Facilitators to oncological care in foregut cancer: The patient perspective

IF 1
Surgical Oncology Insight Pub Date : 2025-12-01 Epub Date: 2025-09-17 DOI:10.1016/j.soi.2025.100192
Jaspinder S. Sanghera , Michelle M. Holland , Ioannis Liapis , Rida Ahmad , Katie West , Manish Tripathi , Larry Hearld , Daniel I. Chu , Krista Mehari , Martin J. Heslin , Smita Bhatia , Annabelle L. Fonseca
{"title":"Facilitators to oncological care in foregut cancer: The patient perspective","authors":"Jaspinder S. Sanghera ,&nbsp;Michelle M. Holland ,&nbsp;Ioannis Liapis ,&nbsp;Rida Ahmad ,&nbsp;Katie West ,&nbsp;Manish Tripathi ,&nbsp;Larry Hearld ,&nbsp;Daniel I. Chu ,&nbsp;Krista Mehari ,&nbsp;Martin J. Heslin ,&nbsp;Smita Bhatia ,&nbsp;Annabelle L. Fonseca","doi":"10.1016/j.soi.2025.100192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Foregut cancers are best treated by specialized, multidisciplinary care, often delivered, at least in part, at tertiary centers. Patient perspectives on the factors that enhance access to and adherence to cancer treatment remain underexplored. This qualitative study explores patient-reported facilitators of care at a safety-net hospital in the Southeastern United States (US).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Patients with foregut cancer receiving care at a safety-net tertiary care institution in the Southeastern US were recruited. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using NVivo 14 Software. Grounded theory methodology was used to identify themes and subthemes. A comprehensive codebook was established, with a high interrater reliability rate of &gt; 90 % for all themes.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the 30 patients interviewed, the majority were male (n = 23, 77 %) and Black (n = 18, 60 %), with an average age of 63 (IQR: 55–67). Facilitator themes were identified across four categories: (1) Individual/Interpersonal; (2) Provider/Care Team; (3) Healthcare Systems, and (4) Broader Policy. The most prevalent facilitators identified included faith and spirituality (87 %), support from immediate family (83 %), trust in the care team (90 %), and effective communication (97 %).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Understanding patient perspectives is essential for delivering high-quality care in foregut cancer. These facilitators should be actively promoted during the development of future interventions. An appreciation of patient beliefs, communication training for care providers, hiring necessary ancillary staff, use of written handouts, expanding financial aid services, and wider healthcare reform are all avenues to explore in the ongoing effort to improve comprehensive oncological care for patients.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":101191,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Oncology Insight","volume":"2 4","pages":"Article 100192"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Oncology Insight","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S295024702500088X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Foregut cancers are best treated by specialized, multidisciplinary care, often delivered, at least in part, at tertiary centers. Patient perspectives on the factors that enhance access to and adherence to cancer treatment remain underexplored. This qualitative study explores patient-reported facilitators of care at a safety-net hospital in the Southeastern United States (US).

Methods

Patients with foregut cancer receiving care at a safety-net tertiary care institution in the Southeastern US were recruited. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using NVivo 14 Software. Grounded theory methodology was used to identify themes and subthemes. A comprehensive codebook was established, with a high interrater reliability rate of > 90 % for all themes.

Results

Of the 30 patients interviewed, the majority were male (n = 23, 77 %) and Black (n = 18, 60 %), with an average age of 63 (IQR: 55–67). Facilitator themes were identified across four categories: (1) Individual/Interpersonal; (2) Provider/Care Team; (3) Healthcare Systems, and (4) Broader Policy. The most prevalent facilitators identified included faith and spirituality (87 %), support from immediate family (83 %), trust in the care team (90 %), and effective communication (97 %).

Conclusion

Understanding patient perspectives is essential for delivering high-quality care in foregut cancer. These facilitators should be actively promoted during the development of future interventions. An appreciation of patient beliefs, communication training for care providers, hiring necessary ancillary staff, use of written handouts, expanding financial aid services, and wider healthcare reform are all avenues to explore in the ongoing effort to improve comprehensive oncological care for patients.
前肠癌肿瘤护理的促进因素:患者的观点
背景:前肠癌最好的治疗方法是专业的、多学科的治疗,通常至少部分在三级中心进行。患者对提高获得和坚持癌症治疗的因素的看法仍未得到充分探讨。本定性研究探讨了美国东南部一家安全网医院患者报告的护理促进者。方法招募在美国东南部一家安全网三级医疗机构接受治疗的前肠癌患者。使用NVivo 14软件对访谈进行记录、转录和分析。采用扎根理论方法确定主题和副主题。建立了一个全面的码本,所有主题的判读信度均为>; 90 %。结果30例受访患者中,男性居多(n = 23,77 %),黑人居多(n = 18,60 %),平均年龄63岁(IQR: 55 ~ 67)。引导者主题分为四个类别:(1)个人/人际;(2)提供者/护理团队;(3)医疗保健系统,(4)更广泛的政策。最普遍的促进因素包括信仰和灵性(87% %)、直系亲属的支持(83% %)、对护理团队的信任(90% %)和有效的沟通(97% %)。结论了解患者的观点对提供高质量的前肠癌治疗至关重要。在制定今后的干预措施时,应积极促进这些促进因素。了解患者的信念,对护理人员进行沟通培训,雇用必要的辅助人员,使用书面讲义,扩大财政援助服务,以及更广泛的医疗改革,这些都是正在进行的努力中探索的途径,以改善对患者的综合肿瘤护理。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书