A meta-ethnography investigating relational influences on mental health and cancer-related health care interventions for racially minoritised people in the UK.

OBJECTIVE: Despite calls to increase the 'cultural competence' of health care providers, racially minoritised people continue to experience a range of problems when it comes to health care, including discrimination. While relevant qualitative meta-syntheses have suggested better ways forward for health care for racialised minorities, many have lacked conceptual depth, and none have specifically investigated the relational dimensions involved in care. We set out to investigate the social and cultural influences on health care interventions, focusing on psychological approaches and/or cancer care to inform the trial of a new psychological therapy for those living with or beyond cancer. METHOD: A meta-ethnography approach was used to examine the relevant qualitative studies, following Noblit and Hare, and guided by patient involvement throughout. Papers were analysed between September 2018 and February 2023, with some interruptions caused by the Covid pandemic. The following databases were searched: Ovid MEDLINE, EBSCO CINAHL, Ovid Embase, EBSCO PsycINFO, Proquest Sociology Collection (including Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA), Sociological Abstracts and Sociology Database), EBSCO SocINDEX, Ovid AMED, and Web of Science. The systematic review protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (ID: CRD42018107695), and reporting follows the eMERGe Reporting Guidance for meta-ethnographies (France et al. 2019). RESULTS: Twenty-nine journal papers were included in the final review. Themes (third-order constructs) developed in the paper include the centrality of the patient-practitioner relationship; how participants give meaning to their illness in connection to others; how families (rather than individuals) may make health decisions; how links with a higher power and spiritual/religious others can play a role in coping; and the ways in which a hierarchy of help-seeking develops, frequently with the first port of call being the resources of oneself. Participants in studies had a need to avoid being 'othered' in their care, valuing practitioners that connected with them, and who were able to recognise them as whole and complex (sometimes described in relational languages like 'love'). Complex family-based health decision-making and/or the importance of relations with non-human interactants (e.g. God, spiritual beings) were frequently uncovered, not to mention the profoundly emergent nature of stigma, whereby families could be relatively safe havens for containing and dealing with health challenges. A conceptual framework of 'animated via (frequently hidden) affective relationality' emerged in the final synthesis, bringing all themes together, and drawing attention to the emergent nature of the salient issues facing minoritised patients in health care interactions. CONCLUSION: Our analysis is important because it sheds light on the hitherto buried relational forces animating and producing the specific issues facing racially minoritised patients, which study participants thought were largely overlooked, but to which professionals can readily relate (given the universal nature of human relations). Thus, training around the affective relationality of consultations could be a fruitful avenue to explore to improve care of diverse patients

Review of systematic reviews of non-pharmacological interventions to improve quality of life in cancer survivors.

Over two million people in the UK are living with and beyond cancer. A third report diminished quality of life. A review of published systematic reviews to identify effective non-pharmacological interventions to improve the quality of life of cancer survivors. Databases searched until May 2017 included PubMed, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and PsycINFO. Published systematic reviews of randomised trials of non-pharmacological interventions for people living with and beyond cancer were included; included reviews targeted patients aged over 18. All participants had already received a cancer diagnosis. Interventions located in any healthcare setting, home or online were included. Reviews of alternative therapies or those non-English reports were excluded. Two researchers independently assessed titles, abstracts and the full text of papers, and independently extracted the data. The primary outcome of interest was any measure of global (overall) quality of life. Quality assessment assessing methdological quality of systematic reviews (AMSTAR) and narrative synthesis, evaluating effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions and their components. Of 14 430 unique titles, 21 were included in the review of reviews. There was little overlap in the primary papers across these reviews. Thirteen reviews covered mixed tumour groups, seven focused on breast cancer and one focused on prostate cancer. Face-to-face interventions were often combined with online, telephone and paper-based reading materials. Interventions included physical, psychological or behavioural, multidimensional rehabilitation and online approaches. Yoga specifically, physical exercise more generally, cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) programmes showed benefit in terms of quality of life. Exercise-based interventions were effective in the short (less than 3-8 months) and long term. CBT and MBSR also showed benefits, especially in the short term. The evidence for multidisciplinary, online and educational interventions was equivocal. [Abstract copyright: © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Qualitative study of experience of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT+) amongst Survivors' Rehabilitation Evaluation after Cancer (SURECAN) trial participants and therapists: A protocol.

Background: This interview study forms part of a mixed methods process evaluation of the Survivors’ Rehabilitation Evaluation after Cancer (SURECAN) trial to understand the experiences of participants (who are living with and beyond cancer) in receiving a form of acceptance and commitment therapy, and therapists providing the intervention. SURECAN is a multi-centre, pragmatic, individual participant randomised controlled trial of an intervention based on acceptance and commitment therapy supplemented by support for return to meaningful work and/or physical activity (ACT+). This qualitative study addresses the ways in which participants believe they benefit from ACT+ (or not), and how the ACT+ intervention might best be implemented into routine National Health Service (NHS) care. Methods: : The study investigates experiences of ACT+ by different participants to understand how we can optimise the ACT+ intervention and its delivery (assuming the intervention is successful). We will conduct individual interviews with participants who have taken part in the active arm of the SURECAN trial to understand their experiences of engaging with and receiving ACT+, their perceptions of the impact of the therapy, and relevant contextual factors influencing these experiences. In particular, we will focus on comparing our interview findings between those trial participants who improved and those who failed to improve (or worsened), in terms of quality of life following ACT+. Additionally, we will conduct individual interviews with therapists who have delivered ACT+ as part of the SURECAN trial, to understand their experiences of delivering ACT+. Conclusions: : Consistent with other qualitative protocols, this protocol is not registered. Instead, it is shared as a means of documenting ahead of time, how we are endeavouring to understand the ways in which a newly trialled talking therapy is received by patients and therapists, and how (if successful) it might be incorporated into the NHS