Dignity Therapy (DT) has been implemented over the past 20 years, but a detailed training protocol is not available to facilitate consistency of its implementation. Consistent training positively impacts intervention reproducibility.

The objective of this article is to describe a detailed method for DT therapist training.

Chochinov's DT training seminars included preparatory reading of the DT textbook, in-person training, and practice interview sessions. Building on this training plan, we added feedback on practice and actual interview sessions, a tracking form to guide the process, a written training manual with an annotated model DT transcript, and quarterly support sessions. Using this training method, 18 DT therapists were trained across 6 sites.

The DT experts’ verbal and written feedback on the practice and actual sessions encouraged the trainees to provide additional attention to eight components: (1) initial framing (i.e., clarifying and organizing of the patient's own goals for creating the legacy document), (2) verifying the patient's understanding of DT, (3) gathering the patient's biographical information, (4) using probing questions, (5) exploring the patient's story thread, (6) refocusing toward the legacy document creation, (7) inviting the patient's expression of meaningful messages, and (8) general DT processes. Evident from the ongoing individual trainee mentoring was achievement and maintenance of adherence to the DT protocol.

The DT training protocol is a process to enable consistency in the training process, across waves of trainees, toward the goal of maintaining DT implementation consistency. This training protocol will enable future DT researchers and clinicians to consistently train therapists across various disciplines and locales. Furthermore, we anticipate that this training protocol could be generalizable as a roadmap for implementers of other life review and palliative care interview-based interventions.

This review provides an overview of the existing literature on the importance of care coordination for lung cancer care and other cancers in general. The review is inclusive of the burden of cancer, with a special reference to lung cancer, as well as challenges and achievements relating to cancer care coordination.

We conducted a search of online databases of peer-reviewed studies published in the English language. The analysis for this review has been packaged into themes in order to generate results that can inform researchers and cancer health professionals, on the existing gaps necessary for developing appropriate intervention strategies and policy guidelines.

Cancer is a complex condition that often requires multiple interventions provided by a variety of health professionals within the healthcare continuum. This paper reviewed research studies that explored the supportive care needs of cancer patients. The results are presented in three superordinate themes, namely (a) cancer as a healthcare priority in South Africa (SA), (b) making a case for coordinated cancer care in SA, and (c) care coordination: a poorly defined, yet complex concept. One major need identified was the requirement of informational support. Other essential needs included referral, emotional, and financial support.

The identification of current obstacles has the potential to guide the development of a model to improve quality coordinated cancer health care. It remains that limited research exists around cancer services and cancer care in the South African region. This narrative review identified common elements and barriers to care for lung cancer patients and survivors, and offers recommendations for developing clinical care models.

To determine the frequency, factors and reasons of patient non-adherence to radiotherapy (RT) in a tertiary cancer centre.

Inadvertent treatment interruptions often lead to prolongation of planned treatment time. In the case of RT with a curative intent, prolongation of planned treatment has been associated with inferior clinical outcomes. Delay or prolongation of treatment is associated with a relative risk of local recurrence by up to 2% per day for specific malignancies. Thus, it is critical to understand key factors that influence non-adherence to RT.

A retrospective observation audit was conducted comprising patients treated with radical, adjuvant or palliative RT at our centre from January 2018 to December 2018. Non-adherence was defined as premature permanent termination of planned treatment by the patient without recommendation or consultation from the treating clinician. All data were collected and analysed (retrospectively) with the help of Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22.

A total of 1,548 patients were included in the study of which 105 (6·7%) were non-adherent to planned RT. Of the total 105 patients, 44 (42%) were elderly (60 years and above). Treatment non-adherence was predominant in males (male:female = 1·85:1). More than 90% of non-adherent patients had stage III and IV cancer. A total of 77 patients (74%) out of 105 were more than 50 km away from our centre. A total of 66 (63%) out of 105 patients had completed more than 2 weeks of radiation (40% of planned RT) and then defaulted for radiation due to acute toxicities.

Treatment adherence is a major factor in determining successful outcomes among cancer patients treated with RT. This study reveals several factors that contribute to non-adherence to treatment.

Our objective was to examine the accuracy of non-psychiatrist assessments of psychiatric problems in cancer patients.

We conducted a retrospective chart review of cancer patients who were admitted and referred to the consultation–liaison (C–L) team between January of 2011 and December of 2012. The agreement between non-psychiatrist assessments and final diagnoses by attending C–L psychiatrists was estimated for every category of referral assessment using codes from the International Classification of Mental and Behavioral Disorders (10th revision). The data were obtained from the consultation records of 240 cancer inpatients who were referred to the C–L service at a tertiary care center in Tokyo.

The agreement ratio between referring oncologists and psychiatrists differed according to the evaluation categories. The degrees of agreement for the categories of “delirious,” “depressive,” “dyssomnia,” “anxious,” “demented,” “psychotic,” and “other” were 0.87, 0.43, 0.51, 0.50, 0.27, 0.55, and 0.57, respectively. The agreement for all patients was 0.65. Significant differences were observed among seven categories (chi-squared value = 42.454 at p < 0.001 and df = 6). The analysis of means for proportions showed that the degree of agreement for the “delirious” category was significantly higher and that that for the “depressive” category was lower than that for all patients, while for the “demented” category it was close to the lower decision limit but barely significant. One half of the 20 cases who were referred as depressive were diagnosed with delirium, with one quarter of those having continuously impaired consciousness. Some 7 of the 11 cases who were referred as demented were diagnosed as having delirium.

