S. Cooke , D. Nelson , A. Arslan Argin , D. Laparidou , R. Young , J. Waller , R. Kane , D. McInnerney , S.L. Quaife , M.D. Peake , L. Mitchinson
{"title":"Identifying and exploring patient engagement interventions for people diagnosed with lung cancer: A rapid systematic review","authors":"S. Cooke , D. Nelson , A. Arslan Argin , D. Laparidou , R. Young , J. Waller , R. Kane , D. McInnerney , S.L. Quaife , M.D. Peake , L. Mitchinson","doi":"10.1016/j.lungcan.2025.108484","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To identify and synthesise evidence describing patient engagement interventions that have been used to support people diagnosed with lung cancer.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A rapid systematic review was conducted following guidance from the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods group and reported using the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) checklist. Keyword searches were performed in MEDLINE and supplemented by Google Scholar searches. Searches were restricted to peer-reviewed articles conducted in high-income countries and published in English. Data was extracted using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist, tabulated, and narratively synthesised. Data extraction and quality assessment were conducted by two independent reviewers.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Thirty-four studies were included in the final analysis. Studies show a positive impact of interventions across a range of engagement outcomes including patient and caregiver knowledge, patient activation, and decision making. Interventions were also shown to reduce healthcare use, reduce symptom severity, and improve psychosocial outcomes. Barriers to implementing interventions included: the timing/delivery of interventions, poor digital literacy, system and technical barriers, and poor uptake and adherence by advanced patients. Factors supporting intervention implementation included: participatory research/co-production approaches, providing training and support for those delivering interventions, involving caregivers, and employing broad recruitment strategies. The overall risk of bias for studies ranged from moderate to high.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The identified interventions demonstrate significant potential for enhancing patient engagement and improving outcomes for lung cancer patients. Findings from this review will support the design and implementation of future interventions to help people with cancer engage with healthcare.</div><div><strong>Review registration:</strong> The protocol was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42024521052) on 06/03/24.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":18129,"journal":{"name":"Lung Cancer","volume":"202 ","pages":"Article 108484"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lung Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169500225003769","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
To identify and synthesise evidence describing patient engagement interventions that have been used to support people diagnosed with lung cancer.
Methods
A rapid systematic review was conducted following guidance from the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods group and reported using the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) checklist. Keyword searches were performed in MEDLINE and supplemented by Google Scholar searches. Searches were restricted to peer-reviewed articles conducted in high-income countries and published in English. Data was extracted using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist, tabulated, and narratively synthesised. Data extraction and quality assessment were conducted by two independent reviewers.
Results
Thirty-four studies were included in the final analysis. Studies show a positive impact of interventions across a range of engagement outcomes including patient and caregiver knowledge, patient activation, and decision making. Interventions were also shown to reduce healthcare use, reduce symptom severity, and improve psychosocial outcomes. Barriers to implementing interventions included: the timing/delivery of interventions, poor digital literacy, system and technical barriers, and poor uptake and adherence by advanced patients. Factors supporting intervention implementation included: participatory research/co-production approaches, providing training and support for those delivering interventions, involving caregivers, and employing broad recruitment strategies. The overall risk of bias for studies ranged from moderate to high.
Conclusion
The identified interventions demonstrate significant potential for enhancing patient engagement and improving outcomes for lung cancer patients. Findings from this review will support the design and implementation of future interventions to help people with cancer engage with healthcare.
Review registration: The protocol was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42024521052) on 06/03/24.
期刊介绍:
Lung Cancer is an international publication covering the clinical, translational and basic science of malignancies of the lung and chest region.Original research articles, early reports, review articles, editorials and correspondence covering the prevention, epidemiology and etiology, basic biology, pathology, clinical assessment, surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, combined treatment modalities, other treatment modalities and outcomes of lung cancer are welcome.