Search

Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the effectiveness of creative arts therapy (CAT) interventions on the health outcomes of adult patients with cancer. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in six databases from their inception to June 10, 2023, with no restrictions on sex, age, cancer type, cancer stage, or treatment type. The Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB2) tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the equivalent tool for non-RCTs (ROBINS-I) were used to assess the risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted to pool estimates of the effects of CAT on patients’ health-related outcomes. A narrative synthesis of outcomes was performed where meta-analysis was not appropriate. Results: A total of 25 studies (8 RCTs and 17 quasi-RCTs) involving 1489 cancer patients and survivors were included in the final data analysis. Most studies focused on patients with mixed cancer diagnoses who were undergoing active chemotherapy treatment. Most studies utilized painting, drawing, and/or sculpting as CAT interventions. The overall risk of bias in the included studies was moderate to high. Meta-analysis demonstrated a significant improvement in quality of life (SMD with 95% CI = 17.50, 10.05–24.95, P =.0000) and the social aspect of quality of life in cancer patients (SMD with 95% CI = 03.1 (0.06-0.55), P =.01), but no significant effects were found for depressive symptoms and coping strategies among patients who participated in CAT compared to control groups. Narrative analysis and non-RCTs suggested the potential of CAT in reducing levels of depression and anxiety, as well as improving self-image, hope, emotional expression/state, and processing in patients with cancer. However, inconsistent findings were reported regarding the effectiveness of CAT interventions on fatigue, spirituality, and psychosomatic distress/symptom intensity. Conclusion: The findings indicated significant and potential benefits of CAT for individuals with cancer, primarily related to quality of life. However, caution is needed in interpreting these findings due to limitations in the methodologies utilized in the included studies. Further large-scale RCTs are needed to examine the effectiveness of CAT on health outcomes, particularly in relation to self-image, hope, and emotional expression/state and processing among patients with cancer or those in palliative care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Adolescent and young adult (AYA) survivors of a central nervous system (CNS) tumor represent a vulnerable group who can experience: social isolation, low rates of employment, and achieving independence can be compromised, leading to poorer quality of life compared with survivors of other cancer types. The aim of this study is to develop and evaluate the validity of a needs assessment tool (NAT) for AYA survivors of a CNS tumor. Methods Items generated using data from 29 qualitative studies and cognitive interviews (n = 8) produced NAT V1.1 (49 items). 128 of 316 eligible participants attending neuro-oncology clinics at 4 NHS sites between June 2022 and March 2023 completed the NAT V1.1 to allow for item reduction and refinement and to evaluate reliability and validity. A pilot study (n = 6) using YOU-CAN in routine follow-up concluded the study. Results Hierarchical analysis and Rasch analysis identified 18- and 15-items for removal, respectively. YOU-CAN, comprised of the remaining 16 items, demonstrates excellent test-retest reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient, 0.901, n = 40) and sufficient correlation with the European Quality of Life questionnaire and Supportive Care Needs Survey (Pearson r  = 0.433 and 0.590, respectively). Pilot testing showed YOU-CAN triggered discussions of unmet needs in consultations and highlighted the importance of multidisciplinary support. Conclusions YOU-CAN is a valid and reliable instrument containing items related to concerns about physical and emotional health; family and relationships; self-acceptance; and independence. Future efforts should examine YOU-CAN's feasibility, and develop guidance for managing unmet needs. Routine use of YOU-CAN may improve the identification of otherwise undiscussed unmet needs and opportunities to deliver personalized support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To develop a measure of the needs injured children and their families' needs throughout recovery; The MAnchester Needs Tool for Injured Children (MANTIC). Design: Tool development, psychometric testing. Setting: Five children's major trauma centres in England. Participants: Children aged 2 to 16 years with any type of moderate/severe injury(ies) treated in a major trauma centre within 12 months of injury, plus their parents. Methods: Stage 1a (Item generation) : Interviews with injured children and their parents to generate draft items. Stage 1b (Co-production) : Feedback about item clarity, relevance and appropriate response options was provided by parents and the patient and public involvement group. Stage 2 (Psychometric development) : Completion of the prototype MANTIC by injured children and their parents with restructuring (as necessary) to establish construct validity. Concurrent validity was assessed by correlation with quality of life (EQ-5D-Y). MANTICs were repeated 2 weeks later to assess test–retest reliability. Results: Stages 1a,b : Interviews (13 injured children, 19 parents) generated 64 items with semantic differential four-point response scale (strongly disagree, disagree, agree, strongly agree). Stage 2 : One hundred and forty-four participants completed MANTIC questionnaires (mean age 9.8 years, SD 3.8; 68.1% male). Item responses were strong requiring only minor changes to establish construct validity. Concurrent validity with quality of life was moderate (r = 0.55, P < 0.01) as was test–retest reliability (ICC = 0.46 and 0.59, P < 0.001). Uni-dimensionality was strong (Cronbach's α > 0.7) Conclusion: The MANTIC is a feasible, acceptable, valid self-report measure of the needs of injured children and their families, freely available for