The treatment experiences of people living with ileostomies: an interpretative phenomenological analysis

AIMS: To explore treatment and healthcare experiences of people living with ileostomies, so nurses can build on best practice whilst caring for these patients. Background Ileostomies, in which the small intestine is re-directed out of a stoma in the abdominal wall so waste is collected using a bag, are used to treat conditions including Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Existing research suggests that although life with a stoma can be challenging, ileostomy patients are largely supported by multi-disciplinary teams. However, more research is needed to understand the nuances of these relationships and experiences of treatment, with a view to improving clinical care. DESIGN: Participants took part in semi-structured interviews consisting of open ended questions about their experiences of life with an ileostomy and their treatments and time in hospital. Points of interest were followed up. Data were collected between July and December of 2014. METHODS: The qualitative method Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis was used to analyse interviews with 21 people living with ileostomies. FINDINGS: We present findings from two clinical themes: Issues around treatment and Relationships with multi-disciplinary teams. Surgical complications were common, and several participants reported concerns about addiction to painkillers. Varying attitudes were found around reversal surgery. Many reported experiencing distressing, dehumanising care, whilst some felt supported by excellent healthcare providers. CONCLUSION: People living with ileostomies have a very mixed experience of multi-disciplinary teams and treatments, and much could be done to support them more fully. For example, more information about ileostomies could be given to patients and more training given to nurses around stomas

A primary care, multi-disciplinary disease management program for opioid-treated patients with chronic non-cancer pain and a high burden of psychiatric comorbidity

BACKGROUND: Chronic non-cancer pain is a common problem that is often accompanied by psychiatric comorbidity and disability. The effectiveness of a multi-disciplinary pain management program was tested in a 3 month before and after trial. METHODS: Providers in an academic general medicine clinic referred patients with chronic non-cancer pain for participation in a program that combined the skills of internists, clinical pharmacists, and a psychiatrist. Patients were either receiving opioids or being considered for opioid therapy. The intervention consisted of structured clinical assessments, monthly follow-up, pain contracts, medication titration, and psychiatric consultation. Pain, mood, and function were assessed at baseline and 3 months using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale scale (CESD) and the Pain Disability Index (PDI). Patients were monitored for substance misuse. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients were enrolled. Mean age was 51 years, 60% were male, 78% were Caucasian, and 93% were receiving opioids. Baseline average pain was 6.5 on an 11 point scale. The average CESD score was 24.0, and the mean PDI score was 47.0. Sixty-three patients (73%) completed 3 month follow-up. Fifteen withdrew from the program after identification of substance misuse. Among those completing 3 month follow-up, the average pain score improved to 5.5 (p = 0.003). The mean PDI score improved to 39.3 (p < 0.001). Mean CESD score was reduced to 18.0 (p < 0.001), and the proportion of depressed patients fell from 79% to 54% (p = 0.003). Substance misuse was identified in 27 patients (32%). CONCLUSIONS: A primary care disease management program improved pain, depression, and disability scores over three months in a cohort of opioid-treated patients with chronic non-cancer pain. Substance misuse and depression were common, and many patients who had substance misuse identified left the program when they were no longer prescribed opioids. Effective care of patients with chronic pain should include rigorous assessment and treatment of these comorbid disorders and intensive efforts to insure follow up

Adopting a family approach to theory and practice: measuring distress in cancer patient-partner dyads with the distress thermometer

Objective: Significant others are central to patients' experience and management of their cancer illness. Building on our validation of the Distress Thermometer (DT) for family members, this investigation examines individual and collective distress in a sample of cancer patients and their matched partners, accounting for the aspects of gender and role.Method: Questionnaires including the DT were completed by a heterogeneous sample of 224 couples taking part in a multisite study.Results: Our investigation showed that male patients (34.2%), female patients (31.9%), and male partners (29.1%) exhibited very similar levels of distress, while female partners (50.5%) exhibited much higher levels of distress according to the DT. At the dyad level just over half the total sample contained at least one individual reporting significant levels of distress. Among dyads with at least one distressed person, the proportion of dyads where both individuals reported distress was greatest (23.6%). Gender and role analyses revealed that males and females were not equally distributed among the four categories of dyads (i.e. dyads with no distress; dyads where solely the patient or dyads where solely the partner is distressed; dyads where both are distressed).Conclusion: A remarkable number of dyads reported distress in one or both partners. Diverse patterns of distress within dyads suggest varying risks of psychosocial strain. Screening patients' partners in addition to patients themselves may enable earlier identification of risk settings. The support offered to either member of such dyads should account for their role- and gender-specific needs. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

Prescribing databases can be used to monitor trends in opioid analgesic prescribing in Australia

