Effect of Education on Symptom Management and Control in Cancer Patients Receiving Palliative Care

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING
Mahcube Cubukcu , Bekir Sahin , Dilek Kiymaz , Nur Simsek Yurt
{"title":"Effect of Education on Symptom Management and Control in Cancer Patients Receiving Palliative Care","authors":"Mahcube Cubukcu ,&nbsp;Bekir Sahin ,&nbsp;Dilek Kiymaz ,&nbsp;Nur Simsek Yurt","doi":"10.1016/j.pmn.2024.02.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>This study aims to investigate the effect of an educational intervention on cancer patients receiving palliative care and their caregivers concerning symptom management and family needs.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This study involved 120 participants—60 cancer patients and their respective caregivers—divided into intervention and control groups. Over a 2-week period, the intervention group received a comprehensive educational program focusing on symptom management, while the control group did not receive any educational intervention. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) and Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) were used to assess patients' symptoms, their intensity, and performance, while the Family Need Scale (FNS) was utilized to evaluate caregivers' needs. These assessments were conducted at the beginning and end of the study. Primary outcomes focused on symptom assessment using ESAS and PPS, along with evaluating caregivers’ needs through FNS. Secondary outcomes involved assessing participant satisfaction with the intervention.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>At the end of the study, comparing initial and second evaluations, both ESAS and PPS scores significantly increased in the intervention and control groups (<em>p</em> = .003, <em>p</em> = .002, respectively). Additionally, a statistically significant decrease in the severity of symptoms, except for lethargy/hypokinesis, was observed in the intervention group compared to the control group. The FNS scale indicated that family needs satisfaction was higher in the intervention group compared to the control group. The data obtained demonstrated that there was a reduction the pain, fatigue, depression, anxiety, drowsiness, and shortness of breath levels in the intervention group compared to the control group, but there was no significant difference other than these symptoms.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The educational intervention positively impacted symptom management and family needs. Optimizing symptom control would greatly benefit palliative care patients and their caregivers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19959,"journal":{"name":"Pain Management Nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Management Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1524904224000195","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

This study aims to investigate the effect of an educational intervention on cancer patients receiving palliative care and their caregivers concerning symptom management and family needs.

Methods

This study involved 120 participants—60 cancer patients and their respective caregivers—divided into intervention and control groups. Over a 2-week period, the intervention group received a comprehensive educational program focusing on symptom management, while the control group did not receive any educational intervention. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) and Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) were used to assess patients' symptoms, their intensity, and performance, while the Family Need Scale (FNS) was utilized to evaluate caregivers' needs. These assessments were conducted at the beginning and end of the study. Primary outcomes focused on symptom assessment using ESAS and PPS, along with evaluating caregivers’ needs through FNS. Secondary outcomes involved assessing participant satisfaction with the intervention.

Results

At the end of the study, comparing initial and second evaluations, both ESAS and PPS scores significantly increased in the intervention and control groups (p = .003, p = .002, respectively). Additionally, a statistically significant decrease in the severity of symptoms, except for lethargy/hypokinesis, was observed in the intervention group compared to the control group. The FNS scale indicated that family needs satisfaction was higher in the intervention group compared to the control group. The data obtained demonstrated that there was a reduction the pain, fatigue, depression, anxiety, drowsiness, and shortness of breath levels in the intervention group compared to the control group, but there was no significant difference other than these symptoms.

Conclusions

The educational intervention positively impacted symptom management and family needs. Optimizing symptom control would greatly benefit palliative care patients and their caregivers.

教育对接受姑息治疗的癌症患者症状管理和控制的影响
研究目的本研究旨在探讨教育干预对接受姑息治疗的癌症患者及其护理人员在症状管理和家庭需求方面的影响:这项研究涉及 120 名参与者--60 名癌症患者及其护理人员--分为干预组和对照组。在为期两周的时间里,干预组接受了以症状管理为重点的综合教育计划,而对照组则没有接受任何教育干预。埃德蒙顿症状评估系统(ESAS)和姑息表现量表(PPS)用于评估患者的症状、症状强度和表现,而家庭需求量表(FNS)则用于评估照护者的需求。这些评估分别在研究开始和结束时进行。主要结果侧重于使用 ESAS 和 PPS 进行症状评估,以及通过 FNS 评估护理人员的需求。次要结果包括评估参与者对干预措施的满意度:在研究结束时,比较初次评估和第二次评估,干预组和对照组的 ESAS 和 PPS 分数均有显著提高(分别为 p = .003 和 p = .002)。此外,与对照组相比,除嗜睡/运动不足外,干预组的症状严重程度在统计学上有明显下降。FNS 量表显示,与对照组相比,干预组的家庭需求满意度更高。获得的数据表明,与对照组相比,干预组的疼痛、疲劳、抑郁、焦虑、嗜睡和呼吸急促程度有所减轻,但除这些症状外,其他症状没有显著差异:教育干预对症状控制和家庭需求产生了积极影响。优化症状控制对姑息关怀患者及其照护者大有裨益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pain Management Nursing
Pain Management Nursing 医学-护理
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.90%
发文量
187
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: This peer-reviewed journal offers a unique focus on the realm of pain management as it applies to nursing. Original and review articles from experts in the field offer key insights in the areas of clinical practice, advocacy, education, administration, and research. Additional features include practice guidelines and pharmacology updates.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信