A virtuous framework for professional reflection.

Reflection on professional practice (either individually or in dialogue with peers or seniors) will often focus on doctors' skills. This approach emphasises compliance and competence. This paper suggests that an alternative and useful lens for professional reflection and development can be drawn from the framework of virtue ethics to encourage consideration of the ultimate purpose of medicine, and the character or virtues needed to be a good doctor. This alternative approach supports doctors to reflect on and develop their virtues, including practical wisdom, which orchestrates the doctor's skills and virtues. This emphasis on purpose and character within professional reflection promotes excellence, rather than just competency, and engages with what motivated most doctors to enter medicine.

Improving personalised care and support planning for people living with treatable-but-not-curable cancer.

People living with treatable-but-not-curable (TbnC) cancer encounter cancer-related needs. While the NHS long-term plan commits to offering a Holistic Needs Assessment (HNA) and care plan to all people diagnosed with cancer, the content, delivery and timing of this intervention differs across practice. Understanding how people make sense of their cancer experience can support personalised care. A conceptual framework based on personal narratives of living with and beyond cancer (across different cancer types and all stages of the disease trajectory), identified three interlinked themes: Adversity, Restoration and Compatibility, resulting in the ARC framework.Our aim was to use the ARC framework to underpin the HNA to improve the experience of personalised care and support planning for people living with TbnC cancer. We used clinical work experience to operationalise the ARC framework and develop the intervention, called the ARC HNA, and service-level structure, called the ARC clinic. We sought expert input on the proposed content and structure from patients and clinicians through involvement and engagement activities. Delivered alongside standard care, the ARC HNA was piloted with patients on the TbnC cancer (myeloma and metastatic breast, prostate or lung) pathway, who were 6-24 months into their treatment. Iterations were made to the content, delivery and timing of the intervention based on user feedback.Fifty-one patients received the intervention. An average of 12 new concerns were identified per patient, and 96% of patients achieved at least one of their goals. Patients valued the space for reflection and follow-up, and clinicians valued the collaborative approach to meeting patients' supportive care needs. Compared with routine initial HNA and care plan completion rates of 13%, ARC clinic achieved 90% with all care plans shared with general practitioners. The ARC clinic adopts a novel and proactive approach to delivering HNAs and care plans in a meaningful and personalised way.

Prehabilitation in the lung cancer pathway: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is the third most common type of cancer in the UK. Treatment outcomes are poor and UK deaths from lung cancer are higher than any other cancer. Prehabilitation has shown to be an important means of preparing patients both physically and psychologically for cancer treatment. However, little is understood about the context and mechanisms of prehabilitation that can impact physiological and psychological wellbeing. Our aim was to review and summarise primary research on prehabilitation in the lung cancer pathway using a realist approach. METHODS: A scoping review of empirical primary research was conducted. Five online medical databases from 2016 - February 2023 were searched. All articles reporting on prehabilitation in lung cancer were included in the review. For this review, prehabilitation was defined as either a uni-modal or multi-modal intervention including exercise, nutrition and/or psychosocial support within a home, community or hospital based setting. A realist framework of context, mechanism and outcome was used to assist with the interpretation of findings. RESULTS: In total, 31 studies were included in the review, of which, three were published study protocols. Over 95% of studies featured an exercise component as part of a prehabilitation programme. Twenty-six of the studies had a surgical focus. Only two studies reported using theory to underpin the design of this complex intervention. There was large heterogeneity across all studies as well as a lack of clinical trials to provide definitive evidence on the programme design, setting, type of intervention, patient criteria, delivery, duration and outcome measures used. CONCLUSION: A standardised prehabilitation programme for lung cancer patients does not yet exist. Future lung cancer prehabilitation programmes should take into account patient led values, needs, goals, support structures and beliefs, as these factors can affect the delivery and engagement of interventions. Future research should consider using a conceptual framework to conceptualise the living with and beyond cancer experience to help shape and inform personalised prehabilitation services.

