Search

Cancer-related disability is a complex problem for older breast cancer survivors. One aspect of cancer-related disability is a survivor's inability to complete meaningful daily activities and engage in life roles, referred to as activity limitations and participation restrictions respectively. There is a limited understanding of how interventions influence activity limitations and participation restrictions in this population. A scoping review was undertaken to identify and characterize nonpharmacological interventions developed to address activity limitations and participation restrictions. A systematic search of electronic databases (Ovid Medline, Embase, EBSCO CINAHL, and Ovid PsycINFO) was conducted in April 2020 and updated October 2020. Eleven studies met inclusion criteria. Most frequently observed delivery features were in-person and one-on-one format. Six interventions incorporated telehealth delivery components. Interventions were often complex and varied in content. Exercise and behavioral strategies were among the most frequently used active ingredients. Activity limitations and participation restrictions were often secondary outcomes, and measures of these outcomes were varied in content and assessment method. Study samples were not representative of the current population of older adult breast cancer survivors. Future intervention research should clarify intervention delivery, content, and dose, prioritize comprehensive measurement of activity limitations and participation restrictions, as well as recruit and involve representative study samples to enhance generalizability of findings.

Purpose Many older breast cancer survivors experience long-term disability due to cancer and cancer-related treatments. However, less than 20% of older breast cancer survivors utilize cancer rehabilitation services to address cancer-related disability. Further understanding of survivor experiences may reveal strategies to improve uptake cancer rehabilitation services in the USA. Methods Older breast cancer survivors were recruited from university-based registries, previous breast cancer research studies at our institution, community support groups, and geriatric oncology clinics. Participants completed a brief online survey to capture demographic and clinical characteristics. Semi-structured telephone-based interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. Interviews facilitated conversation about access to rehabilitation and indications for cancer rehabilitation. Results Participants (n = 14) were, on average, 71 years old, primarily White, and an average of 36.5 months post-diagnosis. Five participants had formally received rehabilitation for a cancer-related concern. Participants described seven factors that influenced utilization of cancer rehabilitation services: (1) emerging awareness of disability; (2) coping styles; (3) comparison of cancer experience with others; (4) provider interaction; (5) perceptions of cancer diagnosis; (6) social support; and (7) cost of rehabilitation. Conclusions Older breast cancer survivors consider multiple factors when determining utilization of cancer rehabilitation services. Development of shared decision-making tools addressing the seven described factors may enhance communication and referral to cancer rehabilitation services. Intervention research should adopt frameworks that enhance healthcare accessibility to improve relevance of intervention content and delivery features for older breast cancer survivors.

Objectives: This study longitudinally examined how older adult cancer survivors perceive disability in activities of daily living over time compared to older adults who have not had cancer. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of the National Health and Aging Trends Study examining participants with a new cancer diagnosis and age-, gender-, and comorbidity-matched comparison participants without a history of cancer. Generalized linear mixed models examined time and group interaction and main effects in disability. Results: There was a significant main effect of time ( F 4,771 = 12.81; p < .0001) demonstrating increasing disability levels for both groups. There were significant group differences, with higher disability in the cancer group than the comparison group (β = 0.628, SE = 0.263; t = 2.39, p = 0.017). Discussion: Although perceived disability was greater immediately following cancer diagnosis, older adult cancer survivors and comparison participants appear to have similar perceived disability over time.

Introduction The purpose of this research was to describe participation restrictions in younger and older adult cancer survivors post treatment. Method Younger adult cancer survivors ( n = 20) and older adult cancer survivors ( n = 21) completed questionnaires and a semi-structured interview of satisfaction with daily life activities and self-reported health outcomes in a single visit. Reports were based on recall during treatment and current perspectives post treatment. Results Despite general health short forms revealing health within normal limits, semi-structured interview approaches revealed dissatisfaction with occupational performance in both younger and older adult cancer survivors. Older adults reported persistent dissatisfaction with instrumental activities from diagnosis through post treatment compared to younger adult cancer survivors. Older adults received fewer referrals for cancer rehabilitation services (19%) compared to younger adult cancer survivors (50%). Conclusion Dissatisfaction with daily life activities persists several years post cancer diagnosis in older and younger adult cancer survivors, despite self-reported health within normal limits. Impairment-based short forms may lack sensitivity to detect activity limitations and participation restrictions conveyed through in-depth assessment. Adoption of more comprehensive screening methods may be needed for timely referral to cancer-based occupational therapy services.

