Assessing the needs of informal caregivers to cancer survivors: a review of the instruments

Objective: Cancer may impact negatively on an informal caregiver's health long after treatment has ended. This review identifies the self-report measures currently in use to measure caregivers need for support and determines their scientific soundness and clinical utility.

Method: A systematic electronic database search of Medline, CINAHL, PsychINFO, BNI ProQuest was conducted. The psychometric properties and clinical utility of needs assessment tools for caregivers of cancer survivors (excluding advanced disease) were extracted and summarised.

Results: Seven cancer survivor caregiver needs assessment tools were identified. Data on instrument development was well reported, although variability was noted in their structure and content. The majority demonstrated some degree of reliability and validity; only two were evaluated for test–retest reliability (CaSPUN and SPUNS) with only the SPUNS showing a high degree of reliability over time. The Health Care Needs Survey (HCNS), Needs Assessment of Family Caregivers-Cancer (NAFC-C) and Cancer Caregiving Tasks Consequences and Needs Questionnaire (CaTCoN) have been validated at various stages of the cancer continuum. Minimal data was available on responsiveness.

Conclusion: All assessment tools identified require further psychometric analysis. For research purposes, the use of the SPUNS (with its acceptable test–retest reliability) appears most appropriate; although its length may be of concern for clinical use; therefore, the shorter SCNS-P&C is likely to be more suitable for use clinically. At present, the NAFC-C demonstrates a great potential in both the research and clinical environments; however, it requires further psychometric testing before it can be fully recommended. Further analysis is necessary on ideal response formats and the meaning of a total needs score.

Learning, development, and support needs of community palliative care clinical nurse specialists

Background: The palliative care clinical nurse specialist (PC-CNS) is a core member of the specialist palliative care team. According to professional policy, the role has four specific components: clinical practice, education, research, and leadership and management. Little is known about how to support staff in this role. Aim: The aim of this study was to explore what learning, development, and support PC-CNSs in one hospice need to enable them to fulfil all components of their role. Design: Using a descriptive exploratory approach, semi-structured interviews were undertaken with a purposive sample of community PC-CNSs from a hospice in Northern Ireland. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and thematically analysed. Findings: Seventeen interviews were analysed and three themes identified: influence of organisational culture, influence of the individual, and learning and development solutions. Conclusions: Participants reported that the PC-CNS role was stressful. They identified that the organisational culture and indeed individuals themselves influenced the learning and development support available to help them fulfil the four components of the role. Working relationships and stability within teams affected how supported individuals felt and had implications for managers in meeting the needs of staff while balancing the needs of the service.

A Comparison of Support Needs Between Rural and Urban Family Caregivers Providing Palliative Care

The present study examined the support needs for urban and rural family caregivers of a palliative family member using a cross-sectional telephone survey in northeastern Ontario, Canada (n = 140; 70 urban, 70 rural). Support needs identified as most important by both the groups were informational. Rural caregivers reported greater unmet needs in tangible support (P =.01). No differences were observed between the groups for emotional or informational support needs (P =.25 and P =.35, respectively). Rural and urban caregivers perceived care for care recipients as accessible (mean accessibility score 1.9, standard deviation [SD] = 0.09 and 1.7, SD = 0.7, respectively, P =.20); the majority indicated that when needed, services were easily and quickly obtained. Although there are similarities in the formal care experiences, rural caregivers experience greater unmet needs in receiving support for instrumental activities. © The Author(s) 2013.

The legal needs of children and young people in Northern Ireland: the views of young people and adult stakeholders

This research was conducted on behalf of the Department of Justice to explore the following issues: the nature and extent of the legal needs of children and young people; the extent to which these legal needs are being met; barriers to children and young people accessing legal advice, information and representation; potential solutions to these barriers; and potential future mechanisms for meeting identified legal needs of children and young people.

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.