BackgroundThere is limited evidence of the unmet needs and experiences of adults with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in the published scientific literature. This study aimed to explore the experiences of adults in England with ADHD regarding access to diagnostic and treatment services, ADHD-related impairment and to compare experiences between patients diagnosed during adulthood and childhood.MethodsIn this qualitative study, 30 adults with ADHD were recruited through an ADHD charity (n = 17) and two hospital outpatient clinics for adults with ADHD in England (n = 13). Half of the participants were diagnosed with ADHD during childhood or adolescence and the remainder during adulthood. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and data was analysed using a thematic approach based on Grounded Theory principles.ResultsAnalysis revealed five core themes: ‘An uphill struggle’: the challenge of accessing services, ‘Accumulated Psychosocial Burden and the Impact of ADHD’, ‘Weighing up Costs vs. Benefits of ADHD Pharmacological Treatment’, ‘Value of Non-pharmacological Treatment’ and ‘Barriers to Treatment Adherence’. Accessing services and the challenges associated with securing a definitive diagnosis of ADHD in adulthood was an ‘uphill struggle’, often due to sceptical and negative attitudes towards ADHD by healthcare professionals. ADHD-related impairment had an overwhelmingly chaotic impact on every aspect of patients’ lives and many felt ill equipped to cope. A persistent sense of failure and missed potential from living with the impact of ADHD impairment had led to an accumulated psychosocial burden, especially among those diagnosed from late adolescence onwards. In contrast, positive adjustment was facilitated by a younger age at diagnosis. Although medication was perceived as necessary in alleviating impairment, many felt strongly that by itself, it was inadequate. Additional support in the form of psychological therapies or psycho-education was strongly desired. However, few patients had access to non-pharmacological treatment. In some, medication use was often inadequately monitored with little or no follow-up by healthcare professionals, leading to poor adherence and a sense of abandonment from the healthcare system.ConclusionThe findings suggest that the unmet needs of adults with ADHD are substantial and that there is a wide gap between policy and current practice in England.
BackgroundThe aim of the study was to develop and validate measures of awareness of symptoms and risk factors for ovarian and cervical cancer (Ovarian and Cervical Cancer Awareness Measures).MethodsPotentially relevant items were extracted from the literature and generated by experts. Four validation studies were carried out to establish reliability and validity. Women aged 21–67 years (n=146) and ovarian and cervical cancer experts (n=32) were included in the studies. Internal reliability was assessed psychometrically. Test-retest reliability was assessed over a 1-week interval. To establish construct validity, Cancer Awareness Measure (CAM) scores of cancer experts were compared with equally well-educated comparison groups. Sensitivity to change was tested by randomly assigning participants to read either a leaflet giving information about ovarian/cervical cancer or a leaflet with control information, and then completing the ovarian/cervical CAM.ResultsInternal reliability (Cronbach's α=0.88 for the ovarian CAM and α=0.84 for the cervical CAM) and test-retest reliability (r=0.84 and r=0.77 for the ovarian and cervical CAMs, respectively) were both high. Validity was demonstrated with cancer experts achieving higher scores than controls [ovarian CAM: t(36)= –5.6, p<0.001; cervical CAM: t(38)= –3.7, p=0.001], and volunteers who were randomised to read a cancer leaflet scored higher than those who received a control leaflet [ovarian CAM: t(49)=7.5, p<0.001; cervical CAM: t(48)= –5.5, p<0.001].ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the psychometric properties of the ovarian and cervical CAMs and supports their utility in assessing ovarian and cervical cancer awareness in the general population.
Findings suggest a nurse-led psycho-educational intervention in primary care is feasible, acceptable and potentially useful to prostate cancer survivors.
ObjectivesTo summarize black and minority ethnic (BME) patients' and partners experiences of prostate cancer by examining the findings of existing qualitative studies.MethodsWe undertook a systematic metasynthesis of qualitative studies using a modified version of Noblit and Hare's “meta‐ethnography” approach, with a 2000‐2015 search of 7 databases.ResultsThirteen studies of men from US and UK BME groups were included. We explored constructs with BME‐specific features. Health care provider relationships, formation of a spiritual alliance with God (which enhanced the participants' feeling of empowerment and ability to cope with the cancer), and living on for others (generally to increase cancer awareness), often connected to spiritual regrowth, were the 3 constructs most commonly reported. A magnified effect from erectile dysfunction was also common. Initially, this affected men's disclosure to others about their cancer and their sexual problems, but eventually men responded by shifting their conceptualizations of masculinity to sustain self and social identities. There was also evidence of inequality resulting from financial constraints and adversity that necessitated resilience in coping.ConclusionsThe prostate cancer experience of BME men and their partners is affected by a complex intersection of ethnicity with other factors. Health care services should acknowledge this. If providers recognize the men's felt masculinities, social identities, and spiritual beliefs and their shifting nature, services could be improved, with community as well as individual benefits. More studies are needed in diverse ethnic groups.
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.