Is personalised prehabilitation feasible to implement for patients undergoing oncological treatment for lung cancer at a London teaching hospital? Protocol of a feasibility trial.

INTRODUCTION: There is significant potential to improve outcomes for patients with lung cancer in terms of quality of life and survival. There is some evidence that prehabilitation can help, but, to date, this has only been tested in surgical populations, despite 70%-80% of patients with lung cancer in the UK receiving non-surgical treatment. The physiological and psychological benefits of prehabilitation seen in surgical patients could be extrapolated to those receiving non-surgical treatment, particularly in such a poor prognosis group. With patients and healthcare professionals, we have co-designed a personalised and evidence-based prehabilitation programme. This draws on a conceptual framework that aligns with patient values and needs as well as functional goals. We aim to investigate whether this programme is feasible to implement and evaluate in clinical practice. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An open-label, single-group feasibility study incorporating quantitative assessments, a qualitative free text questionnaire and reflective field notes. Thirty participants will be recruited over an eight-month period from a single London teaching hospital. All recruited participants will receive a personalised prehabilitation programme during their oncological treatment. This includes a one-hour face-to-face appointment prior to, at week three and at week six of their treatment regimen as well as a weekly telephone call. Interventions including nutrition, physical activity and psychological well-being are stratified according to a patient's priorities, level of readiness and expressed needs. The primary outcome will be feasibility of the personalised prehabilitation programme in clinical practice by investigating areas of uncertainty regarding patient recruitment, attrition, treatment fidelity, intervention adherence and acceptability of study outcome measures. Secondary outcomes will include quality of life, functional capacity and grip strength. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the Health Research Authority (reference number 22/PR/0390). Results of this study will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed articles, presentations at scientific conferences and in collaboration with patient and public involvement representatives. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05318807.

Feasibility of Implementation and the Impact of a Digital Prehabilitation Service in Patients Undergoing Treatment for Oesophago-Gastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Home-based and supervised prehabilitation programmes are shown to have a positive impact on outcomes in patients with oesophago-gastric (OG) cancer. The primary aim of this study was to establish the feasibility of delivering a digital prehabilitation service. METHODS: Patients undergoing treatment for OG cancer with curative intent were recruited into the study. During the COVID-19 pandemic, patients were offered a digital prehabilitation service. Following the lifting of COVID-19 restrictions, patients were also offered both a hybrid clinic-based in-person service and a digital service. Implementation and clinical metrics from the two prehabilitation models were compared. RESULTS: 31 of 41 patients accepted the digital service (75%). Of the people who started the digital programme, 3 dropped out (10%). Compliance with the weekly touchpoints was 86%, and the median length of programme was 12 weeks. Twenty-six patients enrolled in the in-person service. Two patients dropped out (10%). Average compliance to weekly touchpoints was 71%, and the median length of programme was 10 weeks. In the digital group, sit to stand (STS) increased from 14.5 (IQR 10.5-15.5) to 16 (IQR 16-22); p = 0.02. Median heart rate recovery (HRR) increased from 10.5 (IQR 7.5-14) to 15.5 (IQR 11-20) bpm; p = 0.24. There was a significant drop in distress (median 3 (IQR 0-5) to 1 (IQR 0-2); p = 0.04) and a small drop in anxiety (median 3 (0-5) to 2 (0-3); p = 0.22). There was no difference in the postoperative complication rate and length of hospital stay between the two groups. DISCUSSION: This study has shown that digital prehabilitation can be delivered effectively to patients with OG cancer, with high engagement and retention rates. We observed improvements in some physical and psychological parameters with the digital service, with comparable clinical outcomes to the in-person service.