The objective of this short report was to describe types of education provided to older, hospitalized patients with cancer and their caregivers using electronic health record data. A total of 437 patients, representing 512 inpatient stays (admissions), met the inclusion criteria. The sample were predominately male (58%) and White (95%). The average patient age at first admission was 74 years (SD 6.21 years) and the average length of admission was 5 days (SD 3.41 days). Out of all admissions, 89% included at least one documented education session with a provider. Three important results emerged from this study 1) education on medications is commonly conveyed to cancer patients (77%), 2) nurses are primarily responsible for providing education (65%), and 3) caregivers are infrequently involved (41%) in patient education. Additional educational topics tailored to the long-term needs of older adults with cancer are warranted. These topics should be delivered by an array of interprofessional care providers with demonstrated competency. Lastly, patient education should ensure inclusion of caregivers as part of the interprofessional cancer care team to promote successful management of cancer-related concerns.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the magnitude of work-related disability in post-menopausal women with breast cancer compared to healthy controls. It also examined demographic and clinical correlates of work-related disability in post-menopausal women with breast cancer. STUDY DESIGN: Exploratory secondary analysis of longitudinal study. OUTCOME MEASURE: The Work Limitations Questionnaire measured the percentage of at-work productivity loss. RESULTS: The analysis revealed a significant group by time interaction effect (F(1,40)=4.705, p=.036, partial η(2)=.105) on work-related disability. Participants with breast cancer (M=2.364, SE=.374) had significantly higher percentage of at-work productivity loss compared to the healthy control group (M=1.263, SE=.392). At baseline, cognitive-emotional symptoms were moderately to strongly associated with work-related disability. At 6 months, physical symptoms were moderately associated with work-related disability. CONCLUSIONS: Newly, diagnosed women with breast cancer are likely to experience higher rates of work-related disability compared to health counterparts. Healthcare providers should provide intervention to parallel the shift in symptoms which lead to higher work-related disability and job cessation

Objectives This article discusses the effects of cancer on broader domains of health; the evidence and application of activity-focused rehabilitation approaches in rehabilitation populations; and the role of nurses in the promotion of activity-focused rehabilitation. Data Sources Narrative review of rehabilitation literature. Conclusion Cancer impacts activity engagement, community participation, and quality of life. Optimal cancer rehabilitation may lie in adoption and implementation of activity-focused rehabilitation approaches. Recent research suggests that this approach may improve impairments and activity engagement outcomes. Implications for Nursing Practice Nurses are critical for screening for activity limitations and participation restrictions and early referral to rehabilitation treatment. Nurses can also educate survivors on the importance of meta-cognitive and self-management strategies to promote engagement in meaningful activities to reduce long-term disability.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of the Spinal Cord Injury Pressure Ulcer Scale (SCIPUS) during acute care and inpatient rehabilitation following spinal cord injury (SCI) by determining critical cutoff points and assessing the ability to predict risk for pressure ulceration (PrU). DESIGN: Retrospective. METHODS: Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) for the receiver operating characteristic were determined for the scale’s ability to predict PrU 2-3 and 5-7 days after administrating the SCIPUS during acute care, and 5-7 and 14-21 days after administrating the SCIPUS during inpatient rehabilitation. RESULTS: During acute hospitalization, SCIPUS’s ability to assess risk for PrUs within 2-3 days was determined at cutoff score of 15 with 100% sensitivity and 75% specificity, AUC = 0.85. The scale was unable to assess PrU risk at 5-7 days, AUC < 0.6 at cutoff score of 13. During inpatient rehabilitation, the scale was unable to assess PrU risk at 5-7 and 14-21 days, AUC < 0.6 at cutoff score of 9. CONCLUSIONS: The SCIPUS could predict PrU occurring within 2-3 days following administration during acute, but unable to predict over a longer term within acute or inpatient rehabilitation. Improved PrU risk assessment following SCI may be possible with modification to the SCIPUS.