Normalisation process theory and the implementation of a new glaucoma clinical pathway in hospital eye services: perspectives of doctors, nurses and optometrists

Background Normalisation process theory reports the importance of contextual integration in successfully embedding novel interventions, with recent propositions detailing the role that ‘plasticity’ of intervention components and ‘elasticity’ of an intended setting contribute. We report on the introduction of a clinical pathway assessing patient non-responsiveness to treatment for glaucoma and ocular hypertension. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of implementing the Cardiff Model of Glaucoma Care into hospital eye services, identifying any issues of acceptability for staff through the filter of normalisation process theory. Methods A prospective observational study was undertaken in four hospital eye services. This incorporated detailed qualitative semi-structured interviews with staff (n = 8) to gather their perceptions on the intervention’s usefulness and practicality. In addition, observational field notes of patient and staff consultations (n = 88) were collected, as well as broader organisational observations from within the research sites (n = 52). Data collection and analysis was informed by the normalisation process theory framework. Results Staff reported the pathway led to beneficial knowledge on managing patient treatment, but the model was sometimes perceived as overly prescriptive. This perception varied significantly based on the composition of clinics in relation to staff experience, staff availability and pre-existing clinical structures. The most commonly recounted barrier came in contextually integrating into sites where wider administrative systems were inflexible to intervention components

Decision regret in men living with and beyond nonmetastatic prostate cancer in the United Kingdom: A population‐based patient‐reported outcome study

Objective: Clinical options for managing nonmetastatic prostate cancer (PCa) vary. Each option has side effects associated with it, leading to difficulty in decision‐making. This study aimed to assess the relationship between patient involvement in treatment decision‐making and subsequent decision regret (DR), and quantify the impact of health‐related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes on DR. Methods: Men living in the United Kingdom, 18 to 42 months after diagnosis of PCa, were identified from cancer registration data and sent a questionnaire. Measures included the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), Expanded Prostate cancer Index Composite short form (EPIC‐26), EQ‐5D‐5L, and an item on involvement in treatment decision‐making. Multivariable ordinal regression was utilized, with DR categorized as none, mild, or moderate/severe regret. Results: A total of 17 193 men with stage I‐III PCa completed the DRS: 36.6% reported no regret, 43.3% mild regret, and 20.0% moderate/severe regret. The odds of reporting DR were greater if men indicated their views were not taken into account odds ratio ([OR] = 6.42, 95% CI: 5.39‐7.64) or were involved “to some extent” in decision‐making (OR = 4.63, 95% CI: 4.27‐5.02), compared with men who were “definitely” involved. After adjustment, including for involvement, men reporting moderate/big problems with urinary, bowel, or sexual function were more likely to experience regret compared with men with no/small problems. Better HRQL scores were associated with lower levels of DR. Conclusions: This large‐scale study demonstrates the benefit of patient involvement in treatment decision‐making for nonmetastatic PCa. However, men experiencing side effects and poorer HRQL report greater DR. Promoting engagement in clinical decision‐making represents good practice and may reduce the risk of subsequent regret

Regional variations in quality of survival among men with prostate cancer across the United Kingdom

Purpose: Prostate cancer incidence, treatment and survival rates vary throughout the United Kingdom (UK) but little is known about regional differences in quality of survival. Objective: To investigate variations in patient-reported outcomes between UK countries and English Cancer Alliances. Design, setting and participants: A cross-sectional postal survey of prostate cancer survivors diagnosed 18-42 months previously. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Urinary, bowel, sexual problems and vitality were patient reported using the EPIC-26 questionnaire. General health was also self-assessed. Regional variations were identified using multivariable log-linear regression. Results and limitations: 35,823 men responded; 60.8% of those invited. Self-assessed health was significantly lower than the UK average in Wales and Scotland. Respondents reported more urinary incontinence in Scotland, more urinary irritation/obstruction in Scotland and Northern Ireland (NI), poorer bowel function in Scotland and NI, worse sexual function in Scotland, and reduced vitality/hormonal function in Scotland, Wales and NI. Self-assessed health was poorer than the English average in South Yorkshire and North-East & Cumbria, with more urinary incontinence in North-East & Cumbria and Peninsula, greater sexual problems in West Midlands and poorer vitality in North-East & Cumbria and West Midlands. Limitations include difficulty identifying clinically significant differences and limited information on pre-treatment conditions. Conclusions: Despite adjustment for treatment, clinical and socio-demographic factors, quality of survival among prostate cancer survivors varied by area of residence. Adoption of best practice from areas performing well could support enhanced survival quality in poorer performing areas, particularly with regards bowel problems and vitality, where clinically relevant differences were reported. Patient summary: We conducted a UK-wide survey of patient’s quality of life after treatment for prostate cancer. Outcomes were found to vary depending upon where patients live. Different service providers need to ensure that all prostate cancer patients receive the same follow up care

