No abstract

This study examines the prevalence of problems in children within four months after a parent's cancer diagnosis (T1) and six (T2) and twelve months (T3) afterwards. Sixty-nine ill parents and 57 spouses completed the Child Behavior Checklist for 57 primary school (aged 4-11 years) and 66 adolescent children (aged 12-18 years). Adolescents completed the self-report version. Children's functioning was compared to that of the norm group and a sample of families that were confronted with parental cancer between one to five years before study participation (retrospective study). Most children were reported as having a similar level as or fewer problems than was reported in the norm and retrospective studies. Reported problems decreased with time, but children who initially had more problems remained vulnerable during the year. Fathers and mothers highly agree in their perception of children's behavior, with the exception of adolescent daughters' behavior. Agreement between mothers and adolescent daughters was high, whereas agreement between fathers and adolescent sons and daughters, and mothers and adolescent sons was low to moderate. The outcomes suggest that most children do not experience problems shortly after the parent's diagnosis and were functioning over time on a level equal to or better than that of their peers. Differences in informant's perceptions appear and remain of interest.

The Breast Size Satisfaction Survey (BSSS) was established to assess women's breast size dissatisfaction and breasted experiences from a cross-national perspective. A total of 18,541 women were recruited from 61 research sites across 40 nations and completed measures of current-ideal breast size discrepancy, as well as measures of theorised antecedents (personality, Western and local media exposure, and proxies of socioeconomic status) and outcomes (weight and appearance dissatisfaction, breast awareness, and

PurposeIn the Netherlands, the three-step process ‘Screening for Distress and Referral Need’ (SDRN) was developed for helping identifying, and referring cancer patients suffering from clinically relevant distress or needing a referral. This process includes (1) instrument completion, (2) patient-care provider discussion of the responses, and (3) referral based on 1 and 2. The Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, location Groningen (IKNL-G), initiated the implementation of SDRN and developed an implementation roadmap, including procedure and materials. This exploratory study examines the feasibility of SDRN implementation in hospitals, seen from healthcare providers’ perspective, responsible for implementation, and those executing SDRN.MethodsHealthcare providers, from 22 hospitals and from 5 oncology departments of the University Medical Center Groningen (=25 % of Dutch hospitals), evaluated their experiences by responding to a 26-item internet survey.ResultsTwenty-five participants (response = 93 %) completed the survey. SDRN was implemented in 21 hospitals (implementation = 91 %), in two thirds of these hospitals in more than one patient group. Adoption of IKNL-G’s roadmap elements varied between 84 and 100 %. Participants’ average satisfaction score with SDRN was 6.5 (possible range = 0–10, range found = 5–8). Significant positive relationships were found between this satisfaction and participants’ satisfaction with frequency of SDRN (p = 0.02), and keeping logistical agreements (p = 0.04). Participants were dissatisfied with SDRN’s limited current availability to only select patient groups and only certain disease phases.ConclusionsThe implementation of SDRN in daily practice, supported by a pre-developed implementation roadmap, is highly feasible. Continuous attention to SDRN execution, broadening implementation to all forms of cancer, and during the total disease trajectory seems vital to improve healthcare providers’ satisfaction.