Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer 3/2019

01-03-2019 | Original Article

Priorities for caregiver research in cancer care: an international Delphi survey of caregivers, clinicians, managers, and researchers

Authors: Sylvie D. Lambert, Lydia Ould Brahim, Marjorie Morrison, Afaf Girgis, Mark Yaffe, Eric Belzile, Karissa Clayberg, John Robinson, Sally Thorne, Joan L. Bottorff, Wendy Duggleby, Heather Campbell-Enns, Youngmee Kim, Carmen G. Loiselle

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 3/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

With an increased investment in psychosocial caregiving research, it becomes critical to establish the need for data of key stakeholders and future strategic directions. The purpose of this international Delphi study was to engage caregivers, clinicians, researchers, and managers to identify priority topics for caregiver research in cancer care.

Methods

A three-round, online Delphi survey took place. In round 1, stakeholders generated caregiver research topics by answering an open-ended question. Content analysis of stakeholders’ answers identified topics to be included in the round 2 survey to rate their importance. The round 3 survey included topics with less than 80% agreement for stakeholders to reconsider in light of other participants’ responses.

Results

In round 1, eighty-six topics were generated by 103 clinicians, 63 researchers, 61 caregivers, and 22 managers and grouped into 10 content areas: impact of cancer, support programs, vulnerable caregivers, technology, role in health care, caregiver-centered care, knowledge translation, environmental scan, financial cost of caregiving, and policy. Across rounds 2 and 3, nine topics achieved consensus for all stakeholder panels (e.g., home care interventions), with three of these emphasizing more research needed on the financial impact of informal caregiving (e.g., financial impact of “burnout” for caregivers and society). Of note, vulnerable caregivers and use of technology were content areas prioritized particularly by managers and researchers, but not caregivers.

