Article available under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-ND licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) eprints@whiterose.ac.uk https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Reuse Unless indicated otherwise, fulltext items are protected by copyright with all rights reserved. The copyright exception in section 29 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 allows the making of a single copy solely for the purpose of non-commercial research or private study within the limits of fair dealing. The publisher or other rights-holder may allow further reproduction and re-use of this version -refer to the White Rose Research Online record for this item. Where records identify the publisher as the copyright holder, users can verify any specific terms of use on the publisher's website. TakedownIf you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing eprints@whiterose.ac.uk including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. Abstract:Purpose: For patients with cancer, providing appropriate information about prognosis or chances of recurrent disease remains a difficult area of practice. Much research has suggested that patients want to be given all available information, although the realities of attempting to do this are complex and may be perceived by some as uncaring. A review of recent literature was undertaken to explore the process of disclosure, patient experience and preferences for information regarding prognosis or risk of recurrence.Methods: A systematic approach was taken to searching electronic databases for relevant literature from 2004 to June 2014. Primary research from a range of methodological approaches was included and critical interpretive synthesis was employed to explore themes and identify gaps in the evidence.Results: Twenty papers were identified as appropriate. They were diverse in objectives and patient groups. Themes identified included: the nature of prognostic information, patient need for prognostic information, patient need to maintain hope, balancing hope and realism, patient factors, disease factors and clinician factors. A thematic framework was developed.Conclusions: Patients often struggle to fully understand complex prognostic information. information preferences, including information on prognosis and have indicated that most patients prefer to be given all available information good and bad (Cassileth et al., 1980; Cox et al., 2006; Jenkins et al., 2001). However, a qualitative study with acute leukaemia patients suggested a more nuanced requirement for information giving balanced with maintaining hope (Friis et al., 2003). In 2005 a wide-ranging and comprehensive review of the literature exploring communication of prognosis in cancer care was published (Hagerty et al., 2005a). This review explored evidence from early stage cancer patients, as well as with more disseminated disease, and at end of life and included studies published up until the end of 2003. Eleven research questions were constructed inclu...
A note on versions:The version presented here may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the repository url above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. AbstractDespite media images to the contrary, cardiopulmonary resuscitation in emergency departments is often unsuccessful. The purpose of this ethnographic study was to explore how health care professionals working in two emergency departments in the UK, make decisions to commence, continue or stop resuscitation. Data collection involved participant observation of resuscitation attempts and in-depth interviews with nurses, medical staff and paramedics who had taken part in the attempts. Detailed case examples were constructed for comparative analysis. Findings show that emergency department staff use experience and acquired tacit knowledge to construct a typology of cardiac arrest categories that help them navigate decision making. Categorisation is based on `less is more' heuristics which combine explicit and tacit knowledge to facilitate rapid decisions. Staff then work as a team to rapidly assimilate and interpret information drawn from observations of the patient's body and from technical, biomedical monitoring data. The meaning of technical data is negotiated during staff interaction. This analysis was informed by a theory of `bodily' and `technical' trajectory alignment that was first developed from an ethnography of death and dying in intensive care units. The categorisation of cardiac arrest situations and trajectory alignment are the means by which staff achieve consensus decisions and determine the point at which an attempt should be withdrawn. This enables them to construct an acceptable death in highly challenging circumstances.2
Patients with lung cancer who undergo surgery may potentially be cured. The resulting pathological staging gives an indication of 5-year survival and whether further treatment is recommended. To date, there is little research evidence regarding the way potential recurrence is communicated to patients by staff. This qualitative research used case studies to explore how information disclosure about possible recurrence was managed following lung cancer surgery and aimed to identify practice implications for clinical teams. Twelve patients were recruited and first postoperative surgical and subsequent oncology or follow-up consultations were recorded and transcribed. The perspective of the professionals involved in these clinics was ascertained through 30 in-depth interviews. Key themes in the data were identified using Framework Analysis. Recurrence risk was communicated to patients in a number of ways and levels of clarity and openness. Information provided by participants about early warning signs of recurrence varied. Findings indicate information provided was linked to the patient's prognosis and individual professionals' underlying communication approach. This study provides a unique insight into the views of lung cancer specialists regarding information disclosure and reveals the challenging nature and complexity of discussing recurrence following lung cancer surgery.
Emerging roles in lung cancer care: an exploration of the work of unregistered practitioners. AbstractBackground: Despite the evolution of support roles in other areas of nursing practice, the
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.