Personality and educational level determine self-reported health-related quality-of-life and distress in patients with renal tumors awaiting radical surgery

Nurse-led telephone follow-up according to the revised nursing outcomes classification for laryngeal carcinoma surgery patients: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This study used the revised nursing outcomes classification (NOC) outlined in our previous study, "Core nursing outcomes for otorhinolaryngology head-neck," for telephone follow-up of patients who had laryngeal carcinoma surgery in China. This randomized controlled trial aimed to compare nurse-led telephone follow-up according to the revised NOC with traditional telephone follow-up.

METHODS

A total of 100 postoperative patients were recruited from March 2018‒March 2020. Patients were randomly assigned to nurse-led telephone follow-up groups as either revised NOC follow-up (n = 51) or traditional follow-up (n = 49). The investigated outcomes included nursing outcomes, quality of life, and self-care abilities.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics of patients were well balanced. We noted that improvements in nursing outcomes in the intervention group were significantly better than for those in the control group (P = 0.018), primarily regarding psychosocial health (P < 0.001) and health knowledge and behavior (P < 0.001). Moreover, patient outcomes in the intervention group were associated with greater improvements in quality of life than those in the control group (P < 0.001), especially for social conditions (P < 0.001), emotional health (P < 0.001), functional status (P < 0.001), and additional attention (P = 0.001). Finally, compared with the control group, significant improvements were observed in self-care abilities in the intervention group (P = 0.002), mainly regarding general self-care abilities (P = 0.016) and development self-care abilities (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study found that nurse-led telephone follow-up according to the revised NOC improved nursing outcomes, quality of life, and self-care abilities.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2100045941.

Quality of Life and Psychological Distress among Patients with Small Renal Masses

Background: Quality of life (QoL) and psychological distress represent an important aspect of the daily life of cancer patients. The aim of this systematic review was to critically analyze available literature regarding QoL and psychological distress in patients with small renal masses (SRMs). (2) Methods: A systematic search of EMBASE, PUBMED and American Psychological Association (APA-net) was performed on 30 April 2022. Studies were considered eligible if they included patients with SRMs, had a prospective or retrospective design, included at least 10 patients, were published in the last 20 years, and assessed the QoL or psychological distress in patients that underwent active surveillance (AS) in comparison to those that underwent ablation/surgery treatments. (3) Results: The patients that underwent AS were statistically significantly older, with smaller renal masses than those that underwent surgery/ablation. A study showed a significant reduction in total scores of Short Form-12 (SF-12) among AS patients when compared to partial nephrectomy (PN) patients at enrollment (95.0 ± 15.8 vs. 99.1 ± 13.9), 2 years (91.0 ± 16.4 vs. 100.3 ± 14.3), and at 3 years (92.9 ± 15.9 vs. 100.3 ± 14.3), p < 0.05, respectively. That was mainly due to lower physical health scores. On the other hand, another study showed that AS patients with a biopsy-proven malignant tumor had a worse psychological distress sub-score (PDSS) compared to patients treated with surgery/ablation after biopsy. (4) Conclusions: It seems that there is an influence on QoL and psychological distress while on AS of SMRs. However, due to the low amount of available data, the impact of AS or active treatment on QoL or psychological distress of patients with small renal masses warrants further investigation.

Identifying the unmet supportive care needs of people affected by kidney cancer: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To synthesize existing evidence on the unmet supportive care needs of people affected by kidney cancer, across the cancer care continuum.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA Statement Guidelines. Electronic databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, and PsychINFO) were searched using key search terms. Articles were assessed according to pre-specified eligibility criteria. Data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted. The findings were integrated in a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

One thousand sixty-three publications were screened, and 18 publications met the inclusion criteria. The following domains of unmet needs in order of frequency included psychological/emotional needs (17/18: 94%), physical needs (10/18: 56%), social needs (4/18: 22%), interpersonal/intimacy needs (4/18: 22%), patient-clinician communication needs (3/18: 17%), family-related needs (3/18: 17%), health system/information needs (3/18: 17%), spiritual needs (3/18: 17%), daily living needs (2/18: 11%), practical needs (1/18: 6%), and cognitive needs (1/18: 6%).

CONCLUSIONS

There was a wide range of unmet supportive care needs experienced by people diagnosed with kidney cancer. A prominent focus was on psychological and physical needs. Further research is needed to understand how clinical (stage/treatment) and demographic (age/socio-economic/ethnicity) variables may moderate or mediate the relationship with unmet needs over time. With many unmet needs identified, this review provides a starting place to inform future work to address the complex unmet supportive care needs of people affected by kidney cancer.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Individuals living with kidney cancer have many unmet supportive care needs, and future research is needed to learn about what are the most pressing needs and how to best address these concerns to ensure holistic person-centered care is delivered.

Quality of life among cancer inpatients 80 years and older: a systematic review

Objective

The aim of this systematic review was to summarize and assess the literature on quality of life (QoL) among cancer patients 80 years and older admitted to hospitals and what QoL instruments have been used.

Methods

We searched systematically in Medline, Embase and Cinahl. Eligibility criteria included studies with any design measuring QoL among cancer patients 80 years and older hospitalized for treatment (surgery, chemotherapy or radiation therapy). Exclusion criteria: studies not available in English, French, German or Spanish. We screened the titles and abstracts according to a predefined set of inclusion criteria. All the included studies were assessed according to the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklists, and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Statement checklist was used to ensure rigor in conducting and reporting. This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017058290).

Results

We included 17 studies with 2005 participants with various cancer diagnoses and Classification of Malignant Tumors stages (TNM). The included studies used a range of different QoL instruments and had different aims and outcomes. Both cancer-specific and generic instruments were used. Only one of the 17 studies used an age-specific instrument. All the studies included patients 80 years and older in their cohort, but none specifically analyzed QoL outcomes in this particular subgroup. Based on findings in the age-heterogeneous population (age range 20–100 years), QoL seems to be correlated with the type of diagnosed carcinoma, length of stay, depression and severe symptom burden.

Conclusion

We were unable to find any research directly exploring QoL and its determinants among cancer patients 80 years and older since none of the included studies presented specific analysis of data in this particular age subgroup. This finding represents a major gap in the knowledge base in this patient group. Based on this finding, we strongly recommend future studies that include this increasingly important and challenging patient group to use valid age- and diagnosis-specific QoL instruments.