The accuracy of non-psychiatrist assessments for psychiatric problems in cancer patients differs by presumed diagnosis. Oncologists should consider unrecognized delirium in cancer inpatients who appear depressed or demented.

The objectives of the present study were to describe and compare the characteristics and reports of end-of-life experiences (ELEs) by healthcare professionals at different institutions and to investigate the influence of religious beliefs on these reports.

A multicenter study was carried out in Brazil that included six nursing homes (NHs), a cancer hospital (ONC), and a palliative care (PC) unit. Sociodemographic data, ELE reports (Fenwick's questionnaire), religiosity (the Duke Religion Index), spirituality (the Spirituality Self-Rating Scale), and mental health (the DASS-21 questionnaire) were assessed. The analysis was performed using ANOVA and chi-square tests in order to compare ELE perceptions in these different settings.

A total of 133 healthcare professionals (46 ONC, 36 PC, and 51 NH) were interviewed, 70% of whom recounted at least one ELE report in the previous five years. The most common ELEs were “visions of dead relatives collecting the dying person” (88.2%), “a desire to mend family rifts” (84.9%), and “visions of dead relatives near the bed providing emotional comfort” (80.6%). Most healthcare professionals (70–80%) believed that these experiences had a spiritual significance and were not due to biological effects. Comparison among settings revealed that those working in the PC unit had more reports, a greater openness about the issue, and more interest in training. Individual religious beliefs had no influence on perception of ELEs.

Our study revealed that ELE reports are not uncommon in clinical practice and seem to be little influenced by religious or spiritual beliefs. Although strongly reported in all settings, palliative care professionals tend to be more open to this issue and have a stronger perception of ELEs.

The concept of “wisdom” is beginning to emerge in the oncology literature, raising questions concerning: (1) how the concept of wisdom is used in oncology literature; (2) the ways in which wisdom has been a focus of inquiry within oncology care; and (3) how wisdom is characterized when the term is used.

A scoping review, using Arksey and O'Malley's five-step framework, was undertaken to address these questions. In consultation with oncology reference librarians, “wisdom”- and “oncology”-related search terms were identified, and four electronic databases were searched: CINAHL, SocINDEX, PubMed, and PsychINFO. After removal of duplicates and application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, 58 records were identified and included for analysis.

The concept of wisdom was employed with a breadth of meanings, and 58 records were schematized into 7 genres, including: (1) empirical research with wisdom foregrounded as a study focus (n = 2); (2) empirical research articles where “wisdom” appears in the findings (n = 16); (3) a quality-improvement project where wisdom is an embedded concept (n = 1); (4) essays where wisdom is an aspect of the discussion (n = 5); (5) commentary/opinion pieces where wisdom is an aspect of its focus (n = 6); (6) personal stories describing wisdom as something gleaned from lived experience with cancer (n = 2); and (7) everyday/taken-for-granted uses of wisdom (n = 26).

The notion of wisdom has a taken-for-granted presence in the published oncology literature and holds promise for future research into patient and clinician wisdom in oncology care. Nonetheless, the terminology is varied and unclear. A scholarly focus on wisdom has not been brought to bear in cancer care to the degree it has in other fields, and research is in the early stages. Various characterizations of wisdom are present. If such a resource as “wisdom” exists, dwelling in human experiences and practices, there may be benefit in recognizing wisdom as informing the epistemologies of practice in oncology care.

To explore the experiences of people with advanced cancer and/or their caregivers accessing out-of-hours care.

The organisation and delivery of out-of-hours in the United Kingdom has undergone major reforms over the past three decades culminating in the new General Medical Service contract in 2004. There are concerns around continuity of care for patients with complex needs under the new arrangements.

A qualitative interview study was undertaken recruiting patients from two primary care trusts in Southwest England. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 28 people with advanced cancer and/or their caregivers who had recently requested out-of-hours care. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically.

Two main themes were identified including the legitimacy of seeking help and continuities of care. Most participants were reluctant to seek help, finding it difficult to decide whether their needs were sufficient to contact services. The degree to which services legitimised participants’ requests mediated their experiences. Distress arose when services were dismissive of their needs, whereas respondents were appreciative of clinicians who provided them with reassurance. Participants reported a lack of relational and informational continuity of care. Consulting with an unfamiliar clinician out-of-hours raised doubts in some participants’ minds about the quality of care. Some participants recounted episodes in which there were problems with pain management. While the themes suggest that the delivery of out-of-hours care as a whole was not always perfect, around-the-clock access to professional sources of support and reassurance was highly valued. However, the transfer of information to out-of-hours providers remains a key challenge; participants did not understand why out-of-hours providers could not access more information on their medical histories given the level of computerisation within the National Health Service. The findings highlight the need to improve continuity between in-hours and out-of-hours services for patients with complex needs.