Health care systems in Asian countries need to re-think and prioritize survivorship cancer care and put action plans in place to overcome some of the challenges surrounding the delivery of optimal supportive cancer care, use available resource-stratified guidelines for supportive care and test efficient and cost-effective models of survivorship care.

BackgroundMost efforts to advance cancer survivorship care have occurred in Western countries. There has been limited research towards gaining a comprehensive understanding of survivorship care provision in the Asia-Pacific region. This study aimed to establish the perceptions of responsibility, confidence, and frequency of survivorship care practices of oncology practitioners and examine their perspectives on factors that impede quality survivorship care.MethodsA cross-sectional survey of hospital-based oncology practitioners in 10 Asia-Pacific countries was undertaken between May 2015–October 2016. The participating countries included Australia, Hong Kong, China, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, Singapore, India, Myanmar, and The Philippines. The survey was administered using paper-based or online questionnaires via specialist cancer care settings, educational meetings, and professional organisations.ResultsIn total, 1501 oncology practitioners participated in the study. When comparing the subscales of responsibility perception, frequency and confidence, Australian practitioners had significantly higher ratings than practitioners in Hong Kong, Japan, Thailand, and Singapore (all p < 0.05). Surprisingly, practitioners working in Low- and Mid- Income Countries (LMICs) had higher levels of responsibility perception, confidence and frequencies of delivering survivorship care than those working in High-Income Countries (HICs) (p < 0.001), except for the responsibility perception of care coordination where no difference in scores was observed (p = 0.83). Physicians were more confident in delivering most of the survivorship care interventions compared to nurses and allied-health professionals. Perceived barriers to survivorship care were similar across the HICs and LMICs, with the most highly rated items for all practitioners being lack of time, dedicated educational resources for patients and family members, and evidence-based practice guidelines informing survivorship care.ConclusionsDifferent survivorship practices have been observed between HICs and LMICs, Australia and other countries and between the professional disciplines. Future service planning and research efforts should take these findings into account and overcome barriers identified in this study.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-017-3733-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objectives: This study investigated physical symptoms, unmet supportive care needs, and quality of life (QoL) perception among different types of Thai cancer survivors who had completed first-line treatment. Methods: A cross-sectional study recruited breast, gynecological, colorectal, lung, and head and neck cancer survivors ( n = 236) who were attending follow-up visits at a regional cancer hospital in central Thailand. Data were collected by the Physical Symptom Concerns Survey, the Cancer Survivors’ Unmet Needs Scale, and a single item measuring global QoL. Descriptive statistics, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Welch's ANOVA were used for data analysis. Results: Cancer survivors generally perceived good QoL, with significantly low QoL for lung cancer survivors ( P < 0.001). There were no differences in symptom experiences among the five cancer groups, except for pain, which was significantly higher in lung cancer survivors than in the other four groups. The most frequently reported symptoms across all groups were numbness in the hands/feet, sleep disturbances, fatigue, and pain. The top unmet supportive care need among all participants was related to concerns of cancer recurrence (44.5%). Head and neck cancer survivors reported the highest number of unmet needs among the five cancer groups. Conclusions: This study mapped the unmet supportive care needs in Thai cancer patients and showed that patients with head and neck cancer and lung cancer were strongly affected. A survivorship care plan focusing on managing physical symptoms and providing supportive and psychosocial care should be developed to meet the needs of each cancer survivor group and to enhance QoL after the completion of treatment.

In this cross‐sectional study, we aimed to determine factors influencing the health status of caregivers of stroke survivors. A total of 126 caregivers of stroke survivors were recruited from three outpatient clinics in Thai Nguyen National General Hospital, Vietnam, from November 2016 to March 2017. Data were collected through six instruments: a demographic questionnaire, the Modified Barthel Index, the Zarit Burden Interview Scale, the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, the Family Caregiver Conflict Scale, and the Short Form‐36 Health Survey. Stepwise multiple regression was employed to analyze the data. Caregiver burden, patient's functional status, caregiver's age, and social support together explained 80.3% of the variations in health status of caregivers of stroke survivors. Caregiver burden was the strongest predictor of health status of these caregivers. Based on the findings, nurses should take caregiver's age, functional status of stroke survivors, caregiver burden, and social support into consideration when preparing family caregivers to provide care for stroke survivors. To reduce perceived caregiver burden, family support interventions should be embraced to enhance health status of the caregivers of stroke survivors.

Facilitating patient participation is complex in acute cancer care. Patient participation is recognized by nurses as a positive way of promoting independence in patients. However, balancing patient autonomy with nurses' perceived professional responsibilities is challenging in practice.