ABSTRACT
Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is common and can be distressing for some survivors. There is increasing interest in measuring levels of CRF, highlighting its impact on quality of life. This review describes the nature and scope of evidence relating to interventions for CRF. Scoping review methodology was used to identify studies, extract data, collate and summarise results. Data were collated according to cancer tumour streams, stage of illness and the types of trial interventions. A total of 447 trials and 37 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria. Nine papers reported longitudinal results. Populations studied were predominantly of mixed cancer diagnoses and breast cancer. The most frequent interventions were exercise, pharmacological, psycho-education and mind-body interventions. Fatigue was identified as a primary outcome measure (OM) in 58% of studies, with 58 different fatigue measures reported. Emerging evidence exists for the effectiveness of fatigue interventions for some cancer types. More research on interventions with participants with the same cancer type and illness phase is needed. Measurement of severity and impact of CRF using fewer, robust OMs will permit comparisons across studies.
Subject(s)
Fatigue/therapy , Neoplasms/complications , Quality of Life , Clinical Trials as Topic , Complementary Therapies/methods , Exercise Therapy/methods , Fatigue/etiology , Female , Humans , Male , Nutritional Support , Psychotherapy/methods , Sample SizeABSTRACT
This paper introduces a theoretical framework that recognises the rehabilitation needs of people who have cancer and offers a multi-tiered model to meet these needs. Various models for providing survivorship care have been previously proposed, giving rise to multiple possible delivery systems. Existing cancer rehabilitation frameworks recognise different phases of illness, goals of care and the need for services at all stages of illness. The 'Stained Glass Cancer Rehabilitation Framework' incorporates survivor needs and rehabilitation modalities, arranged in a practical hierarchy and builds on earlier models. A broad view of rehabilitation services considers complexity, temporal and geographic factors. Recognition that needs emerge over time demands a routine long-term approach to screening for physical, functional and psychosocial rehabilitation needs by medical and other health professionals. New methods of care delivery and coordination from specialist to primary care settings are needed, long after treatment is completed. Service delivery infrastructure supported by funding reform and training of rehabilitation professionals in delivering appropriate interventions for cancer survivors is essential, together with more research into cancer rehabilitation interventions, functional outcomes and their delivery.
