FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Effectiveness of a community-based multicomponent lifestyle intervention (the ADA programme) to improve the quality of life of French breast cancer survivors: protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomised trial and embedded qualitative study

Por: El-Khoury · F. · Mino · J.-C. · Deschamps · N. · Lopez · C. · Menvielle · G. · Dargent-Molina · P.
Introduction

Breast cancer survivors (BCSs) are often faced with multiple mental and physical sequelae and are at increased risk of emotional distress, degraded health-related quality of life (HRQoL), chronic pain and fatigue.

Physical activity is strongly associated with improved HRQoL and survival rates; however, adherence rates to recommendations for a healthy lifestyle are seldom satisfactory among BCSs. Also, few studies have examined the effectiveness of multicomponent and personalised interventions that integrate physical activity and motivational techniques to improve the HRQoL of BCS.

Method and analysis

"Activité physique adaptée Doublée d’un Accompagnement d’après cancer" (ADA) is an integrated programme of physical activity enriched with a dietary and supportive care approach targeting BCS in the early post-treatment phase. The effectiveness of the ADA intervention will be evaluated using a cluster randomised controlled trial design with two arms (ADA programme vs usual care; 1:1 ratio).

The ADA intervention aims to recruit 160 participants and will be implemented by Siel Bleu, a non-profit association specialised in health prevention via adapted physical activity. Measurements will be performed at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months after the start of the intervention. The primary outcome will be participants’ HRQoL, at 12 months measured by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue global score. Secondary outcome will include participants’ physical, social, emotional and functional well-being. The effect of the intervention on physical activity level, motivation for physical activity, relation to food and self-efficacy will also be evaluated.

Ethics and dissemination

The study was approved by the ‘CPP Paris XI’ Institutional Review Board on 5 May 2022 (Ref no.: 21.04512.000048-22004). The study’s findings will be shared through various channels, including academic publications, simplified reports for wider audiences and active engagement with medical and institutional organisations as well as patients’ associations.

Trial registration number

NCT05658341.

Experiences and perspectives related to shared decision-making among outpatients with degenerative joint disease in Taiwan: a qualitative study

Por: Chuang · Y.-H. · Wang · C.-C. · Hsiao · C.-Y. · Lu · C.-Y. · Wu · J.-C. · Hou · W.-H.
Objectives

Various treatment options are available for degenerative joint disease (DJD). During clinical visits, patients and clinicians collaboratively make decisions regarding the optimal treatment for DJD; this is the essence of shared decision-making (SDM). Here, we collated and assessed the SDM-related experiences and perspectives of outpatients with DJD in Taiwan.

Design

In-depth interviews and thematic analysis.

Setting

Primary care clinics of a regional teaching hospital in Taiwan, October 2021–May 2022.

Participants

21 outpatients with at least three visits for DJD and who were aware of SDM.

Results

Four main themes emerged in this study: first, equipping themselves with knowledge: outpatients obtained disease-related and treatment-related knowledge in various ways—seeking relevant information online, discussing with family and friends, learning from their own experiences or learning from professionals. Second, shared or not shared: physicians had different patterns for communicating with patients, particularly when demonstrating authority, performing mutual discussion, respecting patient preferences or responding perfunctorily. Third, seldom saying no to physician-prescribed treatment plans during clinical visits: most patients respected physicians’ professionalism; however, some patients rejected physicians’ recommendations indirectly, whereas some responded depending on their disease prognosis. Fourth, whose call?—participants decided to accept or reject a treatment plan independently or by discussing it with their families or by obeying their physicians’ recommendations.

Conclusions

In general, patients with DJD sought reliable medical information from various sources before visiting doctors; however, when having a conversation with patients, physicians dominated the discussion on treatment options. The patient–physician interaction dynamics during the SDM process determined the final medical decision, which was in accordance with either patients’ original autonomy or physicians’ recommendations. To alleviate medical paternalism and physician dominance, patients should be empowered to engage in medical decision-making and share their opinions or concerns with their physicians. Family members should also be included in SDM.

❌