0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The effectiveness of nurse‐led care in supporting self‐management in patients with cancer: A systematic review

      1 , 1
      Journal of Clinical Nursing
      Wiley

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aims and objectives

          To determine the impact of nurse‐led follow‐up care supporting self‐management of people who have had or have cancer.

          Background

          Cancer care is evolving towards enabling people to self‐manage the impact of cancer, treatment and overall care on their quality of life (QoL), self‐efficacy and distress.

          Design

          A systematic review following Joanna Briggs Institution (JBI) guidance and reported in accordance with the PRISMA statement was undertaken.

          Methods

          Four databases were searched, OVID Medline, CINAHL, PsychINFO and Embase. Quantitative randomised control trials with people who have or have had cancer accessing nurse‐led care or nurse‐led intervention, undertaken within secondary care were included. Narrative synthesis was undertaken due to heterogeneity of measures used and time points of assessment.

          Results

          Seven papers were included in the final review, all meeting moderate to high‐quality appraisal. Only one study found an impact of nurse‐led care on all three factors under investigation, with a further two studies finding an effect on distress. The remaining studies did not find an impact of the intervention.

          Conclusion

          Clinical Nurse Specialists are well placed to provide follow‐up care for people with cancer, but in relation to QoL, self‐efficacy and distress, there is limited evidence of effectiveness of nurse‐led interventions.

          Public or patient contribution

          This systematic review did not have any public or patient contribution.

          Relevance to clinical practice

          Cancer care is moving to a chronic care, self‐management model. Clinical nurse specialists are well placed to innovate interventions that assist people with cancer to self‐manage.

          Related collections

          Most cited references40

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews

            Background Synthesis of multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in a systematic review can summarize the effects of individual outcomes and provide numerical answers about the effectiveness of interventions. Filtering of searches is time consuming, and no single method fulfills the principal requirements of speed with accuracy. Automation of systematic reviews is driven by a necessity to expedite the availability of current best evidence for policy and clinical decision-making. We developed Rayyan (http://rayyan.qcri.org), a free web and mobile app, that helps expedite the initial screening of abstracts and titles using a process of semi-automation while incorporating a high level of usability. For the beta testing phase, we used two published Cochrane reviews in which included studies had been selected manually. Their searches, with 1030 records and 273 records, were uploaded to Rayyan. Different features of Rayyan were tested using these two reviews. We also conducted a survey of Rayyan’s users and collected feedback through a built-in feature. Results Pilot testing of Rayyan focused on usability, accuracy against manual methods, and the added value of the prediction feature. The “taster” review (273 records) allowed a quick overview of Rayyan for early comments on usability. The second review (1030 records) required several iterations to identify the previously identified 11 trials. The “suggestions” and “hints,” based on the “prediction model,” appeared as testing progressed beyond five included studies. Post rollout user experiences and a reflexive response by the developers enabled real-time modifications and improvements. The survey respondents reported 40% average time savings when using Rayyan compared to others tools, with 34% of the respondents reporting more than 50% time savings. In addition, around 75% of the respondents mentioned that screening and labeling studies as well as collaborating on reviews to be the two most important features of Rayyan. As of November 2016, Rayyan users exceed 2000 from over 60 countries conducting hundreds of reviews totaling more than 1.6M citations. Feedback from users, obtained mostly through the app web site and a recent survey, has highlighted the ease in exploration of searches, the time saved, and simplicity in sharing and comparing include-exclude decisions. The strongest features of the app, identified and reported in user feedback, were its ability to help in screening and collaboration as well as the time savings it affords to users. Conclusions Rayyan is responsive and intuitive in use with significant potential to lighten the load of reviewers.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Methodological guidance for systematic reviews of observational epidemiological studies reporting prevalence and cumulative incidence data.

              There currently does not exist guidance for authors aiming to undertake systematic reviews of observational epidemiological studies, such as those reporting prevalence and incidence information. These reviews are particularly useful to measure global disease burden and changes in disease over time. The aim of this article is to provide guidance for conducting these types of reviews.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Journal of Clinical Nursing
                Journal of Clinical Nursing
                Wiley
                0962-1067
                1365-2702
                December 2023
                October 13 2023
                December 2023
                : 32
                : 23-24
                : 7996-8006
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Southmead Hospital North Bristol NHS Trust Bristol UK
                Article
                10.1111/jocn.16895
                37837253
                73a341c0-d53a-46ae-b2fc-b27ac7d4b987
                © 2023

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article