University of Newcastle Priority Research Centre for Cancer Research, Innovation and Translation, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
University of Newcastle Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Support Care Cancer. 2020 Jan;28(1):249-259. doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-04801-5. Epub 2019 Apr 27.
It is unknown how many distressed patients receive the additional supportive care recommended by Australian evidence-based distress management guidelines. The study identifies the (1) distress screening practices of Australian cancer services; (2) barriers to improving practices; and (3) implementation strategies which are acceptable to service representatives interested in improving screening practices.
Clinic leads from 220 cancer services were asked to nominate an individual involved in daily patient care to complete a cross-sectional survey on behalf of the service. Questions related to service characteristics; screening and management processes; and implementation barriers. Respondents indicated which implementation strategies were suitable for their health service.
A total of 122 representatives participated from 83 services (51%). The majority of respondents were specialist nurses or unit managers (60%). Approximately 38% of representatives' services never or rarely screen; 52% who screen do so for all patients; 55% use clinical interviewing only; and 34% follow referral protocols. The most common perceived barriers were resources to action screening results (74%); lack of time (67%); and lack of staff training (66%). Approximately 65% of representatives were interested in improving practices. Of the 8 implementation strategies, workshops (85%) and educational materials (69%) were commonly selected. Over half (59%) indicated a multicomponent implementation program was preferable.
Although critical gaps across all guideline components were reported, there is a broad support for screening and willingness to improve. Potential improvements include additional services to manage problems identified by screening, more staff time for screening, additional staff training, and use of patient-report measures.
目前尚不清楚有多少有困扰的患者接受了澳大利亚基于证据的困扰管理指南推荐的额外支持性护理。本研究旨在确定:(1)澳大利亚癌症服务机构的困扰筛查实践情况;(2)改善实践的障碍;(3)服务代表感兴趣的改善筛查实践的可接受的实施策略。
220 个癌症服务的临床负责人被要求提名一名参与日常患者护理的人员代表服务机构完成一项横断面调查。问题涉及服务特征、筛查和管理流程以及实施障碍。受访者指出哪些实施策略适合其卫生服务。
共有 122 名代表来自 83 个服务机构(51%)参与了研究。大多数受访者是专科护士或单位经理(60%)。约 38%的代表机构从不或很少进行筛查;52%进行筛查的机构对所有患者进行筛查;55%仅使用临床访谈;34%遵循转诊协议。最常见的感知障碍是采取行动筛查结果的资源(74%);缺乏时间(67%);以及缺乏员工培训(66%)。约 65%的代表有兴趣改善实践。在 8 种实施策略中,研讨会(85%)和教育材料(69%)是常见的选择。超过一半(59%)的代表表示更喜欢多组分实施计划。
尽管报告了所有指南组成部分的关键差距,但对筛查有广泛的支持并愿意进行改进。潜在的改进措施包括提供额外的服务来管理筛查发现的问题、为筛查分配更多的员工时间、提供更多的员工培训以及使用患者报告的措施。