Living with paradox: A qualitative study of colorectal cancer patients' experiences in managing their health after cancer treatment

Baseline characteristics and recruitment for SWOG S1820: altering intake, managing bowel symptoms in survivors of rectal cancer (AIMS-RC)

PURPOSE

Many survivors of rectal cancer experience persistent bowel dysfunction. There are few evidence-based symptom management interventions to improve bowel control. The purpose of this study is to describe recruitment and pre-randomization baseline sociodemographic, health status, and clinical characteristics for SWOG S1820, a trial of the Altering Intake, Managing Symptoms in Rectal Cancer (AIMS-RC) intervention.

METHODS

SWOG S1820 aimed to determine the preliminary efficacy, feasibility, and acceptability of AIMS-RC, a symptom management intervention for bowel health, comparing intervention to attention control. Survivors with a history of cancers of the rectosigmoid colon or rectum, within 6-24 months of primary treatment completion, with a post-surgical permanent ostomy or anastomosis, and over 18 years of age were enrolled. Outcomes included total bowel function, low anterior resection syndrome, quality of life, motivation for managing bowel health, self-efficacy for managing symptoms, positive and negative affect, and study feasibility and acceptability.

RESULTS

The trial completed accrual over a 29-month period and enrolled 117 participants from 34 institutions across 17 states and one US Pacific territory. At baseline, most enrolled participants reported self-imposed diet adjustments after surgery, persistent dietary intolerances, and bowel discomfort post-treatment, with high levels of constipation and diarrhea (grades 1-4).

CONCLUSIONS

SWOG S1820 was able to recruit, in a timely manner, a study cohort that is demographically representative of US survivors of rectal cancer. Baseline characteristics illustrate the connection between diet/eating and bowel symptoms post-treatment, with many participants reporting diet adjustments and persistent inability to be comfortable with dietary intake.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV REGISTRATION DATE

12/19/2019.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT#04205955.

Safe Prescribing Practices: Clinicians' Views on Prescribing Opioids to Patients With Early-Stage Cancer

PURPOSE

Opioids are often necessary for patients experiencing high-intensity pain. However, side effects exist and some patients may misuse opioids. To better understand how opioids are prescribed to patients with early-stage cancer and how to enhance opioid safety, clinicians' views of opioid prescribing were explored.

METHODS

This was a qualitative inquiry including any Alberta clinician prescribing opioids to patients with early-stage cancer. Semistructured interviews were conducted with nurse practitioners (NP), medical oncologists (MO), radiation oncologists (RO), surgeons (S), primary care physicians (PCP), and palliative care physicians (PC) between June 2021 and March 2022. Interpretive description was used to analyze the data using two coders (C.C. and T.W.). Debriefing sessions were used to resolve and discrepancies.

RESULTS

Twenty-four clinicians were interviewed (NP [n = 5], MO [n = 4], RO [n = 4], S [n = 5], PCP [n = 3], and PC [n = 3]). The majority had been in practice at least 10 years. Prescribing practices were related to disciplinary perspective, goals of care, patient condition, and resource availability. Most clinicians did not see opioid misuse as a problem but were aware that specific patient risk factors are present and that long-term use can be problematic. Most clinicians undertake safe prescribing approaches tacitly (eg, screening for past opioid misuse and reviewing number of prescribers) and not all agreed they should be universally applied. Barriers (eg, procedural and time) and facilitators (eg, education) to safe prescribing approaches were identified.

CONCLUSION

To enhance uptake and cross-disciplinary consistency of safe prescribing approaches, clinician education regarding opioid misuse and benefits of safe prescribing practices, and addressing procedural barriers are necessary.

Altering Intake and Managing Symptoms: Feasibility of a Diet Modification Intervention for Post-Treatment Bowel Dysfunction in Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Bowel dysfunction is a common long-term effect of rectal cancer treatment that affects a survivor's quality of life, with few empirically based interventions for symptom management.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to determine the acceptability of diet modification for bowel dysfunction in postsurgical rectal cancer survivors.

METHODS

 11 rectal cancer survivors who were at least six months post-treatment and reported moderate to severe bowel symptoms completed 10 telephone coaching sessions focusing on diet and symptom management over four months. Feasibility was assessed by study enrollment rate and intervention completion rate.

FINDINGS

 Diet modification coaching for bowel symptom management is feasible for post-treatment rectal cancer survivors. The intervention can be evaluated for efficacy because of potential to serve as a scalable and accessible approach for effective bowel symptom management.

Prevalence vs impact: a mixed methods study of survivorship issues in colorectal cancer

Purpose

This study aims to explore the prevalence of CRC survivorship issues and their impact on survivors’ quality of life (QoL).

Methods

This study utilised a mixed methods sequential explanatory design. Adult CRC survivors between 6- and 60-months post-diagnosis (n = 304) were purposively recruited from three hospitals and twenty-one cancer support centres in Ireland. QoL was evaluated using the EuroQol and FACT-C questionnaires and results compared to population norms. 22 survey participants took part in semi-structured interviews exploring the impact of survivorship issues on their daily lives.

Results

While CRC survivors reported QoL outcomes comparable to or better than normative populations, 54% were dissatisfied with their QoL. The most common survivorship issues reported included negative body image (74%), fatigue (68%), sexual dysfunction (66%) and sleep disturbance (59%). Thematic analysis of the qualitative data illustrated survivors’ attempts to live with the impact of cancer and its treatment (loss, fear, impact) and striving to contextualise, reframe and understand the consequences of cancer and its treatment (control, vigilance, benefit). Within these themes, the cross-domain impact of less prevalent symptoms including bowel dysfunction (28–57%) and peripheral neuropathy (47%) were widely discussed.

Conclusions

Although cancer survivors report positive QoL outcomes, many experience distressing physical, psychological and social effects. The findings suggest less common and difficult to manage symptoms are the greatest source of distress and unmet need. Support and information must be tailored to address survivors’ individual needs and preferences for support, informed by holistic person-centred assessment.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11136-021-02975-2.