Inequalities in access to neuro-oncology supportive care and rehabilitation: a survey of healthcare professionals’ perspectives

F. Boele, L. Rosenlund, S. Nordentoft, Sara Melhuish, E. Nicklin, I. Rydén, A. Williamson, M. Donders-Kamphuis, M. Preusser, E. Le Rhun, B. Kiesel, G. Minniti, J. Furtner, L. Dirven, M. Taphoorn, N. Galldiks, R. Rudà, A. Chalmers, Susan C Short, K. Piil
{"title":"Inequalities in access to neuro-oncology supportive care and rehabilitation: a survey of healthcare professionals’ perspectives","authors":"F. Boele, L. Rosenlund, S. Nordentoft, Sara Melhuish, E. Nicklin, I. Rydén, A. Williamson, M. Donders-Kamphuis, M. Preusser, E. Le Rhun, B. Kiesel, G. Minniti, J. Furtner, L. Dirven, M. Taphoorn, N. Galldiks, R. Rudà, A. Chalmers, Susan C Short, K. Piil","doi":"10.1093/nop/npae023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n Neuro-oncology patients and caregivers should have equitable access to rehabilitation, supportive-, and palliative care. To investigate existing issues and potential solutions, we surveyed neuro-oncology professionals to explore current barriers and facilitators to screening patients’ needs and referral to services.\n \n \n \n Members of the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Brain Tumor Group (EORTC-BTG) were invited to complete a 39-item online questionnaire covering availability of services, screening and referral practice. Responses were analyzed descriptively; associations between sociodemographic/clinical variables and screening/referral practice were explored.\n \n \n \n In total, 103 participants completed the survey (67% women; 57% medical doctors). Fifteen professions from 23 countries were represented. Various rehabilitation, supportive- and palliative care services were available yet rated ‘inadequate’ by 21-37% of participants. Most respondents with a clinical role (n=94) declare to screen (78%) and to refer (83%) their patients routinely for physical/cognitive/emotional issues. Survey completers (n=103) indicated the main reasons for not screening/referring were 1) lack of suitable referral options (50%); 2) shortage of healthcare professionals (48%); 3) long waiting lists (42%). To improve service provision, respondents suggested there is a need for education about neuro-oncology specific issues (75%), improving availability of services (65%) and staff (64%), developing international guidelines (64%), and strengthening the existing evidence-base for rehabilitation (60%).\n \n \n \n Detecting and managing neuro-oncology patients’ and caregivers’ rehabilitation, supportive- and palliative care needs can be improved. Better international collaboration can help address healthcare disparities.\n","PeriodicalId":506567,"journal":{"name":"Neuro-Oncology Practice","volume":"23 24","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuro-Oncology Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/nop/npae023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Neuro-oncology patients and caregivers should have equitable access to rehabilitation, supportive-, and palliative care. To investigate existing issues and potential solutions, we surveyed neuro-oncology professionals to explore current barriers and facilitators to screening patients’ needs and referral to services. Members of the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Brain Tumor Group (EORTC-BTG) were invited to complete a 39-item online questionnaire covering availability of services, screening and referral practice. Responses were analyzed descriptively; associations between sociodemographic/clinical variables and screening/referral practice were explored. In total, 103 participants completed the survey (67% women; 57% medical doctors). Fifteen professions from 23 countries were represented. Various rehabilitation, supportive- and palliative care services were available yet rated ‘inadequate’ by 21-37% of participants. Most respondents with a clinical role (n=94) declare to screen (78%) and to refer (83%) their patients routinely for physical/cognitive/emotional issues. Survey completers (n=103) indicated the main reasons for not screening/referring were 1) lack of suitable referral options (50%); 2) shortage of healthcare professionals (48%); 3) long waiting lists (42%). To improve service provision, respondents suggested there is a need for education about neuro-oncology specific issues (75%), improving availability of services (65%) and staff (64%), developing international guidelines (64%), and strengthening the existing evidence-base for rehabilitation (60%). Detecting and managing neuro-oncology patients’ and caregivers’ rehabilitation, supportive- and palliative care needs can be improved. Better international collaboration can help address healthcare disparities.
获得神经肿瘤支持性护理和康复方面的不平等:医护人员观点调查
神经肿瘤患者和护理人员应能公平地获得康复、支持和姑息治疗服务。为了调查现有的问题和潜在的解决方案,我们对神经肿瘤学专业人员进行了调查,以探讨目前筛查患者需求和转介服务的障碍和促进因素。 我们邀请欧洲神经肿瘤协会(EANO)和欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织脑肿瘤小组(EORTC-BTG)的成员填写了一份包含 39 个项目的在线问卷,内容涉及服务的可用性、筛查和转诊实践。我们对问卷答复进行了描述性分析,并探讨了社会人口学/临床变量与筛查/转诊实践之间的关联。 共有 103 名参与者完成了调查(67% 为女性;57% 为医生)。调查对象来自 23 个国家的 15 个行业。虽然提供了各种康复、支持和姑息治疗服务,但 21% 至 37% 的受访者认为这些服务 "不足"。大多数具有临床职责的受访者(人数=94)表示会对其病人进行身体/认知/情感问题的常规筛查(78%)和转诊(83%)。调查完成者(人数=103)表示,不进行筛查/转诊的主要原因是:1)缺乏合适的转诊选择(50%);2)医护人员短缺(48%);3)等候时间过长(42%)。为改善服务,受访者认为有必要开展有关神经肿瘤特定问题的教育(75%)、改善服务供应(65%)和人员配备(64%)、制定国际指南(64%)以及加强现有的康复证据基础(60%)。 神经肿瘤患者和护理人员的康复、支持性护理和姑息治疗需求的检测和管理可以得到改善。加强国际合作有助于解决医疗差距问题。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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