Conectar
To explore the perceived effectiveness, impact and benefits of a work-based cancer survivorship peer support programme for healthcare employees who have experienced or are experiencing cancer.
A qualitative descriptive study.
Purposive sampling was used to recruit 33 participants (10 peers, 12 peer supporters, 4 line managers and 7 members of the governance group). Data were collected between October 2024 and February 2025 through individual interviews and focus groups. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
Four themes were generated: Programme Reach and Adoption, Implementing the Programme, Programme Effectiveness and Impact and Programme Maintenance and Growth. Challenges included the pilot status of the programme impacting awareness and uptake, potential reluctance to share diagnoses and the impact of cancer on colleagues. The approach of peer supporters was considered central to the programmes' success. Peer supporters valued training and continuous practice development opportunities.
Demonstrated benefits, including satisfaction and the value of peer support, were evident. To ensure programme maintenance, increased recruitment and training of peer supporters and clear communication regarding the programme and referral pathways are essential. Financial support is required to maintain training and address dissemination challenges.
Work-based peer support programmes can help cancer survivors reintegrate into the workforce more effectively, rebuilding confidence, fostering resilience and navigating workplace expectations. Enhanced staff well-being may also positively influence retention, performance and health-related disruptions.
Findings from this underexplored area of work-based peer support within a healthcare setting have the potential to influence healthcare leaders, policy makers and future research. Improving staff's' quality of life on return to work benefits the individual, the organisation and care delivery by ensuring a healthy, supported workforce.
The Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) checklist and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TiDieR) checklist were utilised.
No patient or public contribution.
Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionised cancer treatment through targeted disruption of the physiological pathways that maintain tissue tolerance, but which are co-opted by cancers to evade immunosurveillance. Thus, the resultant T-cell activity often causes immune-related adverse events including immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced inflammatory arthritis (ICI-IA). ICI-IA results in functional impairment that frequently persists, even after ICI discontinuation, with substantial quality-of-life impacts for cancer survivors.
A high-quality body of evidence to guide ICI-IA management remains an unmet need. Pharmacological treatment may be prolonged, typically begins with non-specific immunosuppression, including systemic steroids, and is usually only rationalised to more targeted therapy in resistant cases. Moreover, retrospective data suggest the high dose glucocorticoids sometimes used in new-onset ICI-IA may be associated with worse cancer outcomes.
Tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibition strategies are well established with excellent efficacy and safety profiles in ‘spontaneous’ inflammatory arthritides including rheumatoid and psoriatic arthritis. Mechanistic evidence from ex vivo and murine studies also supports the utility of anti-TNF therapy for steroid-refractory cases of ICI-IA. Although good clinical responses have been reported in this setting, the REACT trial (REmission induction of Arthritis caused by Cancer ImmunoTherapy) aims to provide randomised and robust clinical evidence for deploying targeted therapy earlier in ICI-IA management. It will test whether up-front anti-TNF therapy can more effectively and quickly control symptoms, reduce glucocorticoid exposure, prevent early ICI discontinuation and increase the frequency of drug-free ICI-IA remission.
REACT is a prospective, multicentre, open-label, superiority, two-arm, randomised controlled clinical trial to guide initial therapy for patients with ICI-IA. The trial will compare the current standard of care (initial prednisolone; Arm A) with the anti-TNF drug, adalimumab without glucocorticoids (Arm B).
The primary outcome is glucocorticoid-free arthritis remission rate at 24 weeks where remission is defined as: (i) No use of systemic or intra-articular glucocorticoids (except when used for adrenal insufficiency) within 4 weeks prior to assessment at 24 weeks; and (ii) absence of synovitis on clinical examination.
The protocol was approved by East Midlands—Leicester South Research Ethics Committee on 31-Oct-2024 (Ref: 24/EM/0202). Participants are required to provide written informed consent. The results of this trial will be disseminated through national and international presentations and peer-reviewed publications.
