Clinical Judgement, Treatment Decisions and Frailty Management in Older Cancer Patients: A Qualitative Study Exploring the Experiences of Radiation Therapy Staff

Le résumé fourni par la source

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of older cancer patients can be complex due to frailty that comes with age, and the benefits of radiation therapy for frail older patients are unclear. Radiation therapy staff play a crucial role in identifying and monitoring frailty and tailoring treatment. Research on radiation therapy in frail older patients is limited, and frailty assessments are not widely used in routine care. Understanding staff experiences with clinical judgement and frailty assessment is important for effective treatment. This study explored the radiation therapy staff's experiences of clinical judgement, treatment decision-making, and managing frail older cancer patients. METHODS: The study has an inductive design in which 12 specialist oncology nurses and four clinical oncologists working with cancer patients at four radiation therapy units across four counties in Sweden were interviewed. In total, 16 participants were interviewed for the study. Data were collected in semi-structured individual interviews and were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three themes were identified from the interview analysis: Putting the patient first, Care with integrity and humanity and Receiving support in treatment decisions, along with nine sub-themes. None of the participants was using any structured instrument for assessing frailty. CONCLUSIONS: Radiation therapy staff face significant and complex challenges when treating frail older cancer patients, which can lead to feelings of doubt and powerlessness. Awareness and use of structured frailty assessment are limited. Integrating structured frailty assessment could address the complex challenges experienced by staff by improving decision-making, communication, and patient outcomes, contributing to more ethical and person-centred care.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.