Conclusion

By establishing a confluence of perspectives around research priorities, this study ensures the interests of key stakeholders are integrated in strategic directions, increasing the likelihood of research capable of influencing practice, education, and policy.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Alake-Tuenter E, Biemans HJA, Tobi H, Mulder M (2013) Inquiry-based science teaching competence of primary school teachers: a Delphi study. Teach Teach Educ 35:13–24CrossRef Alake-Tuenter E, Biemans HJA, Tobi H, Mulder M (2013) Inquiry-based science teaching competence of primary school teachers: a Delphi study. Teach Teach Educ 35:13–24CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Beatty L, Lambert S (2013) A systematic review of internet-based self-help therapeutic interventions to improve distress and disease-control among adults with chronic health conditions. Clin Psychol Rev 33:609–622CrossRefPubMed Beatty L, Lambert S (2013) A systematic review of internet-based self-help therapeutic interventions to improve distress and disease-control among adults with chronic health conditions. Clin Psychol Rev 33:609–622CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Browne N, Robinson L, Richardson A (2002) A Delphi study on the research priorities of European oncology nurses. Eur J Oncol Nurs 6:133–144CrossRefPubMed Browne N, Robinson L, Richardson A (2002) A Delphi study on the research priorities of European oncology nurses. Eur J Oncol Nurs 6:133–144CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Chang L (1994) A psychometric evaluation of 4-point and 6-point Likert-type scales in relation to reliability and validity. Appl Psychol Meas 18:205–215CrossRef Chang L (1994) A psychometric evaluation of 4-point and 6-point Likert-type scales in relation to reliability and validity. Appl Psychol Meas 18:205–215CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Donetto S, Tsianakas V, Robert G (2014) Using Experience-based Co-design to improve the quality of healthcare: mapping where we are now and establishing future directions. In: Editor (ed)^(eds) Book Using Experience-based Co-design to improve the quality of healthcare: mapping where we are now and establishing future directions. King’s College London, City, London Donetto S, Tsianakas V, Robert G (2014) Using Experience-based Co-design to improve the quality of healthcare: mapping where we are now and establishing future directions. In: Editor (ed)^(eds) Book Using Experience-based Co-design to improve the quality of healthcare: mapping where we are now and establishing future directions. King’s College London, City, London
6.
go back to reference Garrett M, Fitzmaurice NML, Ware JH (2011) Applied longitudinal analysis, 2nd edn. Wiley,Hoboken, p 740 Garrett M, Fitzmaurice NML, Ware JH (2011) Applied longitudinal analysis, 2nd edn. Wiley,Hoboken, p 740
7.
go back to reference Girgis A, Lambert SD (2017) Cost of informal caregiving in cancer care. Cancer Forum 41:16–22 Girgis A, Lambert SD (2017) Cost of informal caregiving in cancer care. Cancer Forum 41:16–22
8.
go back to reference Gysels M, Richardson A, Higginson IJ (2004) Communication training for health professionals who care for patients with cancer: a systematic review of effectiveness. Support Care Cancer 12:692–700CrossRefPubMed Gysels M, Richardson A, Higginson IJ (2004) Communication training for health professionals who care for patients with cancer: a systematic review of effectiveness. Support Care Cancer 12:692–700CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Hanly P, Céilleachair AÓ, Skally M, O’Leary E, Staines A, Kapur K, Fitzpatrick P, Sharp L (2013) Time costs associated with informal care for colorectal cancer: an investigation of the impact of alternative valuation methods. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 11:193–203CrossRefPubMed Hanly P, Céilleachair AÓ, Skally M, O’Leary E, Staines A, Kapur K, Fitzpatrick P, Sharp L (2013) Time costs associated with informal care for colorectal cancer: an investigation of the impact of alternative valuation methods. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 11:193–203CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Heiko A (2012) Consensus measurement in Delphi studies: review and implications for future quality assurance. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 79:1525–1536CrossRef Heiko A (2012) Consensus measurement in Delphi studies: review and implications for future quality assurance. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 79:1525–1536CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Holroyd-Leduc JM, McMillan J, Jette N, Brémault-Phillips SC, Duggleby W, Hanson HM, Parmar J (2017) Stakeholder meeting: integrated knowledge translation approach to address the caregiver support gap. Can J Aging 36:108–119CrossRefPubMed Holroyd-Leduc JM, McMillan J, Jette N, Brémault-Phillips SC, Duggleby W, Hanson HM, Parmar J (2017) Stakeholder meeting: integrated knowledge translation approach to address the caregiver support gap. Can J Aging 36:108–119CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Hosmer D, Lemeshow S, Sturdivant RX (2013) Applied logistic regression, 3rd edn. Wiley,Hoboken, p 528 Hosmer D, Lemeshow S, Sturdivant RX (2013) Applied logistic regression, 3rd edn. Wiley,Hoboken, p 528
13.
go back to reference Hsu C-C, Sandford BA (2007) The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Pract Assess Res Eval 12:1–8 Hsu C-C, Sandford BA (2007) The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Pract Assess Res Eval 12:1–8
14.