Views of advance care planning in older hospitalized patients following an emergency admission: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence of the need to consider advance care planning (ACP) for older adults who have been recently admitted to hospital as an emergency. However, there is a gap in knowledge regarding how to facilitate ACP following acute illness in later life. AIM/OBJECTIVES: To explore the perceived impact of ACP on the lives of older persons aged 70+ who have been acutely admitted to hospital. METHOD: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with older adults aged 70+ who were admitted to hospital as an emergency. Thematic analysis was enhanced by dual coding and exploration of divergent views within an interdisciplinary team. RESULTS: Twenty participants were interviewed. Thematic analysis generated the following themes: (1) Bespoke planning to holistically support a sense of self, (2) ACP as a socio-cultural phenomenon advocating for older persons rights, (3) The role of personal relationships, (4) Navigating unfamiliar territory and (5) Harnessing resources. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that maintaining a sense of personal identity and protecting individuals' wishes and rights during ACP is important to older adults who have been acutely unwell. Following emergency hospitalization, older persons believe that ACP must be supported by a network of relationships and resources, improving the likelihood of adequate preparation to navigate the uncertainties of future care in later life. Therefore, emergency hospitalization in later life, and the uncertainty that may follow, may provide a catalyst for patients, carers and healthcare professionals to leverage existing or create new relationships and target resources to enable ACP, in order to uphold older persons' identity, rights and wishes following acute illness.

Coping With the Emotional Impact of Working in Cancer Care: The Importance of Team Working and Collective Processing.

Hospitals provide the vast majority of cancer care. A necessary focus on survival has meant that they are less well-developed in terms of supporting patients with the emotional impact of cancer; and in supporting the frontline staff who contend with this. An integration of psychotherapeutic and neurobiological findings is used to develop an understanding of the patient-staff relationship and impact of high levels of distress within it. This includes reference to Transference and Countertransference, Mirror Neurons and Poly Vagal Theory. This paper considers how patients can unconsciously "transfer" emotional distress on to healthcare practitioners; and how this evokes an emotional response from the practitioner via the mirror neuron system (MNS). This can allow the practitioner to "feel into" the patient's experience and develop a more nuanced understanding. However, it may also activate emotions connected to the practitioner's life and can leave them feeling overwhelmed. The practitioner's capacity to regulate their own emotional arousal, via the vagus nerve, has a significant impact on their ability to support the patient and themselves within emotionally distressing interactions. This dynamic often unfolds without either party having significant awareness of it. A Systemic and Process-Oriented perspective is taken to understand this within the broader context of a hospital-based structure; and consider how practitioners on frontline teams may or may not support each other in working collectively with high levels of distress. A team's level of understanding and attunement to emotional experiences as well their primary relational and communication style has significant bearing on capacity for emotion-and-relationship focused coping. A failure to work with the emotional and relational interconnection between patients and staff can contribute to isolated patients, disconnected staff, conflict within teams and an overarching system lacking in compassion. However, due to the often unconscious nature of such processes and limited understanding or training on them, they are regularly left unaddressed. Over time, this can have an accumulated effect on everyone. Group-based collective processing is considered in terms of how it can be used in supporting practitioners to integrate an emotional and relational way of working with a problem-focused approach and integrated into regular daily working.

Co-designing an intervention to increase uptake of advance care planning in later life following emergency hospitalisation: a research protocol using accelerated experience-based co-design (AEBCD) and the behaviour change wheel (BCW).

INTRODUCTION: Despite the potential benefits of advance care planning, uptake in older adults is low. In general, there is a lack of guidance as to how to initiate advance care planning conversations and encourage individuals to take action in planning their future care, including after emergency hospitalisation. Participatory action research methods are harnessed in health services research to design interventions that are relevant to end-users and stakeholders. This study aims to involve older persons, carers and healthcare professionals in co-designing an intervention to increase uptake of advance care planning in later life, which can be used by social contacts and healthcare professionals, particularly in the context of a recent emergency hospitalisation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The theory-driven participatory design research method integrates and adapts accelerated experience-based co-design with the behaviour change wheel, in the form of a collaborative multi-stakeholder co-design workshop. In total, 12 participants, comprising 4 lay persons aged 70+, 4 carers and 4 healthcare professionals with experience in elder care, will be recruited to participate in two online half-day sessions, together comprising one online workshop. There will be a maximum of two workshops. First, in the discovery phase, participants will reflect on findings from earlier qualitative research on views and experiences of advance care planning from three workstreams: patients, carers and healthcare professionals. Second, in the co-design phase, participants will explore practical mechanisms in which older persons aged 70+ can be encouraged to adopt advance care planning behaviours based on the behaviour change wheel, in order to co-design a behavioural intervention to increase uptake of advance care planning in older adults after an emergency hospitalisation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the Science Engineering Technology Research Ethics Committee at Imperial College London (Reference: 19IC5538). The findings from this study will be disseminated through publications, conferences and meetings.

