Objective This literature review aims to explore the role of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic across the interdisciplinary cancer care team. Data Sources Electronic databases including CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Scopus, and grey literature were searched using Google Scholar up until September 2020. Conclusion While the safe and effective delivery of cancer care via telehealth requires education and training for healthcare professionals and patients, telehealth has provided a timely solution to the barriers caused by the COVID-19 pandemic on the delivery of interdisciplinary cancer services. Globally, evidence has shown that telehealth in cancer care can leverage an innovative response during the COVID-19 pandemic but may provide a long-lasting solution to enable patients to be treated appropriately in their home environment. Telehealth reduces the travel burden on patients for consultation, affords a timely solution to discuss distressing side effects, initiate interventions, and enable possible treatment additions and/or changes. Implications for Nursing Practice Global public health disasters pose significant and unique challenges to the provision of necessary services for people affected by cancer. Oncology nurses can provide a central contribution in the delivery of telehealth through transformational leadership across all domains and settings in cancer care. Oncology nurses provide the “hub of cancer care” safely embedded in the interdisciplinary team. Telehealth provides a solution to the current global health crisis but could also benefit the future provision of services and broad reach clinical trials.

To systematically evaluate evidence regarding the unmet supportive care needs of men and women affected by chemotherapy induced alopecia (CIA) to inform clinical practice guidelines. Methods:We performed a review of CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Scopus, the Cochrane Library (CCRT and CDSR) controlled trials databases and clinicaltrials.gov from January 1990 to June 2019 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. Twenty-seven publications were selected for inclusion in this analysis.Results: Included reports used qualitative (ten) and quantitative (seventeen) studies. Across these studies men and women reported the major impact that CIA had on their psychological well-being, quality of life and body image. Hair loss had a negative impact irrespective of gender, which resulted in feelings of vulnerability and visibility of being a "cancer patient". Men and women described negative feelings, often similar, related to CIA with a range of unmet supportive care needs.Conclusions: Some patients are not well prepared for alopecia due to a lack of information and resources to reduce the psychological burden associated with CIA. Hair loss will affect each patient and their family differently, therefore intervention and support must be tailored at an individual level of need to optimise psychological and physical well-being and recovery.Implications for Cancer Survivors: People affected by CIA may experience a range of unmet supportive care needs and oncology doctors and nurses are urged to use these findings in their everyday consultations to ensure effective, person-centred care and timely intervention to minimise the sequalae associated with CIA.

Aims and Objectives:To explore organisation-wide experiences of person-centred care and risk assessment practices using existing healthcare organisation documentation.Background: There is increasing emphasis on multidimensional risk assessments during hospital admission. However, little is known about how nurses use multidimensional assessment documentation in clinical practice to address preventable harms and optimise person-centred care.Design: A qualitative descriptive study reported according to COREQ. Methods: Metropolitan tertiary hospital and rehabilitation hospital servicing a population of 550,000. A sample of 111 participants (12 patients, 4 family members/carers, 94 nurses and 1 allied health professional) from a range of wards/clinical locations. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted at two time points. The audio recording was transcribed, and an inductive thematic analysis was used to provide insight from multiple perspectives. Results: Three main themes emerged: (1) 'What works well in practice' included: efficiency in the structure of the documentation; the Introduction, Situation, Background Assessment, Recommendation (ISBAR) framework and prompting for clinical decisionmaking were valued by nurses; and direct patient care is always prioritised. (2) 'What does not work well in practice': obtaining the patient's signature on daily care plans; multidisciplinary (MDT) involvement; duplication of paperwork and person-centred goals are not well-captured in care plan documentation. (3) 'Experience of care'; satisfaction of person-centred care; communication in the MDT was important, but sometimes insufficient; patients had variable involvement in their daily care plan; and inadequate integration of care between MDT team which negatively impacted patients. Conclusions: Efficient and streamlined documentation systems should herald feedback from nurses to address their clinical workflow needs and can support, and capture, their decision-making that enables partnership with patients to improve the individualisation of care provision.

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Lung volume reduction surgery is a proven treatment for emphysematous patients with hyperinflation, but the precarious health of candidates has prompted development of less invasive approaches. Bronchoscopic implanted endobronchial coils, shape-memory nitinol filaments, shrink emphysematous lung tissue to restore elastic recoil and to tether airways to maintain patency. Studies have demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and improvements in lung function, exercise capacity, and quality of life out to 3 years. Volume reduction is key. However, data for longer-term survival are limited. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> The aim of this study was to establish the 5-year overall and transplant-free survivals of subjects whose procedure in the first randomized controlled trial, RESET, achieved clinically meaningful reduction in residual volume (RV). <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Patients and their primary care doctors were contacted to confirm vital status and history of additional interventions. Death certificates were acquired via the General Registry Office. Survival time was calculated for responders achieving a reduction of ≥10% in RV compared to non-responders. <b><i>Results:</i></b> 39 patients completed the planned bilateral sequential treatments. Six patients received unilateral implants. At 5 years, 22 patients had died. The overall survivals at 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 years were 88.9, 88.9, 77.8, 64.4 and 50.6%, respectively. Two patients underwent lung transplantation at 52 and 59 months and were alive at 5 years. The transplant-free (TF) survivals at 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 years were 88.9, 88.9, 77.8, 64.4 and 46.7%, respectively. Volume reduction responders (<i>n</i> = 18) at 3 months had a 5-year TF survival of 66.7% compared to 36.4% for non-responders (<i>n</i> = 22; <i>p</i> = 0.07). Higher baseline inspiratory capacity (HR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02–0.73; <i>p</i> = 0.02) and partial pressure of oxygen (pO₂) (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38–0.86; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.01) values were predictive of survival for the entire cohort and were not influenced by age. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Endobronchial coil implantation appears to confer a 5-year survival advantage for those who achieved a 10% reduction in RV at 3 months. Ongoing trials are designed to clarify the mechanisms of action of coils and to refine patient selection.

Background: Prostate cancer is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer globally. Cancer prehabilitation is defined as a process on the continuum of care that occurs between the time of a cancer diagnosis and the beginning of acute treatment. This article will discuss the importance of prostate cancer prehabilitation interventions in optimising physical and psychological recovery, to enhance person-centred care.

What are the long-term holistic health consequences of COVID-19 among survivors? An umbrella systematic review.

Routine and specialised PFT is safe for patients, in the context of established screening preparticipation guidelines. In the event of a PSI, these are likely to be low risk of harm. Our findings highlight the most common PSIs encountered during PFT to facilitate risk reduction.

No abstract