go back to reference Keeney S, Hasson F, McKenna H (2006) Consulting the oracle: ten lessons from using the Delphi technique in nursing research. J Adv Nurs 53:205–212CrossRefPubMed Keeney S, Hasson F, McKenna H (2006) Consulting the oracle: ten lessons from using the Delphi technique in nursing research. J Adv Nurs 53:205–212CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Kent EE, Rowland JH, Northouse L, Litzelman K, Chou W-YS, Shelburne N, Timura C, O'Mara A, Huss K (2016) Caring for caregivers and patients: Research and clinical priorities for informal cancer caregiving. CNCR Cancer 122:1987–1995CrossRef Kent EE, Rowland JH, Northouse L, Litzelman K, Chou W-YS, Shelburne N, Timura C, O'Mara A, Huss K (2016) Caring for caregivers and patients: Research and clinical priorities for informal cancer caregiving. CNCR Cancer 122:1987–1995CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Kim Y, Schulz R (2008) Family caregivers’ strain: comparative analysis of cancer caregiving with dementia, diabetes, and frail elderly caregiving. J Aging Health 20:483–503CrossRefPubMed Kim Y, Schulz R (2008) Family caregivers’ strain: comparative analysis of cancer caregiving with dementia, diabetes, and frail elderly caregiving. J Aging Health 20:483–503CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Lambert SD, Girgis A, Levesque J (2016) The impact of cancer and chronic conditions on caregivers and family members. In: Koczwara B (ed) Cancer and chronic conditions: addressing the problem of multimorbidity in Cancer patients and survivors. Springer Science+Business Media, Berlin Lambert SD, Girgis A, Levesque J (2016) The impact of cancer and chronic conditions on caregivers and family members. In: Koczwara B (ed) Cancer and chronic conditions: addressing the problem of multimorbidity in Cancer patients and survivors. Springer Science+Business Media, Berlin
18.
go back to reference Mitchell AJ, Vahabzadeh A, Magruder K (2011) Screening for distress and depression in cancer settings: 10 lessons from 40 years of primary-care research. Psychooncology 20:572–584CrossRefPubMed Mitchell AJ, Vahabzadeh A, Magruder K (2011) Screening for distress and depression in cancer settings: 10 lessons from 40 years of primary-care research. Psychooncology 20:572–584CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Moniz-Cook E, Elston C, Gardiner E, Agar S, Silver M, Win T, Wang M (2008) Can training community mental health nurses to support family carers reduce behavioural problems in dementia? An exploratory pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 23:185–191CrossRefPubMed Moniz-Cook E, Elston C, Gardiner E, Agar S, Silver M, Win T, Wang M (2008) Can training community mental health nurses to support family carers reduce behavioural problems in dementia? An exploratory pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 23:185–191CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Northouse LL, McCorkle R (2010) Spouse caregivers of cancer patients. In: Holland JC, Breitbart WS, Jacobsen PB, Lederberg MS, Loscalzo MJ, McCorkle R (eds) Psycho-oncology. Oxford university press, New York, pp 516–521CrossRef Northouse LL, McCorkle R (2010) Spouse caregivers of cancer patients. In: Holland JC, Breitbart WS, Jacobsen PB, Lederberg MS, Loscalzo MJ, McCorkle R (eds) Psycho-oncology. Oxford university press, New York, pp 516–521CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Okoli C, Pawlowski SD (2004) The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Inf Resour Manag J 42:15–29 Okoli C, Pawlowski SD (2004) The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Inf Resour Manag J 42:15–29
23.
go back to reference Rankin N, Butow P, Price M, Evans A (2011) Views of psycho-oncology health professionals on priority psycho-oncology research questions. Support Care Cancer 19:1133–1141CrossRefPubMed Rankin N, Butow P, Price M, Evans A (2011) Views of psycho-oncology health professionals on priority psycho-oncology research questions. Support Care Cancer 19:1133–1141CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Rayens MK, Hahn EJ (2000) Building consensus using the policy Delphi method. Policy Polit Nurs Pract 1:308–315CrossRef Rayens MK, Hahn EJ (2000) Building consensus using the policy Delphi method. Policy Polit Nurs Pract 1:308–315CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Shippee ND, Domecq Garces JP, Prutsky Lopez GJ, Wang Z, Elraiyah TA, Nabhan M, Brito JP, Boehmer K, Hasan R, Firwana B, Erwin PJ, Montori VM, Murad MH (2015) Patient and service user engagement in research: a systematic review and synthesized framework. Health Expect 18:1151–1166CrossRefPubMed Shippee ND, Domecq Garces JP, Prutsky Lopez GJ, Wang Z, Elraiyah TA, Nabhan M, Brito JP, Boehmer K, Hasan R, Firwana B, Erwin PJ, Montori VM, Murad MH (2015) Patient and service user engagement in research: a systematic review and synthesized framework. Health Expect 18:1151–1166CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Sinha M (2013) Spotlight on Canadians: results from the General Social Survey. Portrait of caregivers, 2012. In: Editor (ed)^(eds) Book Spotlight on Canadians: results from the General Social Survey. Portrait of caregivers, 2012., City Sinha M (2013) Spotlight on Canadians: results from the General Social Survey. Portrait of caregivers, 2012. In: Editor (ed)^(eds) Book Spotlight on Canadians: results from the General Social Survey. Portrait of caregivers, 2012., City
27.
go back to reference Tang W, Chan C, So W, Leung D (2014) Web-based interventions for caregivers of cancer patients: a review of literatures. Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs 1:9–15CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Tang W, Chan C, So W, Leung D (2014) Web-based interventions for caregivers of cancer patients: a review of literatures. Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs 1:9–15CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
go back to reference Van Houtven CH, Ramsey SD, Hornbrook MC, Atienza AA, van Ryn M (2010) Economic burden for informal caregivers of lung and colorectal cancer patients. Oncologist 15:883–893CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Van Houtven CH, Ramsey SD, Hornbrook MC, Atienza AA, van Ryn M (2010) Economic burden for informal caregivers of lung and colorectal cancer patients. Oncologist 15:883–893CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Priorities for caregiver research in cancer care: an international Delphi survey of caregivers, clinicians, managers, and researchers
Authors
Sylvie D. Lambert
Lydia Ould Brahim
Marjorie Morrison
Afaf Girgis
Mark Yaffe
Eric Belzile
Karissa Clayberg
John Robinson
Sally Thorne
Joan L. Bottorff
Wendy Duggleby
Heather Campbell-Enns
Youngmee Kim
Carmen G. Loiselle
Publication date
01-03-2019
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 3/2019
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-018-4314-y

Other articles of this Issue 3/2019

Supportive Care in Cancer 3/2019 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