Views of advance care planning in caregivers of older hospitalised patients following an emergency admission: A qualitative study.

This study explores the views of advance care planning in caregivers of older hospitalised patients following an emergency admission. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight carers, mostly with a personal relationship to the older patient. Thematic analysis generated three themes: (1) working with uncertainty - it all sounds very fine. . . what is the reality?, (2) supporting the older person - you have to look at it on an individual basis and (3) enabling the process - when you do it properly. The belief that advance care planning can support older individuals and scepticism whether advance care planning can be enabled among social and healthcare challenges are discussed.

'Still living with it even though it's gone': Using interpretive phenomenological analysis to explore shared experiences of living with and beyond breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Living with and beyond cancer is an increasingly common experience. While research is uncovering valuable individual experiences of those living with and beyond cancer, it has been argued that this idiographic approach is limited in outlook, reach and impact. This study contributes to the understanding of what it means to live with and beyond cancer by complementing idiographic knowledge with multiple perspectives from a group of participants who are living with and beyond cancer, to explore how individual experiences may be relevant to others. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with people who had received treatment for breast (n = 6), prostate (n = 6) or colorectal cancer (n = 6). Data were analysed using interpretive phenomenological analysis. The early findings were then shared with a wider group of people who had received treatment for breast, prostate or colorectal cancer (n = 26) in six focus groups, to explore whether they had similar experiences. RESULTS: While individual accounts of living with and beyond cancer detail unique features specific to each person's experience, focus group discussions illustrated how participant life worlds interact and overlap. The findings identified thematic similarities within and between individual and group levels and across cancer types. Three super-ordinate themes describe the shared experience of living with and beyond cancer: i) the cancer shock, ii) managing cancer and getting through and iii) getting over cancer. CONCLUSIONS: A multiple perspective approach informs our understanding of shared experiences of living with and beyond cancer. This knowledge can be used to direct, design, and deliver relevant supportive cancer care.

Tracking cancer patients during COVID-19 using structured outcomes and keywords.

For the duration of COVID-19, cancer pathways will be affected by the significant loss of elective capacity and increased risk of COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality for cancer patients. Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust (ICHT) has developed a simple, effective MDT recording process, using keywords, to support the tracking of patients who require treatment prioritisation, repeated clinical/MDT reviews and/or need adjustments to their treatment. Following implementation in April, the percentage of MDT outcomes with keywords recorded was 79% in June and 77% for the first two weeks of July. Analysis of the 3,680 MDT outcomes with at least one key word recorded showed that 96% had the 'intention to proceed' recorded. For 59% patients, the decision was to 'proceed', 5% patients are being monitored, 3% patients have been deferred and 29% were 'closed'. While this process adds time to busy MDTs, we hypothesise that it will support the tracking and safety-netting of thousands of cancer patients whose care has been affected by the pandemic. The process could easily be implemented in other trusts and adapted for other specialties.

Towards a standardised method of patient prioritisation that accounts for clinical harm.

COVID-19 has highlighted the need for a standardised approach for prioritising patients requiring elective care. The Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCS) developed guidance at the start of the pandemic for prioritising surgical patients based on the urgency of different procedures. Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust (ICHT) has extended this to all aspects of elective care to enable standardised decision-making based on clinical priority, clinical harm and patient vulnerability. This was a clinically led project that involved close collaboration with lay partners, who were concerned that the RCS guidance lacked the sensitivity to reflect individual patients' needs. Our novel elective care recovery matrix is designed to be applicable across all elective care services and at Trust or system level. Implementation at ICHT progressed rapidly: as of 28 August 2020 >200 consultants have received training on the process and 58% of all surgical orders have been prioritised using the new framework (5,134/8,800). While COVID-19 was the driver, the applicability can be wider and could inform new ways of working. The framework enables rapid quantification of individual patient care requirements, thus enabling clinicians to target more accurately those patients with the greatest need and those who would see the greatest benefit.