clinical or research purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: There is limited research exploring how smoking cessation treatment should be implemented into lung cancer screening in the United Kingdom. This study aimed to understand attitudes and preferences regarding the integration of smoking cessation support within lung cancer screening from the perspective of those eligible. Methods: Thirty‐one lung cancer screening eligible individuals aged 55–80 years with current or former smoking histories were recruited using community outreach and social media. Two focus groups (three participants each) and 25 individual telephone interviews were conducted. Data were analysed using the framework approach to thematic analysis. Results: Three themes were generated: (1) bringing lung cancer closer to home, where screening was viewed as providing an opportunity to motivate smoking cessation, depending on perceived personal risk and screening result; (2) a sensitive approach to cessation with the uptake of cessation support considered to be largely dependent on screening practitioners' communication style and expectations of stigma and (3) creating an equitable service that focuses on ease of access as a key determinant of uptake, where integrating cessation within the screening appointment may sustain increased quit motivation and prevent loss to follow‐up. Conclusions: The integration of smoking cessation into lung cancer screening was viewed positively by those eligible to attend. Screening appointments providing personalized lung health information may increase cessation motivation. Services should proactively support participants with possible fatalistic views regarding risk and decreased cessation motivation upon receiving a good screening result. To increase engagement in cessation, services need to be person‐centred. Patient or Public Contribution: This study has included patient and public involvement throughout, including input regarding study design, research materials, recruitment strategies and research summaries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Acute episodes of agitation are frequently experienced by patients during critical illness, yet what is not understood is the experience of agitation from the patient and family perspectives. Aims and objectives: To search existing literature, appraise it and then provide a synthesized interpretation to broaden the understanding of patients' and their families' experience of agitation during an adult critical care admission. Design: Qualitative meta‐synthesis. Methods: A qualitative meta‐synthesis based on a systematic literature search registered with PROSPERO. The search conducted between July and September 2019 was applied to ProQuest, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, British Nursing Index, Cochrane Library, Ovid Medline, Web of Science, and PsycINFO databases. We appraised the selected literature and presented a synthesized interpretation. Analysis was based on the approach of Gadamerian hermeneutics. Due to the lack of data identified; the family experiences of agitation could not be addressed within the review. Results: In total, 8 studies were included capturing the experiences of 494 patients, aged between 18 and 92 years, with 225 (45%) women. The analysis generated three core themes: (a) What is real, what is not, (b) loss of communication and dependency, and (c) what helps, what does not. Fear of death, the emotion of anxiety, and feelings of pain alongside transient periods of fluctuating conscious levels provoked a feeling of intense vulnerability. The loss of effective communication and the feeling of dependence incite agitation and distress. Conclusions: The patient's recollection of their critical illness can be completely or partially absent and disjointed with uncertainty around what is real and what is not. Family members observe the full effect of the patient's critical care illness and could be a wealth of untapped information. Relevance to clinical practice: Increasing awareness of the critically ill patients' experience of agitation highlights possible contributing factors to agitation development, such as staff interaction and communication skills, and the critical care environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People who are experiencing a period of critical illness frequently experience severe agitation. The presence of agitation can pose risks to the patient, family, and clinical team. Aims and objectives: To capture the views and opinions of critical care multidisciplinary teams concerning the approaches in the management of agitation, and to understand and identify the perceived risks and benefits of current management strategies. Design: A descriptive qualitative design. Methods: Data were gathered using semi‐structured interviews with multidisciplinary teams from adult critical care units from one region in the United Kingdom. Findings: A total of 19 participants participated between February to September 2017. There were two group interviews (GIs) (n = 12, GI 1 n = 8, GI 2 n = 4) and seven one‐to‐one interviews, across four hospital organisations with one participant working via an agency. The mean length (± SD) of each interview, one to one or group, was 58.86 minutes (5.81 minutes). Three major themes were generated about the complex clinical decision‐making required to manage an agitated patient. These themes represented: the burden of care, continuity of clinical decision‐making, and uncertainty and indecision experienced by participants. Conclusion: Participants described caring for an agitated patient as challenging and stressful. Staff sought clarification on what level of restrictive practice is allowed. Feelings of anxiety and stress generated by the decisions made may have an impact on staff, particularly those who are more inexperienced, which in the longer term could lead to fatigue or moral distress. Relevance to clinical practice. The study has emphasised the challenges faced by multidisciplinary teams and how decision‐making may impact on individuals within the team. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]