Commentary on: Lou J, Li J, Fan Y, et al. Effects of virtual reality on analgesia in wound care and physical therapy for burn patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pain Manag Nursing. 2024; 25(4):377–388.
Implications for practice and research Virtual reality (VR) is a promising distraction intervention for pain and anxiety. Which type of VR and most effective length of exposure to reduce symptom burden is unknown. Future research must address this gap to discover best practices for the frequency, intensity and duration of VR therapy for analgesia.
Over the past 20 years, virtual reality (VR) has emerged in culture and healthcare providing a virtual world with audio and visual stimuli that can be immersive or non-immersive. Immersive VR has headsets with motion detectors that enable a multidimensional environmental experience with sensory feedback. Non-immersive VR provides a one-dimensional digital environment observed...
Commentary on: Previdoli G, Alldred DP, Silcock J, et al. ‘It’s a job to be done’. Managing polypharmacy at home: a qualitative interview study exploring the experiences of older people living with frailty. Health Expectations 2024;27:e13952.
Implications for practice and research Chronic illness in ageing requires complex medication regimes linked to adverse drug events, hospitalisation and mortality. The impact of age-related frailty with polypharmacy is less known.
Causality exists between frailty and polypharmacy, and the risks associated with polypharmacy among frail older persons are high.
This study aims to review whether both clinical and Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) of Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty have improved over time using the National Joint Registry (NJR).
This study is a population-based cohort study using the NJR and Hospital Episode Statistics for England.
Publicly funded hospitals and procedures in England from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2021.
All patients that received a reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) in the specified time period. Patients were excluded if they had less than 1 year of follow-up.
Primary outcome was revision at one year. Secondary outcomes were non-revision re-operation and mortality at one year, length of stay (LOS) and mean change in Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) from pre-operatively to 6 months post-operatively.
There were 24 411 RSA cases available for analysis. There was no significant improvement in revision rates over time; however, there was a significant reduction in non-revision re-operations (OR 0.93 (0.86–0.99) p=0.03) and mortality (0.96 (0.92–1.00) p=0.04). LOS over time improved with an average reduction of 0.24 days per year, ranging from a mean of 3.94 days in 2013 to 2.44 days in 2021 (p
Over the 9-year period recorded in the NJR, revision rates were low and remained similar. There has, however, been an improvement in other clinical outcomes such as non-revision reoperation and mortality as well as functional outcomes and reduced LOS, which demonstrates progress in the quality of care provided to shoulder replacement patients and is suggestive of advancements in surgical techniques, perioperative management and rehabilitation strategies.
Post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) describes a cluster of ongoing symptoms experienced by a large proportion of patients previously admitted to critical care. Despite a large rise in survival following critical care, interventions to support recovery and combat PICS are lacking. It has been suggested that the use of digital tools such as virtual reality (VR) may play a useful role in the development of recovery-supporting interventions. We engaged with people with lived experience of critical care admission to coproduce a VR intervention (ViRtual REality to AiD recoverY post ICU (VR READY)). Here, we present a protocol for the initial feasibility and acceptability testing of this intervention.
This is a single-arm, single-site, non-randomised feasibility trial of VR READY. Up to 25 participants recently admitted to critical care will be recruited to use the VR READY intervention for at least 5 min per day for a period of 14 days. Participants must have capacity to consent and be free from ongoing delirium in order to participate. Outcomes relating to sleep and well-being will be measured at baseline and at day 14 after intervention delivery. The primary outcome is feasibility, which will be assessed according to prespecified criteria. Participants will complete a qualitative interview to assess acceptability of the intervention, trial design and outcomes approximately 1 month after completing the intervention period. No formal statistical analysis of outcomes will be conducted, but these will be summarised descriptively. Interviews will be subjected to reflexive thematic analysis.
This study received a favourable ethical opinion by North-East York Research Ethics Committee (Ref 23/NE/0113) in June 2024. Study results will be disseminated through the peer review literature, ISRCTN registry and directly to participants, which will be facilitated by the study public and patient involvement steering group.
FreshRSS 