The Lived Experiences, Perceptions, and Considerations of Patients After Operable Lung Cancer Concerning Nonparticipation in a Randomized Clinical Rehabilitation Trial

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore the lived experiences, perceptions, and considerations of individuals who declined participation in a randomized clinical trial involving exercise rehabilitation after surgery for lung cancer. An interpretive phenomenological approach was applied comprising interviews with 15 individuals who did not wish to participate in the trial. The findings shed light on a discrepancy between their freedom to act and make decisions and the limitations of having to act in a certain way. The participants found themselves in a gray area between a healthy life and a good life, as influenced by societal norms and taking responsibility for one’s own health and rehabilitation. When including patients in rehabilitation after lung cancer, having insight into the underlying narrative on values and the good life, priorities in daily life, social context and the norms embedded in people’s self-understanding is crucial.

Where Does Value Lie in Peer Support? An Exploratory Discussion of the Theories and Methods Underpinning Effective Research in Peer Support

“…Hawe (2015) considers that applying complexity thinking will change how interventions are designed and evaluated. One of those changes in thinking relates to evaluating “real-world” interventions such as behavior change (Schoen et al, 2020). Greenhalgh and Papoutsi (2018) agree with Khan et al (2018) that by embracing complexity rather than attempting to control for it, as do reductionist methods, interventions will be tailored to work within local contexts while recognizing change takes time.…”

Surprise Reveals the Affective-Moral Economies in Cancer Illness Narratives

“…Risk awareness, rather than cancer, is portrayed as the problem. Campaigns to forewarn smokers of the well-known link between smoking, lung, and bladder cancer (Anand et al, 2008;Chapple et al, 2004) situate individuals diagnosed with these cancers as uninformed and irresponsible (Schoenau et al, 2020). Such rhetoric reinforces broader health moralities, in which illness appears as punitive and becomes subject to dynamics of blaming and shaming (Lupton, 2012).…”

Reasons for non-participation in cancer rehabilitation: a scoping literature review

“…Based on discussion, ‘post hoc’ exclusion criteria were developed and applied [ 17 ]. The ‘post hoc’ basis for exclusion was studies investigating reasons for non-participation in interventions designed as clinical trials, even if they were described as ‘rehabilitation trials’ [ 28 ]. Studies that examined participants’ or health professionals’ perceived reasons for non-participation were only included if they also addressed non-participant reasons.…”