised beneficial impact of flexibility on psychological well-being. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: PCa survivors utilise a range of coping strategies, and the types of strategies used may have implications for men's well-being. The ability to be flexible in both coping responses used, and in the view of oneself as a man may be particularly important skills in meeting the challenges associated with this disease.
