Conectar
The clinical significance of cancer-related stigma on patients' well-being has been widely established. Stigma can be perceived and internalised by cancer patients or implemented by the general population and healthcare workers. Various interventions have been carried out to reduce cancer-related stigma, but their effectiveness is not well-understood. This review aims to synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of interventions to reduce cancer-related stigma.
An integrative review.
This integrative review combined both qualitative and quantitative studies and followed five steps to identify problems, search for the literature, appraise the literature quality, analyse data, and present data. Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (version 2018) was applied to evaluate the quality of the included studies.
Databases included Web of Science, MEDLINE, SpringerLink, Wiley Online Journals, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, OVID, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (from the inception of each database to 30 April 2021).
Eighteen quantitative, six qualitative, and five mixed-methods studies were included in this review. Cultural factors should be considered when conducting interventions to reduce cancer-related stigma. For cancer patients, multi-component interventions have demonstrated a positive effect on their perceived stigma. For general population, interactive interventions show promise to reduce their implemented stigma towards cancer patients. For healthcare workers, there is a paucity of studies to reduce their implemented stigma. Existing studies reported inconclusive evidence, partially due to the lack of a robust study design with an adequate sample size.
Multi-component and interactive interventions show promise to relieve cancer-related stigma. More methodologically robust studies should be conducted in different cultures to elucidate the most appropriate interventions for different populations to reduce cancer-related stigma.
These findings will facilitate healthcare workers to design and implement interventions to reduce cancer-related stigma, thus improving the quality of life for cancer patients.
No patient and public contribution.
To obtain an in-depth understanding of women's decision-making experiences related to mastectomy.
A descriptive qualitative interview study.
Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted face-to-face with 27 Chinese women with breast cancer who underwent mastectomy at two tertiary hospitals in mainland China between September 2020 and December 2021 after obtaining the appropriate ethical approvals. Interviews were conducted in Mandarin. Data were analysed using inductive content analysis.
Mean age of participants was 48 years (range 31–70). Most participants had low education, low monthly family income, had a partner and health insurance, had been diagnosed with early breast cancer, and had not undergone reconstructive surgery. Six categories related to decision-making experiences emerged: (1) Emotions affecting decision-making, (2) Information seeking for decision-making, (3) Beliefs about mastectomy and the breast, (4) Participation in decision-making, (5) People who influence decision-making, and (6) Post-decision reflection. Participants did not mention the role of nurses in their decision-making process for mastectomy.
This study adds valuable insights into the limited evidence on women's experience with decision-making about mastectomy from a Chinese perspective, which is important given the continuing high prevalence of mastectomy in many regions. Future studies from other countries and ethnic groups are recommended to gain diverse knowledge.
The findings of this study are useful for nurses and other healthcare professionals in the multidisciplinary team to better support women with breast cancer in their decision-making process regarding mastectomy. The findings could inform future interventions to support treatment decision-making and may be relevant to women living in similar socio-medical contexts to those in mainland China.
The study was reported following the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist.
No patient or public contribution.
FreshRSS 