Advance care planning in older hospitalised patients following an emergency admission: A mixed methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Although advance care planning may be beneficial for older adults in the last year of life, its relevance following an emergency hospitalisation requires further investigation. This study quantifies the one-year mortality outcomes of all emergency admissions for patients aged 70+ years and explores patient views on the value of advance care planning following acute hospitalisation. METHOD: This mixed methods study used a two-stage approach: firstly, a quantitative longitudinal cohort study exploring the one-year mortality of patients aged 70+ admitted as an emergency to a large multi-centre hospital cohort; secondly, a qualitative semi-structured interview study gathering information on patient views of advance care planning. RESULTS: There were 14,260 emergency admissions for 70+-year olds over a 12-month period. One-year mortality for admissions across all conditions was 22.6%. The majority of these deaths (59.3%) were within 3 months of admission. Binary logistic regression analysis indicated higher one-year mortality with increasing age and male sex. Interviews with 20 patients resulted in one superordinate theme, "Planning for health and wellbeing in the spectrum of illness". Sub-themes entitled (1) Advance care planning benefitting healthcare for physical and psycho-social health, (2) Contemplation of physical deterioration death and dying and 3) Collaborating with healthcare professionals to undertake advance care planning, suggest that views of advance care planning are shaped by experiences of acute hospitalisation. CONCLUSION: Since approximately 1 in 5 patients aged 70+ admitted to hospital as an emergency are in the last year of life, acute hospitalisation can act as a trigger for tailored ACP. Older hospitalised patients believe that advance care planning can benefit physical and psychosocial health and that discussions should consider a spectrum of possibilities, from future health to the potential of chronic illness, disability and death. In this context, patients may look for expertise from healthcare professionals for planning their future care.

Ketamine infusion for 96 hr after thoracotomy: Effects on acute and persistent pain.

INTRODUCTION: Pain which persists after thoracotomy is well recognized, and activation of the N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor could be a contributing factor. This study sought to establish whether ketamine given peri-operatively could reduce persistent post-surgical pain. TRIAL DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial comparing low-dose intravenous ketamine and saline placebo. METHODS: Seventy patients undergoing thoracotomy were randomized to receive either intravenous ketamine (0.1 mg kg-1  hr-1 ) or saline placebo for 96 hr, starting 10 min prior to surgery. A bolus dose of 0.1 mg/kg of ketamine/placebo was given prior to starting the infusion. Post-operative analgesia consisted of either an epidural infusion or patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), +/- a paravertebral infusion of local anaesthetic. Pain scores and opioid consumption were collected at 24 and 48 hr after surgery. Patients completed numeric pain scores (NPS), modified Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), the short form Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (S-Lanss) at baseline, 6 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in post-operative pain, except the ketamine group reported less pain at rest 48 hr after surgery (p = 0.03). The ketamine group requested significantly less morphine via PCA in the first 24 hr (p = 0.03). There were no differences in pain measures or opioid consumption at 6 weeks, 3, 6 or 12 months. Patients in the ketamine group were more lightheaded (p = 0.02) and experienced more vivid dreams (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Ketamine reduced opioid consumption compared to placebo after surgery, but we were unable to detect any differences in persistent post-surgical pain between the groups. SIGNIFICANCE: This study adds to the growing body of evidence advocating the use of ketamine to reduce opioid consumption. No previous studies of peri-operative ketamine have followed patients for a year after thoracotomy. This study found no reduction in persistent post-surgical pain.

Conceptual framework for living with and beyond cancer: A systematic review and narrative synthesis.

