Experience and coping strategies of bowel dysfunction in postoperative patients with rectal cancer: a systematic review of qualitative evidence

Decision-making preferences and regret in rectal cancer patients undergoing restorative proctectomy: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

How patients make treatment choices in rectal cancer is poorly understood and may affect long-term regret and satisfaction. The objective of this study is to characterize decision-making preferences and their effect on decisional regret in patients undergoing restorative proctectomy for rectal cancer.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted in a single academic specialist rectal cancer center from October 2018 to June 2022. Adult patients who underwent restorative proctectomy at least one year prior were recruited. Health literacy was assessed using the BRIEF instrument. Decision-making preferences regarding cancer treatment were assessed using the Control Preferences Scale. Decisional regret regarding their choice of restorative proctectomy was assessed using the Decision Regret Score. Bowel dysfunction was measured using the low anterior resection syndrome score.

RESULTS

Overall, 123 patients were included. Health literacy was categorized as adequate in 63%, marginal in 25%, and limited in 12%. Patients with adequate health literacy were more likely to prefer a collaborative decision-making role compared with those with low health literacy (86% vs 65%, P = .016). Patients with incongruence between preferred and actual decision-making roles were more likely to report high regret (56% vs 25%, P = .003). Patients with major low anterior resection syndrome were also more likely to experience high regret compared with patients with no/minor low anterior resection syndrome (44% vs 25%, P = .036).

CONCLUSION

A significant proportion of patients with rectal cancer undergoing restorative proctectomy do not have a decision-making role that is congruent with their preferences, and these patients experience a high degree of regret.

Bowel dysfunction and lower urinary tract symptoms on quality of life after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer: A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the impact of bowel dysfunction and lower urinary tract symptoms on the quality of patients with rectal cancer who underwent sphincter-preserving surgery.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included patients who were followed up after sphincter-preserving surgery in Korea. Data were collected from May 2022 to February 2023. The participants (n = 110) responded to self-reported questionnaires assessing the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) score, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-C29 questionnaires.

RESULTS

Among the participants, 66.4% had major low anterior resection syndrome, and 39.1% had moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms. Patients with higher severity of low anterior resection syndrome and lower urinary tract symptoms had a lower quality of life. The IPSS, performance status, duration since the end of the surgery, comorbidities, LARS scores, and tumor location on the anal verge negatively affected the quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Patients with more severe bowel dysfunction or lower urinary tract symptoms have a poorer quality of life. Nurses should be made aware of the factors that can reduce the quality of life of patients who have undergone sphincter-preserving surgery. Accordingly, they should plan to address the various nursing problems.

"You're just on your own": Exploring bowel symptom management needs after rectal cancer surgery through patient and clinician focus groups

PURPOSE

Currently cancer survivorship often leaves the needs of patients unidentified and unmet. The study aims to establish the views of experts on managing bowel symptoms following rectal cancer surgery.

METHOD

People living with bowel symptoms as well as clinicians with expertise in rectal cancer and subsequent bowel changes were invited to participate in online focus groups. Focus groups were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a modified framework analysis. Results were presented narratively with interpretations and quotations.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients following rectal cancer treatment attended one of two focus groups. Sixteen clinicians attended one of four groups. Participants described their opinions about bowel symptom management. Three themes were described by both patients and clinicians: expectations of bodily changes, supported self-repair and knowledgeable self-repair. Data from participants frequently concurred; all recognised clinicians needed to support and empower patients to independently manage their cancer consequences.

CONCLUSION

Well-managed expectations enable patients to set realistic goals and make plans. Clinicians need to support patients to understand potential bowel changes that might occur after rectal cancer surgery, providing support, information and signposting to other relevant information and colleagues. Effective communication through avoidance of jargon and rapport building as well as providing a point of contact help prevent patients feeling alone with their symptoms. Education is needed by both clinicians and patients to ensure consistent and useful advice is provided and understood. A recommendation from the focus groups is to create opportunities for patients to access information with clinician support and signposting.