PurposePatients with lung cancer frequently suffer psychological distress and guidelines in the United Kingdom recommend screening of all cancer patients for this problem. The audit investigated use of the Distress Thermometer in terms of staff adherence to locally developed guidelines, patient willingness to use the tool, its impact on referral rates to clinical psychology services and concordance between the tool and the clinical assessment.MethodUse of the Distress Thermometer was audited over a 3-month period in one lung cancer outpatient clinic. Referrals to clinical psychology services in response to clearly delineated referral indicators were assessed. Patient-reported outcomes were compared with practitioner assessment of need during clinical consultations to see whether the tool was measuring distress effectively.ResultsThirty three of 34 patients used the Distress Thermometer during the audit period. Ten reported distress levels above 4 in the emotional or family problems domains. On ten occasions, the clinical interview identified problems not elicited by the Distress Thermometer. Guidelines were adhered to by staff, and patients were offered information about local support services and referral to clinical psychology services where indicated. Whilst all patients were happy to receive written information about further sources of support, none wanted to be referred to psychological services at that time.ConclusionsThe Distress Thermometer is acceptable to patients with lung cancer in outpatient settings but it did not increase referrals for psychological support. Staff found it to be a useful tool in opening up communication about patient issues although it should not replace a comprehensive clinical interview.
Non-pharmacological breathlessness interventions in lung cancer have proven beneficial. Breathlessness is also a major symptom in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study measured the effectiveness of a non-exercise-based four-week cognitive-behavioural breathlessness intervention, delivered in a group setting for elderly patients with severe COPD. The results of the one-year feasibility study are presented. Patients with COPD were asked to complete the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale six weeks before the intervention, at the start and end of the intervention and at six weeks follow-up. The multidisciplinary intervention used a cognitive-behavioural format to address understanding of COPD and medication, anxiety, panic and depression, activity pacing, relaxation, breathing retraining and goal-setting. Retrospective data on accident & emergency (A&E) attendances and length of hospital stay was collected six months before and six months after the intervention and the data compared to a matched waiting list control group. The results showed significant improvements in depression and health status. There was a non-significant improvement in anxiety. There was a significant reduction in A&E attendance and a non-significant reduction in length of hospital stay in the intervention group, compared to comparative increases in the control group, highlighting the cost-effectiveness of the intervention.
Background: Transdisciplinary research and generalist practice both face the task of integrating and discerning the value of knowledge across disciplinary and sectoral knowledge cultures. Transdisciplinarity and generalism also both offer philosophical and practical insights into the epistemology, ontology, axiology, and logic of seeing the 'whole'. Although generalism is a skill that can be used in many settings from industry to education, the focus of this paper is the literature of the primary care setting (i.e., general practice or family medicine). Generalist philosophy and practice in the family medicine setting highly values whole person care that uses integrative and interpretive wisdom to include both biomedical and biographical forms of knowledge.Generalist researchers are often caught between reductionist (positivist) biomedical measures and social science (post-positivist) constructivist theories of knowing. Neither of these approaches, even when juxtaposed in mixed-methods research, approximate the complexity of the generalist clinical encounter. A theoretically robust research methodology is needed that acknowledges the complexity of interpreting these ways of knowing in research and clinical practice.Methods: A conceptual review of literature to define the alignment between (a) the philosophy and practice of generalism in primary care and (b) both the practical (Zurich) and philosophical or methodological (Nicolescuian) schools of transdisciplinarity.Results: The alignment between generalism and transdisciplinarity included their broad scope, relational process, complex knowledge management, humble attitude to knowing, and real-world outcome focus. Conclusion:The concurrence between these approaches to knowing is offered here as Transdisciplinary Generalisma coherent epistemology for both primary care researchers and generalist clinicians to understand, enact, and research their own sophisticated craft of managing diverse forms of knowledge.
Rationale, aims and objectives Generalists manage a broad range of biomedical and biographical knowledge as part of each clinical encounter, often in multiple encounters over time. The sophistication of this broad integrative work is often misunderstood by those schooled in reductionist or constructivist approaches to evidence. There is a need to describe the practical and philosophically robust ways that understanding about the whole person is formed. In this paper we describe first principles of generalist approaches to knowledge formation in clinical practice. We name the Craft of Generalism. Methods The newly described methodology of Transdisciplinary Generalism is examined by skilled generalist clinicians and translated into skills and attitudes useful for everyday generalist person‐centred practice and research. Results The Craft of Generalism defines the required scope, process, priorities, and knowledge management skills of all generalists seeking to care for the whole person. These principles are Whole Person Scope, Relational Process, Healing Orientation, and Integrative Wisdom. These skills and attitudes are required for whole person care. If any element of these first principles is left out, the resultant knowledge is incomplete and philosophically incoherent. Conclusions Naming the Craft of Generalism defines the generalist gaze and protects generalism from the colonization of a narrowed medical gaze that excludes all but reductionist evidence or constructivist experience. Defining the Craft of Generalism enables clear teaching of the sophisticated skills and attitudes of the generalist clinician. These philosophically robust principles encourage and defend the use of generalist approaches to knowledge in settings across the community – including health policy, education, and research.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.