School of Social Sciences, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.
Health Economics and Health Technology Assessment, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
BMJ Open. 2019 Jul 9;9(7):e026077. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026077.
Three types of central venous access devices (CVADs) are routinely used in the delivery of intravenous systemic anticancer therapy (SACT): peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs), subcutaneously tunnelled central catheters (Hickman-type devices) and totally implantable chest wall ports (Ports). This qualitative study, nested within a multicentre, randomised controlled trial, sought to explore patient acceptability and experiences of the three devices.
Eight focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed.
Six outpatient cancer treatment centres in the UK.
Forty-two patients (20 female, mean age 61.7 years) who had taken part or were taking part in the broader trial.
As part of the larger, randomised controlled trial, participants had been randomly assigned one of three CVADs for the administration of SACT.
Attitudes towards all three devices were positive, with patients viewing their CVAD as part of their treatment and recovery. Participants with PICCs and Hickmans tended to compare their device favourably with peripheral cannulation. By comparison, participants with Ports consistently compared their device with PICCs and Hickmans, emphasising the perceived superiority of Ports. Ports were perceived to offer unique psychological benefits, including a greater sense of freedom and less intrusion in the context of personal relationships.
Patient experiences and preferences have not been systematically used to inform policy and practice regarding CVAD availability and selection. Our research identified patterns of patient device preferences that favoured Ports, although this was not universal. Results of this study could improve support for patients and offer greater scope for incorporating patient perspectives into decision-making processes.
ISRCTN44504648.
三种中心静脉通路装置(CVAD)常用于静脉全身抗癌治疗(SACT)的给药:外周静脉置入中心静脉导管(PICC)、皮下隧道式中央导管(Hickman 型装置)和完全可植入胸壁端口(Port)。这项定性研究嵌套在一项多中心随机对照试验中,旨在探讨患者对三种装置的可接受性和体验。
进行了 8 次焦点小组讨论,对讨论进行了录音、转录和主题分析。
英国的 6 家门诊癌症治疗中心。
42 名患者(20 名女性,平均年龄 61.7 岁),他们参加了或正在参加更广泛的试验。
作为更大规模随机对照试验的一部分,参与者被随机分配三种 CVAD 之一用于 SACT 的给药。
所有三种装置的态度均为积极的,患者将其 CVAD 视为治疗和康复的一部分。PICC 和 Hickman 患者倾向于将其装置与外周插管进行有利比较。相比之下,Port 患者始终将其装置与 PICC 和 Hickman 进行比较,强调 Port 的优越性。Port 被认为具有独特的心理益处,包括在人际关系中更自由和更少的干扰感。
患者的经验和偏好尚未系统地用于为 CVAD 的可用性和选择提供信息,以指导政策和实践。我们的研究确定了患者对装置的偏好模式,倾向于 Port,但并非普遍如此。本研究的结果可以改善对患者的支持,并为将患者观点纳入决策过程提供更大的空间。
ISRCTN44504648。