Specialist breast cancer nurses’ views on implementing a fear of cancer recurrence intervention in practice: a mixed methods study

Introduction Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) in people with breast cancer affects treatment recovery, quality of life, service utilisation and relationships. Our aim was to investigate how specialist breast cancer nurses (SBCN) respond to their patients’ fears of cancer recurrence and analyse SBCN’s views about embedding a new psychological intervention, the Mini-AFTERc, into their consultations. Method A mixed methods sequential design was used, informed by normalisation process theory. Phase 1: UK SBCNs were emailed a web-based survey to investigate how breast cancer survivors’ FCR is currently identified and managed, and their willingness to utilise the Mini-AFTERc. Phase 2: a purposive sample of respondents (n = 20) were interviewed to augment phase 1 responses, and explore views on the importance of addressing FCR, interest in the Mini-AFTERc intervention, its content, skills required and challenges to delivering the intervention. Results Ninety nurses responded to the survey. When SBCN’s were asked to identify the proportion of patients experiencing FCR in their caseload, there was no consensus on the size of the problem or unmet need. They estimated that 20–100% people experience moderate FCR and 10–70% severe FCR. The interviews identified that clinical conversations are focused primarily on giving information about signs and symptoms of recurrence rather than addressing the psychological aspects of fear. Conclusion Findings indicate wide variability in how FCR was identified, assessed and supported by a sample of UK SBCNs. The introduction of a structured intervention into practice was viewed favourably and has implications for nursing and health professional ways of working in all cancer services

QUALZICE: A QUALitative exploration of the experiences of the participants from the ZICE clinical trial (metastatic breast cancer) receiving intravenous or oral bisphosphonates

BACKGROUND: This qualitative sub-study aimed to explore the experiences of participants on the National Cancer Research Institute ZICE clinical trial, a randomised trial assessing two types of bisphosphonate treatment in breast cancer patients with bone metastases. Participants in the clinical trial were randomly allocated to receive either zoledronate, delivered by an intravenous (IV) infusion at clinic, or oral ibandronate, taken at home.METHODS: Qualitative research interviews were conducted with participant groups organised by treatment and location. Interviews covered experiences and understanding of bisphosphonate treatment, the experience of the delivery mechanisms (IV or oral), side effects and benefits, and quality of life issues. The analytic framework was interpretative phenomenological analysis.RESULTS: This paper reports on one of four superordinate themes: participants' experience of the ZICE trial, which explores the participants' experiences with clinical trial-related processes. Results show that participants were generally satisfied with their randomised treatment, although most participants had an initial preference for oral bisphosphonates. Some difficulties were reported from participants for both interventions: needle phobia, poor veins, difficulty with swallowing and gastric side effects, but pain control was improved with both modes of delivery. However, the infused bisphosphonate was reported to lose effectiveness after three weeks for some participants, whereas the oral bisphosphonate was reported to give consistent pain control. Geographical location and distance to travel made little difference to convenience of access to clinic as the reported lengths of travel time were similar due to traffic congestion in the urban areas. Most participants understood the trial processes, such as randomisation, and information about bisphosphonates but some participants showed little understanding of certain aspects of the trial. Some participants reported difficulties in accessing dental treatment due to their dentist's perceptions of bisphosphonate treatment.CONCLUSIONS: In trials of medicinal products, especially when testing for non-inferiority, participants' preferences and idiosyncrasies in relation to treatments should not be assumed. This study has shown that in a trial context, participants' views can usefully add to the main trial outcomes and they should be taken into account when prescribing in the real world.TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN13914201. Main ZICE MREC: 05/MRE09/57. CRUK E/04/022.</p

Adjuvant endocrine therapy after breast cancer: a qualitative study of factors associated with adherence.

INTRODUCTION: Despite evidence of the efficacy of adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) in reducing the risk of recurrence and mortality after treatment for primary breast cancer, adherence to AET is suboptimal. This study aimed to explore factors that influence adherence and nonadherence to AET following breast cancer to inform the development of supportive interventions. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with 32 women who had been prescribed AET, 2-4 years following their diagnosis of breast cancer. Both adherers (n=19) and nonadherers (n=13) were recruited. The analysis was conducted using the Framework approach. RESULTS: Factors associated with adherence were as follows: managing side effects including information and advice on side effects and taking control of side effects, supportive relationships, and personal influences. Factors associated with nonadherence were as follows: burden of side effects, feeling unsupported, concerns about long-term AET use, regaining normality, including valuing the quality of life over length of life, and risk perception. CONCLUSION: Provision of timely information to prepare women for the potential side effects of AET and education on medication management strategies are needed, including provision of timely and accurate information on the efficacy of AET in reducing breast cancer recurrence and on potential side effects and ways to manage these should they arise. Trust in the doctor-patient relationship and clear patient pathways for bothersome side effects and concerns with AET are important. Training and education on AET for GPs should be considered alongside novel care pathways such as primary care nurse cancer care review and community pharmacist follow-up

