Managing symptoms during cancer treatments: evaluating the implementation of evidence-informed remote support protocols

Implementation Science

Angela Whynot⁴  Ann Syme^1,12  Myriam Skrutkowski⁷  Brenda Sabo^1,13  Terry MacKenzie⁸  Craig Kuziemsky^1,10  Doris Howell⁹  Margaret Harrison³  Esther Green⁵  Joanne Cumminger¹  Kimberly Chapman^1,14  Barbara Ballantyne⁶  Debra Bakker²  Dawn Stacey^1,11 

[1] Pictou County Health Authority, New Glasgow, NS, Canada;School of Nursing, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON, Canada;School of Nursing, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada;Capital Health, Halifax, NS, Canada;Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada;Northeast Cancer Centre, Health Sciences North, Sudbury, ON, Canada;Cancer Care Mission, Nursing Department, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal General Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada;Sudbury Regional Hospital, Regional Cancer Program, Sudbury, ON, Canada;University Health Network, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada;Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada;School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada;Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, Toronto, ON, Canada;School of Nursing, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada;Horizon Health Network, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada

关键词: Guidelines based;    Mixed-methods study;    Implementation science;    Symptom management;    Cancer;   

Others  :  813871
DOI  :  10.1186/1748-5908-7-110

 received in 2012-07-13, accepted in 2012-11-06,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Management of cancer treatment-related symptoms is an important safety issue given that symptoms can become life-threatening and often occur when patients are at home. With funding from the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, a pan-Canadian steering committee was established with representation from eight provinces to develop symptom protocols using a rigorous methodology (CAN-IMPLEMENT^©). Each protocol is based on a systematic review of the literature to identify relevant clinical practice guidelines. Protocols were validated by cancer nurses from across Canada. The aim of this study is to build an effective and sustainable approach for implementing evidence-informed protocols for nurses to use when providing remote symptom assessment, triage, and guidance in self-management for patients experiencing symptoms while undergoing cancer treatments.

Methods

A prospective mixed-methods study design will be used. Guided by the Knowledge to Action Framework, the study will involve (a) establishing an advisory knowledge user team in each of three targeted settings; (b) assessing factors influencing nurses’ use of protocols using interviews/focus groups and a standardized survey instrument; (c) adapting protocols for local use, ensuring fidelity of the content; (d) selecting intervention strategies to overcome known barriers and implementing the protocols; (e) conducting think-aloud usability testing; (f) evaluating protocol use and outcomes by conducting an audit of 100 randomly selected charts at each of the three settings; and (g) assessing satisfaction with remote support using symptom protocols and change in nurses’ barriers to use using survey instruments. The primary outcome is sustained use of the protocols, defined as use in 75% of the calls. Descriptive analysis will be conducted for the barriers, use of protocols, and chart audit outcomes. Content analysis will be conducted on interviews/focus groups and usability testing with comparisons across settings.

