Search

Objective: The Covid −19 pandemic has had a major influence on the organization of cancer care. Little is known about how patients with cancer and their relatives experienced this period. This study explored these experiences and levels of distress and resilience of Dutch cancer patients and their family caregivers during the Covid-19 pandemic. Methods: The qualitative design included in-depth interviews with cancer patients and their family caregivers to explore their experiences. The distress thermometer (NCCN-DT) and resilience questionnaire (CD-RISC2) were used for contextualizing. Data were analyzed by thematic analysis and descriptive statistics. Results: 40 patients with breast cancer, lung cancer, colorectal cancer, or melanoma who received active systemic anti-cancer therapy, were included with a median age of 60 years[SD11.1]. We also included fourteen family caregivers with a median age of 60 years [SD8.6]. Five themes were identified: (1) Living with cancer during Covid-19, (2) Changes in cancer care, (3) Information and support, (4) Safety inside the hospital, and (5) Impact of vaccination. The mean score of NCCN-DT was 2.9[SD2.4] for patients and 4.3[SD2.7] for family caregivers. Mean score of CD-RISC2 was 6.6[SD1.4] for patients and 7.2[SD1] for family caregivers. Conclusions: Patients felt vulnerable during the pandemic and were strict in following the safety precautions. The limited companionship of family caregivers was experienced as the biggest restraint. In general, they felt safe inside the hospital. Vaccination brought some relief. Patients were satisfied with the provided support, but areas were identified which are amenable for redesigning care processes.

Background: We aimed to gain more insight into autonomy of older people with intellectual disabilities in a residential care facility in making choices. Methods: We performed a descriptive ethnographic study in a residential facility in the Netherlands for 22 persons, aged 54–89 years, with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities (IQ <70) and low social–emotional development levels. We combined participant observations and qualitative interviews. Results: Based on the observations, the main themes for the interviews were established. Residents indicated to be free to make independent choices, and experienced less autonomy with regard to health issues and finances. Support staff stated that residents' level of autonomy depends on residents' characteristics, needs, preferences, the attitude of support staff and the rules of the care institution. Conclusion: Residents had a clear view on their autonomy in making independent choices. Support staff is mindful of preserving residents' autonomy, which in practice is limited.