2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2018.12.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Systematic review and meta-analysis of patient reported outcomes for nurse-led models of survivorship care for adult cancer patients

Abstract: Systematic review and metaanalysis of patient reported outcomes for nurse-led models of survivorship care for adult cancer patients.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
39
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
(312 reference statements)
0
39
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Global QoL and a number of QoL domains were found to have no significant improvement after nurse‐led interventions over the control group in a meta‐analysis of seven studies, although constipation, insomnia and financial difficulties for patients were improved (Cheng et al., 2018). In a review of survivorship care, the nurse‐led model (4–6 months long) resulted to improved cognitive and social functioning and reduced fatigue (Monterosso et al., 2019). However, QoL as an outcome is also quite a broad concept encompassing multiple domains of life, and this may not be an appropriate primary outcome for trials (Browall et al., 2017).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Global QoL and a number of QoL domains were found to have no significant improvement after nurse‐led interventions over the control group in a meta‐analysis of seven studies, although constipation, insomnia and financial difficulties for patients were improved (Cheng et al., 2018). In a review of survivorship care, the nurse‐led model (4–6 months long) resulted to improved cognitive and social functioning and reduced fatigue (Monterosso et al., 2019). However, QoL as an outcome is also quite a broad concept encompassing multiple domains of life, and this may not be an appropriate primary outcome for trials (Browall et al., 2017).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mortality rates for cancer are falling globally (Hashim et al, 2016) and it is predicted there will be four million cancer survivors in the UK alone by 2030 (Maddams et al, 2012). Hence, a hospital-based approach to follow-up care is arguably unsustainable from a practical, workforce and financial perspective and there have been recent moves https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2019.101704 Received 13 August 2019; Received in revised form 8 November 2019; Accepted 26 November 2019 T towards alternative follow-up strategies for different cancer diagnoses, including nurse-led models (Monterosso et al, 2019;Taylor et al, 2019) nurse-led telephone follow-up (Beaver et al, 2009(Beaver et al, , 2012(Beaver et al, , 2017Cox et al, 2008;Kimman et al, 2010;Shaida et al, 2007), General Practitioner (GP) follow-up (Murchie et al, 2010;Grunfeld et al, 1996), technological approaches using, for example, telemedicine, smartphones and computer touchscreen technology to monitor symptoms and concerns (Dickinson et al, 2014;Schougaard et al, 2016;Semple et al, 2018), and patient-initiated follow-up (PIFU) (Kirshbaum et al, 2017;Koinberg et al, 2004). In PIFU, there are no routine scheduled hospital clinic appointments.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The anticipated shortage of the oncology workforce has resulted in greater delegation of complex cancer care to oncology advanced practice nurses (APRNs), who are also experiencing workforce shortages [43]. Robust evidence suggests that improved health outcomes are associated with oncology APRN-led care [44][45][46]. Hence, oncology APRNs are in an optimal position to support cancer survivors' self-management skills building, coordinate care with a PCPs, and use telehealth effectively for post-treatment follow-up.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%