Purpose. To systematically review clinical studies examining the effectiveness of nonpharmacological methods to prevent/minimize salivary gland damage due to radioiodine treatment of differentiated thyroid carcinoma (DTC). Methods. Reports on relevant trials were identified by searching the PubMed, CINHAL, Cochrane, and Scopus electronic databases covering the period 01/2000–10/2015. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were prespecified. Search yielded eight studies that were reviewed by four of the present authors. Results. Nonpharmacological methods used in trials may reduce salivary gland damage induced by radioiodine. Sialogogues such as lemon candy, vitamin E, lemon juice, and lemon slice reduced such damage significantly (p < 0.0001, p < 0.05, p < 0.10, and p < 0.05, resp.). Parotid gland massage also reduced the salivary damage significantly (p < 0.001). Additionally, vitamin C had some limited effect (p = 0.37), whereas no effect was present in the case of chewing gum (p = 0.99). Conclusion. The review showed that, among nonpharmacological interventions, sialogogues and parotid gland massage had the greatest impact on reducing salivary damage induced by radioiodine therapy of DTC. However, the studies retrieved were limited in number, sample size, strength of evidence, and generalizability. More randomized controlled trials of these methods with multicenter scope and larger sample sizes will provide more systematic and reliable results allowing more definitive conclusions.

Breast cancer (BC) early screening and detection is a main component for the outcome of the treatment and overall survival. Informal caregivers (ICGs) are less likely to initiate early BC screening methods and utilize health services. The purpose of this study was to explore ICGs’ knowledge and perceptions, including educational and training opportunities or barriers, in promoting early detection practices for BC, as well as healthcare professionals’ (HCP) respective perceptions concerning ICGs in order to identify the need of selected health literacy interventions. A qualitative focus group study was implemented in 3 European countries, using a purposive sampling technique. In total, 26 ICGs and 18 HCPs were involved. The themes that emerged from the focus groups interviews included knowledge, perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs concerning BC; motivational factors and barriers that influence early screening practices and personal involvement. Motivators and barriers concerning BC screening adherence were linked to knowledge, beliefs and perceptions. Health promotion strategies and user-friendly tools should be developed, targeting on the implementation of BC early detection practices among informal caregivers.

No abstract

Background: The clinical assessment of radioiodine -induced sialadenitis is relied on the observer-defined toxicity grading model. However, this model has significant limitations, the major one being the lack of systematic assessment based on objective criteria. The main aim of this study was the development and testing of an assessment tool which could examine the severity of post irradiation sialadenitis.Methods: The development of the Sialadenitis Assessment Tool proceeded through three phases. The first and second phase included a literature review and the development of the tool which derived from the review, respectively. The third phase involved a pilot testing of the Assessment Tool to a sample of 34 patients undergoing I131. The assessment was carried out by two independent HCPs, pre- and post-radioiodine therapy. The results of the assessment tool were compared to other scales, including the DIRIX and EORTC H&N35.Results: The Cohen’s kappa test, suggested that the Sialadenitis Assessment Tool (SAT) is a reliable tool for the assessment of sialadenitis (Cohen’s K =1). The concurrent and internal validity tests, showed a tendency of association with most variables (p <0.001) in the DIRIX s and EORTC QLQ-HN35 scales.Conclusions: Preliminary evidence show that Sialadenitis Assessment Tool is a valid and reliable tool to assess radioiodine-induced sialadenitis in patients undergoing I131 therapy post thyroidectomy.

Objectives: The clinical assessment of radioiodine-induced sialadenitis is relied on the observer-defined toxicity grading model. However, this model has significant limitations, the major one being the lack of systematic assessment based on objective criteria. The main aim of this study was the development and testing of an assessment tool which could examine the severity of post-irradiation sialadenitis. Methods: The development of the Sialadenitis Assessment Tool proceeded through three phases. The first and second phases included a literature review and the development of the tool which derived from the review, respectively. The third phase involved a pilot testing of the Assessment Tool to a sample of 34 patients undergoing I131 therapy. The assessment was carried out by two independent healthcare professionals, pre- and post-radioiodine therapy. The results of the assessment tool were compared with other scales, including the DIRIX and EORTC H&N35. Results: According to the Cohen’s kappa test, the Sialadenitis Assessment Tool is a reliable tool for the assessment of sialadenitis (Cohen’s κ = 1). The concurrent and internal validity tests showed a tendency of association with most variables (p < 0.001) in the DIRIX and EORTC QLQ-HN35 scales. Conclusion: Preliminary evidence show that Sialadenitis Assessment Tool is a valid and reliable tool to assess radioiodine-induced sialadenitis in patients undergoing I131 therapy post-thyroidectomy.

Background: Weekly 10-15 older patients with intestinal cancer are physical assessed by a nurse in order to determine whether the patient is able to receive the second chemotherapy. Many patients are vulnerable and have long geographical distances to the hospital and physically demanding transport time. Family are challenged to be present due to work, other family obligations and geographical distances. The purpose was to investigate how patients, family and nurses experience video consultations as a substitute for physical attendance, in order to understand if it is feasible to assess clinically via screen and to understand barriers and facilitators.