↓ Skip to main content

Self-reported competence in long term care provision for adult cancer survivors: A cross sectional survey of nursing and allied health care professionals

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nursing Studies, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
228 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Self-reported competence in long term care provision for adult cancer survivors: A cross sectional survey of nursing and allied health care professionals
Published in
International Journal of Nursing Studies, September 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.09.001
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Cancer survival is increasing as patients live longer with a cancer diagnosis. This success has implications for health service provision in that increasing numbers of adults who have received cancer therapy are requiring monitoring and long-term health care by a wide range of practitioners. Given these recent trends there is a need to explore staff perceptions and confidence in managing the consequences of cancer diagnosis and treatment in cancer survivors to enhance an integrated cancer service delivery. This study examines the self-reported perceptions of competence in nurses and professionals allied to medicine providing survivorship services caring for adults after cancer treatment in both secondary and primary care. A cross sectional survey of the adult cancer workforce using a self-assessment tool for assessing confidence in providing long-term cancer patient management. This study was a health service evaluation. The study was conducted within the United Kingdom. Respondents were 618 health care professionals of these 368 were specialist adult cancer nurses in oncology and the community setting and 250 cancer allied health professionals. The survey tool was developed with experts in cancer management, nurses professionals allied to medicine such as physiotherapists and dieticians, educationalists, patient groups as well as health service managers. Competence was assessed in 4 domains clinical practice, symptom management, care co-ordination and proactive management. Perceptions of training needs were also ascertained. Data were collected using an Internet survey distributed through cancer services, community settings and professional institutions. In total 618 practitioners who responded were providing services for adults' 1-year post cancer therapy. Practitioners felt confident in managing psychosocial care and communicating with patients. Deficits in self-reported confidence were found in long-term medications management, care planning, long-term and complex symptom management, for those providing dimensions of care coordination and proactive care. Differences in confidence were seen between practitioner groups. Community nurses felt less skilled in managing adult cancer patients long-term. Nurses and allied health professionals self-reported confidence, in managing all areas of care for adult cancer survivors, is variable with deficits in important areas of practice. Despite this being a small proportion of practitioners who are working in cancer care, those responding had perceived gaps in knowledge and educational needs. In providing cancer aftercare there is a requisite shift to proactive care, supported self-management and collaborative management if patient's long-term consequences of cancer and its treatment are to be addressed. If health care providers are to transform cancer survivor services then investment is required in education and capability planning across nurses, allied health professionals in both the hospital and the community setting.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 228 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Unknown 226 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 14%
Researcher 23 10%
Student > Bachelor 19 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 5%
Other 36 16%
Unknown 88 39%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 56 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 14%
Psychology 11 5%
Social Sciences 9 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 3%
Other 20 9%
Unknown 94 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 December 2015.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nursing Studies
#2,390
of 2,586 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,017
of 279,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nursing Studies
#45
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,586 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 279,895 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.