Objective: There has been increased use of prescription opioid analgesics in Australia in the past 20 years with increasing evidence of related problems. A number of data sources collect information about the dispensed prescribing for opioid medications, but little is known about the extent to which these data sources agree on levels of opioid prescribing. Methods: In Queensland, all opioid prescriptions (S8 prescriptions) dispensed by community pharmacies must be submitted to the Drugs of Dependence Unit (DDU). This potentially comprises a gold standard' against which other data sources may be judged. There are two national data sources: the Pharmaceutical Benefits Schedule (PBS) for all medications subsidised by government; and an annual national survey of representative pharmacies, which assesses non-subsidised opioid prescribing. We examined the agreement between these data sources. Results: The three data sources provided consistent estimates of use over time. The correlations between different data sources were high for most opioid analgesics. There was a substantial (60%) increase in the dispensed use of opioid analgesics and a 180% increase in the dispensed use of oxycodone over the period 20022009. Tramadol was the most used opioid-like medication. Conclusions: Since 2002 different data sources reveal similar trends, namely a substantial increase in the prescribing of opioid medications. With few exceptions, the conclusions derived from using any of these data sources were similar. Implications: Improved access to PBS data for relevant stakeholders could provide an efficient and cost-effective way to monitor use of prescription opioid analgesics

Using opioid therapy for pain in clinically challenging situations. Questions for clinicians

Healthcare professionals and organizations increasingly face the conundrum of treating patients with active substance use disorder, a history of personal or familial substance use disorder, or those at elevated risk for substance abuse. Such patients need compassionate care when facing painful conditions; in fact, denying them pain control makes it likely that they will seek out ways to self-medicate with illicit drugs. Yet it remains unclear how to safely and effectively treat patients in these challenging situations. The authors have formulated ten questions to address in order to provide adequate analgesia for such patients. These questions demand a highly individualized approach to analgesia. These ten questions involve understanding the painful condition (presumed trajectory, duration, type of pain), using validated metrics such as risk assessment tools, guidelines, protocols, and safeguards within the system, selection of the optimal analgesic product(s) or combination therapy, and never starting opioid therapy without clear treatment objectives and a definitive exit plan. It is tempting but inaccurate to label these individuals as “inappropriate patients,” rather they are high-risk individuals in very challenging clinical situations. The challenge is that both options — being in pain or being treated with opioids to control pain — expose the patient to a risk of rekindling an addiction. The question is how do we, as clinicians, adequately respond to these very perplexing clinical challenges

Recommendations for the implementation of distress screening programs in cancer centers: Report from the American Psychosocial Oncology Society (APOS), Association of Oncology Social Work (AOSW), and Oncology Nursing Society (ONS) joint task force

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/108593/1/cncr28750.pd

Examining the effects of adjuvant chemotherapy on cognition and the impact of any cognitive impairment on quality of life in colorectal cancer patients: study protocol

Background: Research suggests that chemotherapy can cause deficits in both patients’ objectively measured and self-reported cognitive abilities which can in turn affect their quality of life (QoL). The majority of research studies have used post-treatment retrospective designs or have not included a control group in prospective cohorts. This has limited the conclusions that can be drawn from the results. There have also been a disproportionate number of studies focussed on women with breast cancer, which has limited the generalisability of the results to other cancer populations. Aim: This study aims to identify the extent and impact of chemotherapy-induced cognitive decline in colorectal cancer patients. Possible associations with poorer QoL will also be explored. Design: This will be a longitudinal controlled cohort study. Questionnaires measuring subjective cognitive functioning, QoL, fatigue and mood, and neuropsychological assessments of objective cognitive function will be collected pre-, mid- and post- chemotherapy treatment from a consecutive sample of 78 colorectal cancer patients from five London NHS Trusts. A further 78 colorectal cancer surgery only patients will be assessed at equivalent time points; this will allow the researchers to compare the results of patients undergoing surgery, but not chemotherapy against those receiving both treatments. Pre- and post-chemotherapy difference scores will be calculated to detect subtle changes in cognitive function as measured by the objective neuropsychological assessments and the self-reported questionnaires. A standardised zscore will be computed for every patient on each neuropsychological test, and for each test at each time point. The post-chemotherapy score will then be subtracted from the pre-chemotherapy score to produce a relative difference score for each patient. ANCOVA will be used to compare mean difference z-scores between the chemotherapy and surgery-only groups while controlling for the effects of gender, age, depression, anxiety, fatigue and education. Discussion: The result from this study will indicate whether a decline in cognitive functioning can be attributed to chemotherapy or to disease, surgical or some other confounding factor. Identification of risk factors for cognitive deficits may be used to inform targeted interventions, in order to improve QoL and help patients’ cope