4.5 Review

Understanding the reasons why patients delay seeking treatment for oral cancer symptoms from a primary health care professional: An integrative literature review

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY NURSING
卷 18, 期 1, 页码 118-124

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejon.2013.07.005

关键词

Patient delay; Diagnostic delay; Treatment delay; Delayed presentation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: The purpose of this integrative literature review was to investigate existing research on the reasons why patients delay in seeking treatment for oral cancer symptoms from a primary health care professional. Method: The systematic approach developed by Cooper (1984) was the guiding framework for this integrative review. Cooper (1984) identifies the process of conducting an integrative review as encompassing the following five stages: (a) problem formulation, (b) data collection, (c) evaluation of data points, (d) data analysis and interpretation, and (e) public presentation of results. Results: Despite different research designs employed and sample sizes ranging from 15 to 559, three major themes emerged from the 16 studies included in the review, all of which are directly related to the reasons why people delay seeking treatment for oral cancer symptoms: Patient Sociodemographic Characteristics; Health Related Behaviours, and Psychosocial Factors. Conclusions: Overall, this integrative review demonstrates the complexity surrounding the reasons why patients delay in seeking help for oral cancer treatment. The association between knowledge and patient delay has implications for information provision about cancer to those at risk of developing the disease. The relationship between socioeconomic status and patient delay behaviour warrants further investigation as this has been shown to be an influential factor in the study of patient delay. The meaning of many of the investigated psychosocial factors (e.g. an individuals' symptom interpretation/attribution, disclosure of symptoms to significant others, social priorities), have not been discussed in detail and the research is not theory driven. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据