OBJECTIVE: The concept of living with and beyond cancer is now emerging in policy and literature. Rather than viewing this notion simply as a linear timeline, developing an agreed understanding of the lived experience of people affected by cancer will aid the development of person-centred models of care. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted. The review question was "What does the term 'living with and beyond cancer' mean to people affected by cancer?" The protocol for the review was preregistered in the PROSPERO database (PROSPERO CRD42017059860). All included studies were qualitative, so narrative synthesis was used to integrate descriptions and definitions of living with and beyond cancer into an empirically based conceptual framework. RESULTS: Out of 2345 papers that were identified and 180 that were reviewed, a total of 73 papers were included. The synthesis yielded three interlinked themes: Adversity (realising cancer), Restoration (readjusting life with cancer), and Compatibility (reconciling cancer), resulting in the ARC framework. CONCLUSIONS: Three themes describe the experience of living with and beyond cancer: adversity, restoration, and compatibility. The ARC framework provides an empirically informed grounding for future research and practice in supportive cancer care for this population.

Prioritizing medication safety in care of people with cancer: clinicians' views on main problems and solutions.

BACKGROUND: Cancer care is liable to medication errors due to the complex nature of cancer treatment, the common presence of comorbidities and the involvement of a number of clinicians in cancer care. While the frequency of medication errors in cancer care has been reported, little is known about their causal factors and effective prevention strategies. With a unique insight into the main safety issues in cancer treatment, frontline staff can help close this gap. In this study, we aimed to identify medication safety priorities in cancer patient care according to clinicians in North West London using PRIORITIZE, a novel priority-setting approach. METHODS: The project steering group determined the scope, the context and the criteria for prioritization. We then invited North West London cancer care clinicians to identify and prioritize main causes for, and solutions to, medication errors in cancer care. Forty cancer care providers submitted their suggestions which were thematically synthesized into a composite list of 20 distinct problems and 22 solutions. A group of 26 clinicians from the initial cohort ranked the composite list of suggestions using predetermined criteria. RESULTS: The top ranked problems focused on patients' poor understanding of treatments due to language or education difficulties, clinicians' insufficient attention to patients' psychological distress, and inadequate information sharing among health care providers. The top ranked solutions were provision of guidance to patients and their carers on what to do when unwell, pre-chemotherapy work-up for all patients and better staff training. Overall, clinicians considered improved communication between health care providers, quality assurance procedures (during prescription and monitoring stages) and patient education as key strategies for improving cancer medication safety. Prescribing stage was identified as the most vulnerable to medication safety threats. The highest ranked suggestions received the strongest agreement among the clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: Clinician-identified priorities for reducing medication errors in cancer care addressed various aspects of cancer treatment. Our findings open up an opportunity to assess the congruence between health care professional suggestions, currently implemented patient safety policies and evidence base.

Preventing delayed diagnosis of cancer: clinicians' views on main problems and solutions.

BACKGROUND: Delayed diagnosis is a major contributing factor to the UK's lower cancer survival compared to many European countries. In the UK, there is a significant national variation in early cancer diagnosis. Healthcare providers can offer an insight into local priorities for timely cancer diagnosis. In this study, we aimed to identify the main problems and solutions relating to delay cancer diagnosis according to cancer care clinicians. METHODS: We developed and implemented a new priority-setting approach called PRIORITIZE and invited North West London cancer care clinicians to identify and prioritize main causes for and solutions to delayed diagnosis of cancer care. RESULTS: Clinicians identified a number of concrete problems and solutions relating to delayed diagnosis of cancer. Raising public awareness, patient education as well as better access to specialist care and diagnostic testing were seen as the highest priorities. The identified suggestions focused mostly on the delays during referrals from primary to secondary care. CONCLUSIONS: Many identified priorities were feasible, affordable and converged around common themes such as public awareness, care continuity and length of consultation. As a timely, proactive and scalable priority-setting approach, PRIORITZE could be implemented as a routine preventative system for determining patient safety issues by frontline staff.