Discussion

Given the importance of patient safety, patient-centered care, and delivery of quality services, learning how to effectively implement evidence-informed symptom protocols in oncology healthcare services is essential for ensuring safe, consistent, and effective care for individuals with cancer. This study is likely to have a significant contribution to the delivery of remote oncology services, as well as influence symptom management by patients at home.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Stacey et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Stacey D, Nichol K, Carley M, Macartney G, Bakker D, Chapman K, et al.: Development and validation of evidence-informed protocols for remote symptom assessment, triage and support: the COSTaRS project. Presented 9-13-2011 at the annual meeting of the Canadian Oncology Nursing Association, Halifax, Canada 2011.
• [2]Brouwers M, Stacey D, O'Connor A: Knowledge creation: synthesis, tools and product. Can Med Assoc J 2010, 182:E68-E72.
• [3]Harrison MB, Legare F, Graham ID, Fervers B: Adapting clinical practice guidelines to local context and assessing barriers to their use. Can Med Assoc J 2010, 182:E78-E84.
• [4]Harrison MB, van den Hoek J: for the Canadian Guideline Adaptation Study Group: CAN-IMPLEMENT(C): A guideline adaptation and implementation planning resource. Kingston, Ontario, Canada: Queen's University School of Nursing and Canadian Parternship Against Cancer; 2012.
• [5]Howell D, Keller-Olaman S, Oliver TK, et al.: A Pan-Canadian Practice Guideline: Screening, Assessment and Care of Cancer-Related Fatigue in Adults with Cancer. Canadian Partnership Against Cancer: The National Advisory Working Group on behalf of the Cancer Journey Portfolio 2011.
• [6]Howell D, Currie S, Mayo S, Jones G, Boyle M, et al.: A Pan-Canadian Clinical Practice Guideline: Assessment of Psychosocial Health Care Needs of the adult cancer patient. Toronto: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (Cancer Journey Action Group) and the Canadian Association of Psychosocial Oncology; 2009.
• [7]Gagliardi AR, Brouwers MC, Palda VA, Lemieux-Charles L, Grimshaw JM: How can we improve guideline use? A conceptual framework of implementability. Implementation Science 2011, 6:1-11. BioMed Central Full Text
• [8]The AGREE Collaboration: Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) Instrument. 2001. http://www.agreecollaboration.org webcite
• [9]Brouwers M, Kho ME, Browman GP, Burgers JS, Cluzeau F, Feder G, et al.: Development of the AGREE II, part 2: assessment of validity of items and tools to support application. Can Med Assoc J 2010, 182:E472-E478.
• [10]Nekolaichuk C, Watanabe S, Beaumont C: The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System: a 15-year retrospective review of validation studies (1991–2006). Palliat Med 2008, 22:111-122.
• [11]Barbera L, Seow H, Howell D, Sutradhar R, Earle C, Liu Y, et al.: Symptom burden and performance status in a population-based cohort of ambulatory cancer patients. Cancer 2010, 116:5767-5776.
• [12]Miller WR, Rollnick S: Motivational interviewing: Preparing people for change. 2nd edition. New York: Guilford Press; 2002.
• [13]Preece J, Rogers Y, Sharp H: Interaction design: beyond human-computer interaction. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley; 2007.
• [14]Stacey D, Bakker D, Green E, Zanchetta M, Conlon M: Ambulatory oncology nursing telephone services: a provincial survey. Can Oncol Nurs J 2007, 17:1-5.
• [15]Wilson R, Hubert J: Resurfacing the care in nursing by telephone: lessons from ambulatory oncology. Nurs Outlook 2002, 50:160-164.
• [16]Canadian Nurses Association: Telehealth: The role of the nurse. Ottawa, Canada: The author; 2007.
• [17]Coleman A: Where do I stand? Legal implications of telephone triage. J Clin Nurs 1997, 6:227-231.
• [18]College of Nurses of Ontario: Telepractice: A practice guideline. Toronto, Ontario: The author; 2009.
• [19]Macartney G, Stacey D, Carley M, Harrison MB: Priorities, barriers and facilitators for remote telephone support of cancer symptoms: a survey of Canadian oncology nurses. Can Oncol Nurs J 2012. in press
• [20]Vandyk AD, Harrison MB, Macartney G, Ross-White A, Stacey D: Emergency department visits for symptoms experienced by oncology patients: a systematic review. Support Care Cancer 2012, 20:1589-1599.
• [21]Gagnon M: Knowledge dissemination and exchange of knowledge. In Knowledge translation in health care: Moving from evidence to practice. Edited by Straus S, Tetroe J, Graham ID. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 2009:235-245.
• [22]Graham ID, Logan J, Harrison MB, Straus SE, Tetroe J, Caswell W, et al.: Lost in knowledge translation: time for a map? J Contin Educ Health Prof 2006, 26:13-24.
• [23]Grimshaw J, Eccles M, Thomas R, MacLennan G, Ramsay C, Fraser C, et al.: Toward evidence-based quality improvement: evidence (and its limitations) of the effectiveness of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies 1966–1998. J Gen Intern Med 2006, 21:S14-A20.
• [24]Cochrane LJ, Olson CA, Murray S, Dupuis M, Tooman T, Hayes S: Gaps between knowing and doing: understanding and assessing the barriers to optimal health care. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2007, 27:94-102.
• [25]Straus SE, Tetroe J, Graham I: Defining knowledge translation. Can Med Assoc J 2010, 181:165-168.
• [26]Yin RK: Case study research. Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications; 2003.
• [27]Thompson DS, Estabrooks CA, Scott-Findlay S, Moore K, Wallin L: Interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing: a systematic review. Implementation Science 2007, 11:2-15.
