4.4 Article

Meeting breast cancer patients' information needs during radiotherapy: what can we do to improve the information and support that is currently provided?

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER CARE
Volume 19, Issue 4, Pages 538-547

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2354.2009.01090.x

Keywords

radiotherapy; breast cancer; information needs; grounded theory

Funding

  1. National Breast Cancer Foundation
  2. Edith Cowan University
  3. Nicholas Outterside Memorial Trust

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Previous research has reported that patients require specific information relating to radiotherapy; however, these studies fail to describe patients' specific information needs over time. The aims of this study were to determine the specific information needs of breast cancer patients who are receiving radiotherapy and identify when patients prefer to receive specific information. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 34 early breast cancer patients and 14 health professionals. Seventeen patients were interviewed after treatment completion, and 17 patients were interviewed on at least two occasions during their radiotherapy. Grounded theory and the constant comparative method were used to analyse the data. Three main categories emerged from the data: 'repertoire of information', 'amount of information relating specifically to radiotherapy' and 'tailoring information to match patients' radiotherapy journeys'. Patients' information needs were identified, and key messages and strategies to inform patients were described. This paper identifies breast cancer patient's specific information needs during radiotherapy and shows that patients' information needs are highest during their first appointment with their radiation oncologist and at the time of their planning appointment. The findings presented will enable health professionals to develop and refine their approaches to patient education in radiotherapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available