Cancer survivors with self-reported late effects: their health status, care needs and service utilisation

OBJECTIVE: Cancer survivors (CSs) are at risk of developing late effects (LEs) associated with the disease and its treatment. This paper compares the health status, care needs and use of health services by CSs with LEs and CSs without LEs.

METHODS: Cancer survivors (n = 613) were identified via the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry and invited to participate in a postal survey that was administered by their general practitioner. The survey assessed self-reported LEs, health status, health service use and unmet care needs. A total of 289 (47%) CSs responded to the survey, and 93% of respondents completed a LEs scale.

RESULTS: Forty-one per cent (111/269) of CSs reported LEs. Survivors without LEs and survivors with LEs were comparable in terms of age and gender. The LEs group reported a significantly greater number of co-morbidities, lower physical health and mental health scores, greater overall health service use and more unmet needs. Unadjusted logistic regression analysis found that cancer site, time since diagnosis and treatment were significantly associated with reporting of LEs. CSs who received combination therapies compared with CSs who received single treatments were over two and a half times more likely to report LEs (OR = 2.63, 95% CI = 1.32-5.25) after controlling for all other variables.

CONCLUSIONS: The CS population with LEs comprises a particularly vulnerable group of survivors who have multiple health care problems and needs and who require tailored care plans that take account of LEs and their impact on health-related quality of life.

Evaluation of a partnership between primary and secondary care providing an accessible Level 1 sexual health service in the community

Comprehensive testing for asymptomatic sexually transmitted infections in Northern Ireland has traditionally been provided by genitourinary medicine clinics. As patient demand for services has increased while budgets have remained limited, there has been increasing difficulty in accommodating this demand. In May 2013, the newly commissioned specialist Sexual Health service in the South Eastern Trust sought to pilot a new model of care working alongside a GP partnership of 12 practices. A training programme to enable GPs and practice nurses to deliver Level 1 sexual health care to heterosexual patients aged >16 years, in accordance with the standards of BASHH, was developed. A comprehensive care pathway and dedicated community health advisor supported this new model with close liaison between primary and secondary care. Testing for Chlamydia, gonorrhoea, HIV and syphilis was offered. The aims of the pilot were achieved, namely to provide accessible, cost-effective sexual health care within a framework of robust clinical governance. Furthermore, it uncovered a high positivity rate for Chlamydia, especially in young men attending their general practice, and demonstrated a high level of patient satisfaction. Moreover the capacity of secondary care to deliver Levels 2 and 3 services was increased.

Providing a ‘whole-of-family’ approach to care: family-focused practices in mental health services

Introduction: Family members including children are all impacted by a family member’s mental illness. Although mental health services are increasingly encouraged to engage in family-focused practice, this is not a well-understood concept or practice in mental health care. Methods: An integrative review using systematic methods was conducted with international literature, with the aim of identifying concepts and practices of family-focused practice in child and youth and adult mental health services. Results: Findings from 40 peer-reviewed literature identified a range of understandings and applications of family-focused practice, including who comprises the ‘family’, whether the focus is family of origin or family of procreation or choice, and whether the context of practice is child and youth or adult. ‘Family’ as defined by its members forms the foundation for practice that aims to provide a whole-of-family approach to care. Six core practices comprise a family focus to care: assessment; psychoeducation; family care planning and goal-setting; liaison between families and services; instrumental, emotional and social support; and a coordinated system of care between families and services. Conclusion: By incorporating key principles and the core family-focused practices into their care delivery, clinicians can facilitate a whole-of-family approach to care and strengthen family members’ wellbeing and resilience, and their individual and collective health outcomes.