Quality of life in men living with advanced and localised prostate cancer: A United Kingdom population-wide patient-reported outcome study of 30,000 men

Background. Little is known about the health-related quality of life (HRQL) of men living with advanced prostate cancer. We report population-wide functional outcomes and HRQL in men with all stages of prostate cancer, and identify implications for healthcare delivery. Methods. Men alive 18-42 months after diagnosis of prostate cancer were identified through cancer registration data. A postal survey was administered which contained validated measures to assess a) functional outcomes (EPIC-26 plus use of interventions for sexual dysfunction) and b) generic HRQL (EQ-5D-5L & self-assessed health). Log-linear and binary logistic regression models were used to compare functional outcomes and HRQL across diagnostic stage and self-reported treatment groups. Findings. 35,823 (60.8%) men responded. Stage was known for 85.8%; 19,599 (63.8%) stage I/II, 7,209 (23.4%) stage III, 3,925 (12.8%) stage IV. Functional outcomes: Poor sexual function was common (81.0%), regardless of stage, and over half of men (55.8%) received no intervention for this. Differences in urinary and bowel morbidity were greater with respect to treatment than stage. In men treated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), 30.7% reported moderate/big problems with hot flushes, 29.4% with lack of energy and 22.5% with weight gain. HRQL: Overall self-assessed health was similar in men with stage I-III disease, and whilst reduced in those with stage IV cancer, 23.5% with metastatic disease reported no problems on any EQ-5D dimension. Interpretation. Men diagnosed with advanced disease do not report markedly different HRQL outcomes to those diagnosed with localised disease, although substantial problems with hormonal function and fatigue are reported amongst men treated with ADT. Sexual dysfunction is common and the majority of men are not offered helpful intervention or support. Service improvements around sexual rehabilitation and measures to reduce the impact of ADT are required

Quality of life in men living with advanced and localised prostate cancer in the UK: a population-based study

Background: Little is known about the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of men living with advanced prostate cancer. We report population-wide functional outcomes and HRQOL in men with all stages of prostate cancer and identify implications for health-care delivery. Methods: For this population-based study, men in the UK living 18–42 months after diagnosis of prostate cancer were identified through cancer registration data. A postal survey was administered, which contained validated measures to assess functional outcomes (urinary incontinence, urinary irritation and obstruction, bowel, sexual, and vitality and hormonal function), measured with the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite short form (EPIC-26), plus questions about use of interventions for sexual dysfunction) and generic HRQOL (assessed with the 5-level EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire [EQ-5D-5L] measuring mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain or discomfort, and anxiety or depression, plus a rating of self-assessed health). Log-linear and binary logistic regression models were used to compare functional outcomes and HRQOL across diagnostic stages and self-reported treatment groups. Each model included adjustment for age, socioeconomic deprivation, and number of other long-term conditions. Findings: 35 823 (60·8%) of 58 930 men responded to the survey. Disease stage was known for 30 733 (85·8%) of 35 823 men; 19 599 (63·8%) had stage I or II, 7209 (23·4%) stage III, and 3925 (12·8%) stage IV disease. Mean adjusted EPIC-26 domain scores were high, indicating good function, except for sexual function, for which scores were much lower. Compared with men who did not receive androgen deprivation therapy, more men who received the therapy reported moderate to big problems with hot flushes (30·7% [95% CI 29·8–31·6] vs 5·4% [5·0–5·8]), low energy (29·4% [95% CI 28·6–30·3] vs 14·7% [14·2–15·3]), and weight gain (22·5%, 21·7–23·3) vs 6·9% [6·5–7·3]). Poor sexual function was common (81·0%; 95% CI 80·6–81·5), regardless of stage, and more than half of men (n=18 782 [55·8%]) were not offered any intervention to help with this condition. Overall, self-assessed health was similar in men with stage I–III disease, and although slightly reduced in those with stage IV cancer, 23·5% of men with metastatic disease reported no problems on any EQ-5D dimension. Interpretation: Men diagnosed with advanced disease do not report substantially different HRQOL outcomes to those diagnosed with localised disease, although considerable problems with hormonal function and fatigue are reported in men treated with androgen deprivation therapy. Sexual dysfunction is common and most men are not offered helpful intervention or support. Service improvements around sexual rehabilitation and measures to reduce the effects of androgen deprivation therapy are required. Funding: The Movember Foundation, in partnership with Prostate Cancer UK