			Home About us Contact

Oncology Services (oncology + services)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	100%

Selected Abstracts

Provision of oncology services in remote rural areas: a Scottish perspective

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER CARE, Issue 2 2004
S.M. SMITH research assistant
There is a paucity of research into rural health care services. In particular little is known about the provision of specialist cancer services for patients who live in remote rural areas of the UK. This study set out to investigate current models of medical and clinical oncology care in Scotland. A national survey with key health professionals was conducted to identify rural oncology schemes currently in operation. Detailed quantitative data about the schemes together with qualitative data on how health professionals view current models of care were collected by a computer-assisted telephone survey. Schemes that currently provide outpatient and chemotherapy oncology services for remote rural patients fell into three categories: central clinics (5); shared care outreach clinics with chemotherapy provision (11); and shared care outreach clinics without chemotherapy provision (7). All radiotherapy was conducted at central clinics (5). Widely varying practices in delivery of cancer care were found across the country. The main issues for professionals about current models of care involved expertise, travelling and accessibility (for patients), communication and expansion of the rural service. Nation-wide consistency in cancer care has still to be achieved. Travelling for treatment was seen to take its toll on all patients but particularly for the very remote, elderly and poor. Most professionals believe that an expansion of rural services would be of benefit to these patients. It is clear, however, that the proper infrastructure needs to be in place in terms of local expertise, ensured quality of care, and good communication links with cancer centres before this could happen. [source]

Adolescent oncology services: catching up with the kids

INTERNAL MEDICINE JOURNAL, Issue 7 2006
D. Thomson
No abstract is available for this article. [source]

Twinning: A rewarding scenario for development of oncology services in transitional countries,

PEDIATRIC BLOOD & CANCER, Issue 2 2005
A.J.P. Veerman
First page of article [source]

The Cancer Pain Inventory: preliminary development and validation

PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY, Issue 7 2010
Teresa L. Deshields
Abstract Objective: The purpose of this study was to develop a Cancer Pain Inventory (CPI) that measures cancer patients' beliefs and concerns about pain. This paper describes development and pilot testing of a preliminary version of the CPI and describes its psychometric properties including its reliability and validity relative to established pain measures. Methods: Subjects were recruited from inpatient and outpatient oncology services of an NCI-designated comprehensive cancer center. Participants completed the 50 potential CPI items and these standard measures,Orientation-Memory-Concentration Test, Survey of Pain Attitudes, Brief Pain Inventory, Pain Disability Index, and Center for Epidemiological Studies,Depression Scale. The magnitude and significance of associations between the CPI and the other measures were examined. Results: Of 366 patients who were eligible and agreed to participate in the study, 262 completed the questionnaires. Principal components analyses were used to select items most appropriate for retention in the preliminary version of the CPI and to describe its factor structure. Based on the content of items that loaded on each factor, the five factors were labeled as Catastrophizing, Interference with Functioning, Stoicism, Social Aspects, and Concerns about Pain Medication. Correlations between the CPI and other measures supported construct validity of the five CPI factors. Conclusions: The results supported the validity of the CPI as a measure of five constructs relevant to the experience of pain in the cancer setting. The results also underscored the presence of unique features of cancer-related pain that clearly differ from commonly recognized dimensions of chronic, non-cancer-related pain. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]

Burnout, psychiatric morbidity, and work-related sources of stress in paediatric oncology staff: a review of the literature

PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY, Issue 10 2009
Suzanne Mukherjee
Abstract Objective: A growing body of research suggests that staff working in adult oncology services are at risk of burnout and psychiatric morbidity, but whether or not these findings can be generalised to staff working in paediatric oncology is questionable. This paper reports the findings of a comprehensive review of the literature on burnout, psychiatric morbidity, and sources of work-related stress in paediatric oncology staff. Methods: Electronic searches of MEDLINE and PSYCHINFO. This was followed by a screening process, during which papers where checked against inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the quality of study reporting was assessed. Information about the study design and methods was then extracted from each paper so that the methodological quality could be critiqued. Results: Ten studies meeting the review inclusion criteria were identified. No studies were identified which compared paediatric and adult oncology staff. Research on paediatric oncology staff has failed to use the well-established standardised measures of burnout and psychiatric morbidity employed in studies of adult oncology staff. There is some qualitative evidence to suggest paediatric oncology nurses experience a unique, additional set of stressors not encountered by colleagues in adult oncology services. Conclusion: The evidence on stress and burnout in paediatric oncology staff is extremely limited. In order to devise appropriate and effective interventions to support staff, we need to have a much better understanding of the level of burnout and psychiatric morbidity experienced by all members of the paediatric oncology multi-disciplinary team, as well as the factors that contribute to these experiences. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]