Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Cancer 1/2020

01-12-2020 | Cancer Fatigue | Research article

Experiences and views of different key stakeholders on the feasibility of treating cancer-related fatigue

Authors: Claudia Canella, Michael Mikolasek, Matthias Rostock, Matthias Guckenberger, Josef Jenewein, Esther Linka, Claudia Six, Sarah Stoll, Roger Stupp, Claudia M. Witt

Published in: BMC Cancer | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Although cancer-related fatigue (CRF) has gained increased attention in the past decade, therapy remains a challenge. Treatment programs are more likely to be effective if the needs and interests of the persons involved are well represented. This can be achieved by stakeholder engagement.
In this paper, different key stakeholders’ experiences and views on the feasibility of treating CRF in the context of supportive care in hospital environments are analyzed.

Method

In a qualitative study with the aim of developing an integrative treatment program for CRF, a total of 22 stakeholders (6 medical oncologists, 5 nurses, 9 patients, 1 patient family member, 1 representative of the Swiss Cancer League) were interviewed either in a face-to-face (n = 12) or focus group setting (n = 2). For data analyses, the method of qualitative content analysis was used.

Results

The stakeholders referred to different contextual factors when talking about the feasibility of treating CRF in the context of supportive care in hospital environments. These included: assessment, reporting and information; treatability; attitude; infrastructure, time-management, costs and affordability; and integrative approach.

Conclusions

Key factors of a feasible treatment approach to CRF are a coherent, cost effective integrative treatment program facilitated by an interdisciplinary team of health care providers. Furthermore, the treatment approach should be patient orientated, adopting an individualized approach. The major challenges of making the integrative treatment program feasible for CRF are resources and interprofessional collaboration.
Literature
3.
go back to reference Mortimer JE, Barsevick AM, Bennett CL, Berger AM, Cleeland C, DeVader SR, Escalante C, Gilreath J, Hurria A, Mendoza TR, Rugo HS. Studying cancer-related fatigue: report of the NCCN scientific research committee. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2010;8(12):1331–9.CrossRef Mortimer JE, Barsevick AM, Bennett CL, Berger AM, Cleeland C, DeVader SR, Escalante C, Gilreath J, Hurria A, Mendoza TR, Rugo HS. Studying cancer-related fatigue: report of the NCCN scientific research committee. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2010;8(12):1331–9.CrossRef
7.
8.
go back to reference Basch E, Abernethy AP, Mullins CD, Reeve BB, Smith ML, Coons SJ, Sloan J, Wenzel K, Chauhan C, Eppard W, Frank ES, Lipscomb J, Raymond SA, Spencer M, Tunis S. Recommendations for incorporating patient-reported outcomes into clinical comparative effectiveness research in adult oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(34):4249–55. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2012.42.5967.CrossRefPubMed Basch E, Abernethy AP, Mullins CD, Reeve BB, Smith ML, Coons SJ, Sloan J, Wenzel K, Chauhan C, Eppard W, Frank ES, Lipscomb J, Raymond SA, Spencer M, Tunis S. Recommendations for incorporating patient-reported outcomes into clinical comparative effectiveness research in adult oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(34):4249–55. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1200/​JCO.​2012.​42.​5967.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. New York: de Gruyter; 1967. Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. New York: de Gruyter; 1967.
11.
go back to reference Kuckartz U. Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung. Grundlagentexte Methoden. 4th ed. Weinheim: Beltz Juventa; 2018. Auflage. Kuckartz U. Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung. Grundlagentexte Methoden. 4th ed. Weinheim: Beltz Juventa; 2018. Auflage.
12.
go back to reference Bourgeault I, Dingwall R. In: De Vries R, editor. The SAGE handbook of qualitative methods in health research. London: Sage; 2010.CrossRef Bourgeault I, Dingwall R. In: De Vries R, editor. The SAGE handbook of qualitative methods in health research. London: Sage; 2010.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. The Sage handbook of qualitative research. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2011. Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. The Sage handbook of qualitative research. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2011.
14.
go back to reference Flick U. An introduction to qualitative research. 5th ed. London: Sage; 2014. [updated]. Flick U. An introduction to qualitative research. 5th ed. London: Sage; 2014. [updated].
15.
go back to reference Barbour RS. Focus groups. In: Bourgeault I, Dingwall R, De Vries R, editors. The SAGE handbook of qualitative methods in health research. London: Sage; 2010. Barbour RS. Focus groups. In: Bourgeault I, Dingwall R, De Vries R, editors. The SAGE handbook of qualitative methods in health research. London: Sage; 2010.
16.
go back to reference Flick U. Doing triangulation and mixed methods. The Sage qualitative research kit. 2nd ed. Los Angeles: Sage; 2018.CrossRef Flick U. Doing triangulation and mixed methods. The Sage qualitative research kit. 2nd ed. Los Angeles: Sage; 2018.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Weis J, Horneber M (2014) Cancer-related fatigue. Springer Healthcare. Weis J, Horneber M (2014) Cancer-related fatigue. Springer Healthcare.
21.
go back to reference American Cancer Society. Global Cancer Facts & Figures. 4th ed. Atlanta; 2018. American Cancer Society. Global Cancer Facts & Figures. 4th ed. Atlanta; 2018.
28.
go back to reference Howell D, Keshavarz H, Broadfield L, Hack T, Hamel M, Harth T, Jones J, Mc Leod D, Olson K, Phan S, Sawka A, Swinton N, Ali M (2015) A Pan Canadian practice guideline for screening, assessment, and Management of Cancer-Related Fatigue in adults version 2-2015. Canadian partnership against Cancer (Cancer journey advisory group) and the Canadian Association of Psychosocial Oncology (CAPO). https://www.capo.ca/resources/Documents/Guidelines/. Accessed 05.03.2020. Howell D, Keshavarz H, Broadfield L, Hack T, Hamel M, Harth T, Jones J, Mc Leod D, Olson K, Phan S, Sawka A, Swinton N, Ali M (2015) A Pan Canadian practice guideline for screening, assessment, and Management of Cancer-Related Fatigue in adults version 2-2015. Canadian partnership against Cancer (Cancer journey advisory group) and the Canadian Association of Psychosocial Oncology (CAPO). https://​www.​capo.​ca/​resources/​Documents/​Guidelines/​. Accessed 05.03.2020.
Metadata
Title
Experiences and views of different key stakeholders on the feasibility of treating cancer-related fatigue
Authors
Claudia Canella
Michael Mikolasek
Matthias Rostock
Matthias Guckenberger
Josef Jenewein
Esther Linka
Claudia Six
Sarah Stoll
Roger Stupp
Claudia M. Witt
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Cancer Fatigue
Published in
BMC Cancer / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2407
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-06858-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

BMC Cancer 1/2020 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine