Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
BMJ Open ; 14(3): e081326, 2024 Mar 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38508653

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Little is known regarding how non-specialist nurses communicate with patients living with cancer when the patients are receiving care outside of their cancer units/teams. This scoping review aims to identify, examine and report on the currently available evidence about communication by non-specialist nurses when caring for adults living with cancer outside of their cancer care unit/teams. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A scoping review following the JBI methodology for scoping reviews will be conducted. We will search for empirical studies that meet the inclusion criteria in six databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus and PsycINFO). Handsearching in references of included articles will be performed to find additional articles. The population of interest will be non-specialist nurses. Three concepts will be explored, namely (1) all adult patients living with cancer, (2) a focus on three stages of the cancer continuum of care (cancer diagnosis, treatment and survivorship) and (3) a focus on communication between non-specialist nurses and patients living with cancer. We will include studies describing all healthcare settings outside patients' specialised cancer units or oncology teams. After article selection, two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts and perform a full-text article review, risk of bias assessments and data extraction. A third reviewer will resolve all disagreements. A narrative summary will provide an overview of how the results relate to the research aims and questions. The included articles will be limited to English and published between 2012 and 2023. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval is required since we will use publicly available empirical research sources. This review will provide current research on communication by non-specialist nurses with patients with a cancer diagnosis outside of an oncology setting, evidence that will support effective communication. As such, we aim to disseminate the findings in academic conferences and peer-reviewed journals.


Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Adult , Humans , Neoplasms/therapy , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Delivery of Health Care , Communication , Medical Oncology , Empirical Research , Research Design , Review Literature as Topic
2.
BMC Cancer ; 23(1): 1049, 2023 Nov 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37915009

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A robust evidence base is required to assist healthcare commissioners and providers in selecting effective and sustainable approaches to improve cancer diagnosis and treatment. Such evidence can be difficult to build, given the fast-paced and highly pressured nature of healthcare delivery, the absence of incentives, and the presence of barriers in conducting pragmatic yet robust research evaluations. Cancer Research UK (CRUK) has played an active part in building the evidence base through its funding of programmes to identify, evaluate and scale-up innovative approaches across the UK. The aim of this paper is to describe and explain the research design and intended approach and activities for two cancer services improvement projects in Scotland funded by CRUK. METHODS: A hybrid effectiveness-implementation study design will assess both the efficiency of the new pathways and their implementation strategies, with the aim of generating knowledge for scale-up. A range of implementation, service and clinical outcomes will be assessed as determined by the projects' Theories of Change (ToCs). A naturalistic case study approach will enable in-depth exploration of context and process, and the collection and synthesis of data from multiple sources including routine datasets, patient and staff surveys, in-depth interviews and observational and other data. The evaluations are informed throughout by a patient/public representatives' group, and by small group discussions with volunteer cancer patients. DISCUSSION: Our approach has been designed to provide a holistic understanding of how (well) the improvement projects work (in relation to their anticipated outcomes), and how they interact with their wider contexts. The evaluations will help identify barriers, facilitators, and unanticipated consequences that can impact scalability, sustainability and spread. By opting for a pragmatic, participatory evaluation research design, we hope to inform strategies for scaling up successful innovations while addressing challenges in a targeted manner.


Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Neoplasms , Humans , Surveys and Questionnaires , Scotland , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Neoplasms/therapy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...