Cancer Nursing 

About: Cancer Nursing is an academic journal published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Medicine & Breast cancer. It has an ISSN identifier of 0162-220X. Over the lifetime, 3128 publications have been published receiving 95004 citations. The journal is also known as: Cancer Nurs.

Development of a symptom distress scale.

Abstract: Symptom distress was defined as the degree of discomfort reported by the patient in relation to his/her perception of the symptoms being experienced. The ten symptoms included in the symptom distress scale were nausea, mood, appetite, insomnia, pain, mobility, fatigue, bowel pattern, concent

Symptom clusters: concept analysis and clinical implications for cancer nursing.

Abstract: The purpose of this article is to analyze the concept of symptom clusters and to discuss its application to cancer nursing to promote communication and enhance scientific knowledge. Rodgers' evolutionary method of concept analysis served as the framework for reviewing literature from psychology/psychiatry, general medicine, and nursing. Attributes of symptom clusters were relationships of symptoms and relationships of clusters, concurrence, underlying dimensions, stability, and common etiology. The major antecedent was the presence of 2 or more symptoms. Consequences were poorer physical health status, interference with activities of daily living, emotional distress, and increased financial burden. A symptom cluster is defined as consisting of 2 or more symptoms that are related to each other and that occur together. Symptom clusters are composed of stable groups of symptoms, are relatively independent of other clusters, and may reveal specific underlying dimensions of symptoms. Relationships among symptoms within a cluster should be stronger than relationships among symptoms across different clusters. Symptoms in a cluster may or may not share the same etiology. Symptom should be broadened to include both subjective (self-reported) symptoms and objective (observed) signs. Implications for researchers include the need to use a clear definition, determine the optimal methods of identifying etiology and nature of symptom clusters in various populations, assess the clinical utility of symptom clusters, and test interventions. Implications for practitioners include the need to comprehensively assess symptoms over the entire cancer trajectory, select interventions that target single and multiple symptoms, and evaluate outcomes that include quality of life and economic variables.

Cancer fatalism: the state of the science

Abstract: Cancer fatalism--the belief that death is inevitable when cancer is present--has been identified as a barrier to participation in cancer screening, detection, and treatment. Yet this literature has not been reviewed in a comprehensive and systematic manner. Therefore, this literature review addressed (1) philosophical and theoretical underpinnings of cancer fatalism; (2) relationships among demographic factors, cancer fatalism, and cancer screening; (3) the role of cancer fatalism for patients diagnosed with cancer; and (4) intervention strategies. Most of the reviewed studies were descriptive or correlational, did not have an explicit theoretical framework, had varied definitions of fatalism, and reported screening as "intent to screen" or as "past screening behaviors." Review of the studies suggests that cancer fatalism develops over time and is most frequently reported among medically underserved persons and those with limited knowledge of cancer. Cancer fatalism may be modified through culturally relevant interventions that incorporate spirituality. Emphasis must be placed on recognizing the role of cancer fatalism when planning health promotion activities. Future studies should focus on the consistent measurement of cancer fatalism and testing intervention strategies.

The prevalence and correlates of fatigue in patients receiving treatment with chemotherapy and radiotherapy. A comparison with the fatigue experienced by healthy individuals.

Abstract: Fatigue can be a prevalent and serious problem for the individual with cancer and can negatively impact on the individual's quality of life. Little is known about the prevalence of clinical fatigue among patients with cancer and how the fatigue cancer patient's experience compares with the fatigue people experience as a function of their normal daily activities. This study, which utilized a control group, investigated the prevalence of fatigue among patients receiving treatment with radiotherapy (n = 54) and chemotherapy (n =47) over two measurement points. The level of fatigue experienced by cancer patients was compared with the level of fatigue experienced by apparently healthy auxiliary staff (n = 53) working at three cancer treatment facilities. There were no differences in the mean level of fatigue experienced by cancer patients and the mean level experienced by healthy controls before the start of cancer treatment. However, cancer patients experienced a significant increase in fatigue over a 5- or 6-week course of radiotherapy and 14 days after treatment with chemotherapy, and these increases were significantly greater than the fatigue reported by healthy control subjects. The midpoint of the Pearson Byars Fatigue Feeling Checklist was accepted as a crude measure of clinical fatigue and was found to be significantly different from the mean level of fatigue reported by healthy controls. The prevalence of fatigue among patients after undergoing cancer treatment was determined to be 61%. Fatigue in cancer patients was found to covary with weight, symptom distress, mood disturbance, and alterations in usual functional activities. The best predictors of fatigue in the patient sample were their symptom distress and mood disturbance. Symptom distress and fatigue were significant predictors of impairment in functional activities related to illness. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.

Validity of a verbally administered numeric rating scale to measure cancer pain intensity

Abstract: The ability to quantify pain intensity is essential when caring for individuals in pain in order to monitor patient progress and analgesic effectiveness. Three scales are commonly employed: the simple descriptor scale (SDS), the visual analog scale (VAS), and the numeric (pain intensity) rating scale (NRS). Patients with English as a second language may not be able to complete the SDS without translation, and visually, cognitively, or physically impaired patients may have difficulty using the VAS. The NRS has been found to be a simple and valid alternative in some disease states; however, the validity of this scale administered verbally, without visual cues, to oncology patients has not yet been established. The present study examined validity of a verbally administered 0-10 NRS using convergence methods. The correlation between the VAS and the NRS was strong and statistically significant (r = 0.847, p < 0.001), supporting the validity of the verbally administered NRS. Although all subjects were able to complete the NRS and SDS without apparent difficulty, 11 subjects (20%) were unable to complete the VAS. The mean opioid intake was significantly higher for the group that was unable to complete the VAS (mean 170.8 mg, median 120.0 mg, SD = 135.8) compared to the group that had no difficulty with the scale (mean 65.6 mg, 33.0 mg, SD = 99.7) (Mann-Whitney test, p = 0.0065). The verbally administered 0-10 NRS provides a useful alternative to the VAS, particularly as more contact with patients is established via telephone and patients within the hospital are more acutely ill.