Adjuvant endocrine therapy after breast cancer: A qualitative study of factors associated with adherence

Introduction : Despite evidence of the efficacy of Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy (AET) in reducing the risk of recurrence and mortality after treatment for primary breast cancer, adherence to AET is suboptimal. This study aimed to explore factors that influence adherence and non-adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) following breast cancer to inform the development of supportive interventions. Methods: Interviews were conducted with 32 women who had been prescribed AET, 2-4 years following their diagnosis of breast cancer,. Both adherers (n=19) and non-adherers (n=13) were recruited. The analysis was conducted using the Framework approach. Results: Factors associated with adherence were: Managing side effects including information and advice on side effects, and taking control of side effects, Supportive relationships, and Personal influences. Factors associated with non-adherence were: Burden of side effects, Feeling unsupported, Concerns about long term AET use, Re-gaining normality, including valuing quality of life over length of life, and Risk perception Conclusions: Provision of timely information to prepare women for the potential side effects of AET and education on medication management strategies are needed, including provision of timely and accurate information on the efficacy of AET in reducing breast cancer recurrence, and on potential side effects and ways to manage these should they arise. . Trust in the doctor-patient relationship and clear patient pathways for bothersome side effects and concerns with AET are important. Training and education around AET for GPs should be considered alongside novel care pathways such as primary care nurse cancer care review, and community pharmacist follow-up

Rehabilitation versus surgical reconstruction for non-acute anterior cruciate ligament injury (ACL SNNAP): a pragmatic randomised controlled trial

BackgroundAnterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is a common debilitating injury that can cause instability of the knee. We aimed to investigate the best management strategy between reconstructive surgery and non-surgical treatment for patients with a non-acute ACL injury and persistent symptoms of instability.MethodsWe did a pragmatic, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial in 29 secondary care National Health Service orthopaedic units in the UK. Patients with symptomatic knee problems (instability) consistent with an ACL injury were eligible. We excluded patients with meniscal pathology with characteristics that indicate immediate surgery. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by computer to either surgery (reconstruction) or rehabilitation (physiotherapy but with subsequent reconstruction permitted if instability persisted after treatment), stratified by site and baseline Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score—4 domain version (KOOS4). This management design represented normal practice. The primary outcome was KOOS4 at 18 months after randomisation. The principal analyses were intention-to-treat based, with KOOS4 results analysed using linear regression. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN10110685, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02980367.FindingsBetween Feb 1, 2017, and April 12, 2020, we recruited 316 patients. 156 (49%) participants were randomly assigned to the surgical reconstruction group and 160 (51%) to the rehabilitation group. Mean KOOS4 at 18 months was 73·0 (SD 18·3) in the surgical group and 64·6 (21·6) in the rehabilitation group. The adjusted mean difference was 7·9 (95% CI 2·5–13·2; p=0·0053) in favour of surgical management. 65 (41%) of 160 patients allocated to rehabilitation underwent subsequent surgery according to protocol within 18 months. 43 (28%) of 156 patients allocated to surgery did not receive their allocated treatment. We found no differences between groups in the proportion of intervention-related complications.InterpretationSurgical reconstruction as a management strategy for patients with non-acute ACL injury with persistent symptoms of instability was clinically superior and more cost-effective in comparison with rehabilitation management

Helping patients to help themselves after breast cancer treatment

There is a rise in the number of women living with the long-term consequences of cancer and continuing to suffer unmet need as breast cancer survival improves. This paper includes an introduction to self-management and a discussion of the evidence around the effectiveness of the key intervention types that could help patients to help themselves after treatment. Self-management interventions are particularly beneficial in reducing bother from symptoms, without patients having to take on the additional burden of more unwanted side-effects frequently seen with pharmacological interventions. There is a need to prioritise the funding of these financially viable self-management strategies to ensure equity of access and that these interventions are available for those in need