• [28]Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP, Lavis JN, Hill SJ, Squires JE: Knowledge translation of research findings. Implementation Science 2012, 7:1-29. BioMed Central Full Text
• [29]Bosch M, van der Weijden T, Wensing M, Grol R: Tailoring quality improvement interventions to identified barriers: a multiple case analysis. J Eval Clin Pract 2007, 13:161-168.
• [30]Dillman DA: Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 2000.
• [31]Graham ID, Logan J, Bennett CL, Presseau J, O'Connor AM, Mitchell S, et al.: Physicians' intentions and use of three patient decision aids. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2007, 7:1-10. BioMed Central Full Text
• [32]Stacey D, Graham ID, O'Connor AM, Pomey MP: Barriers and facilitators influencing call centre nurses' decision support for callers facing values-sensitive decisions: a mixed methods study. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs 2005, 2:184-195.
• [33]Stacey D, Chambers SK, Jacobsen MJ, Dunn J: Overcoming barriers to cancer helpline professionals providing decision support for callers" An implementation study. Oncol Nurs Forum 2008, 35:1-9.
• [34]Davies B, Edwards N: Sustaining knowledge use. In Knowledge translation in health care: Moving from evidence to practice. Edited by Straus S, Tetroe J, Graham ID. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 2009:165-173.
• [35]Riley BL, MacDonald J, Mansi O, Kothari A, Kurtz D, VonTettenborn LI, et al.: Is reporting on interventions a weak link in understanding how and why they work? A preliminary exploration using community heart health exemplars. Implementation Science 2008, 3:1-12. BioMed Central Full Text
• [36]Thomas L, McColl E, Cullum N, Rousseau N, Soutter J: Clinical guidelines in nursing, midwifery and the therapies: a systematic review. J Adv Nurs 1999, 30:40-50.
• [37]Hailey D, Grimshaw J, Eccles M, Mitton C, Adair C, McKenzie E, et al.: Effective dissemination of findings from research. Alberta: Institute of Health Economics; 2008.
• [38]Valanis B, Moscato S, Tanner C, Shapiro S, Izumi S, David M, et al.: Making it work: organization and processes of telephone nusing advice services. J Nurs Adm 2003, 33:216-223.
• [39]Valanis B, Tanner C, Randles S, Shapiro S, Izumi S, David M, et al.: A model for examining predictors of outcomes of telephone nursing advice. J Nurs Adm 2003, 33:91-95.
• [40]Legare F, Politi M, Drolet R, Desroches S, Stacey D, Bekker H, et al.: Training health professionals in shared decision making: an international environmental scan. Patient Educ Couns 2012. in press
• [41]van Uden CJT, Ament AJHA, Hobma SO, Zwietering PJ, Crebolder HFJM: Patient satisfaction with out-of-hours primary care in the Netherlands. BMC Health Serv Res 2005, 5:1-10. BioMed Central Full Text
• [42]Stacey D, Pomey MP, O'Connor AM, Graham ID: Adoption and sustainability of decision support for patients facing health decisions: an implementation case study in nursing. Implementation Science 2006, 1:1-10. BioMed Central Full Text
• [43]Virzi RA: Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: how many subjects is enough? Hum Factors 1992, 34:457-468.
• [44]Kushniruk A, Patel V: Cognitive and usability engineering methods for the evaluation of clinical information systems. J Biomed Inform 2004, 37:56-76.
• [45]van den Haak MJ, DeJong MDT, Schellens PJ: Retrospective vs. concurrent think-aloud protocols: testing the usability of an online library catalogue. Behaviour & Information Technology 2003, 22:339-351.
• [46]Stacey D, Noorani H, Fisher A, Robinson D, Joyce J, Pong R: Telephone Triage Services: Systematic Review of the Literature and Survey of Canadian Call Centre Programs. Ottawa: Canadian Coordinating Office of Health Technology Assessment; 2003.
• [47]Jamtvedt G, Young JM, Kristoffersen DT, O'Brien MA, Oxman AD: Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006, (2):CD000259.
• [48]Lincoln YS, Guba E: Naturalistic inquiry. Beverley Hills: Sage Publications; 1985.
• [49]Stacey D, McVeety J, Carley M, Macartney G, COSTaRS Steering Committee: Using the CAN-ADAPTE methodology to adapt guidelines for the pan-Canadian Oncology Symptom Triage and Remote Support (COSTaRS) project. Ottawa, Canada: University of Ottawa /Tau Gamma International Clinical Nursing Research Conference; 2010. http://www.health.uottawa.ca/pdf/abstracts_resumes21mai.pdf webcite
• [50]Howell D, Fitch M, Caldwell B: The impact of Interlink Community Care Nurses on the experience of living with cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum 2002, 29:715-723.
• [51]Molassiotis A, Brearley S, Saunders M, Craven L, Wardley A, Farrell C, et al.: Effectiveness of a home care nursing program in the symptom management of patients with colorectal and breast cancer receiving oral chemotherapy: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27:6191-6198.
• [52]Henry DH, Viswanathan HN, Elkin EP, Traina S, Wade S, Cella D: Symptoms and treatment burden associated with cancer treatment: results from a cross-sectional national survey in the U.S. Supportive Cancer Care 2008, 16:791-801.
• [53]Behl D, Hendrickson AW, Moynihan TJ: Oncologic emergencies. Crit Care Clin 2010, 26:181-205.
• [54]Rubak S, Sandboek A, Lauritzen T, Christensen B: Motivational interviewing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Gen Pract 2005, 55:305-312.
• [55]Bunn F, Byrne G, Kendall S: Telephone consultation and triage: effects on health care use and patient satisfaction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004, (4):CD004180.