Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Adopting a collaborative approach in developing a prehabilitation program for patients with prostate cancer utilising experience-based co-design methodology

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Engaging patients in a prehabilitation program prior to commencement of cancer treatment is a known challenge. Utilising experience-based co-design (EBCD) methodology, this study aimed to explore the prostate cancer treatment journey from the perspectives of the patient and health professionals and collaboratively develop a prehabilitation program for patients with prostate cancer.

Methods

EBCD was utilised for this study. Patients, support persons and health professionals were selectively identified and recruited from two metropolitan health services in Melbourne. Selection criteria included (i) recent clinical/patient experience with prostate cancer treatment and (ii) willingness to share positive experiences and challenges in two 2-hour face-to-face workshops. Findings from these workshops were thematically analysed to identify key themes addressing aims of the study.

Results

Twenty participants including eight patients, one support person and 11 health professionals were recruited. Four key touchpoints were identified. All participants acknowledged positive interactions between patients and health professionals. Patients often described the journey as lonely, stressful and frustrating especially prior to commencement of treatment. A lack of a consistent approach in identifying and preparing patients with prostate cancer for treatment was identified. A structured prehabilitation program was proposed as a solution. Practical ideas to be implemented including timing of commencement, educational content and strategies to boost engagement were formulated.

Conclusions

The findings from the study provided practical guidance for future clinicians when implementing a prehabilitation program. Future study is required to evaluate the effectiveness of such a prehabilitation program in improving patient engagement and preparedness for prostate cancer treatment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Santa Mina D, Matthew AG, Hilton WJ, Au D, Awasthi R, Alibhai SMH, Clarke H, Ritvo P, Trachtenberg J, Fleshner NE, Finelli A, Wijeysundera D, Aprikian A, Tanguay S, Carli F (2014) Prehabilitation for men undergoing radical prostatectomy: a multi-centre, pilot randomized controlled trial. BMC Surg 14:89–89. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2482-14-89

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gillis C, Li C, Lee L, Awasthi R, Augustin B, Gamsa A, Liberman AS, Stein B, Charlebois P, Feldman LS, Carli F (2014) Prehabilitation versus rehabilitation: a randomized control trial in patients undergoing colorectal resection for cancer. Anesthesiology 121(5):937–947. https://doi.org/10.1097/aln.0000000000000393

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Silver JK, Baima J (2013) Cancer prehabilitation: an opportunity to decrease treatment-related morbidity, increase cancer treatment options, and improve physical and psychological health outcomes. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 92(8):715–727. https://doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0b013e31829b4afe

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Carli F, Gillis C, Scheede-Bergdahl C (2017) Promoting a culture of prehabilitation for the surgical cancer patient. Acta Oncol 56(2):128–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2016.1266081

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Santa Mina D, Scheede-Bergdahl C, Gillis C, Carli F (2015) Optimization of surgical outcomes with prehabilitation. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 40(9):966–969. https://doi.org/10.1139/apnm-2015-0084

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Santa Mina D, Hilton WJ, Matthew AG, Awasthi R, Bousquet-Dion G, Alibhai SMH, Au D, Fleshner NE, Finelli A, Clarke H, Aprikian A, Tanguay S, Carli F (2018) Prehabilitation for radical prostatectomy: a multicentre randomized controlled trial. Surg Oncol 27(2):289–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suronc.2018.05.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Granger CL (2016) Physiotherapy management of lung cancer. J Physiother 62(2):60–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Tsianakas V, Robert G, Maben J, Richardson A, Dale C, Griffin M, Wiseman T (2012) Implementing patient-centred cancer care: using experience-based co-design to improve patient experience in breast and lung cancer services. Support Care Cancer 20(11):2639–2647. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-012-1470-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bate P, Robert G (2006) Experience-based design: from redesigning the system around the patient to co-designing services with the patient. Qual Saf Health Care 15(5):307–310. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2005.016527

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Maher L, Baxter H (2009) Working in partnership with service users. Br J Healthc Manag 15(4):172–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Matthews E, Cowman M, Denieffe S (2017) Using experience-based co-design for the development of physical activity provision in rehabilitation and recovery mental health care. J Pyschiatr Ment Health Nurs 24(7):545–552. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.1240

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Fucile B, Bridge B, Duliban C, Law M (2017) Experienced-based co-design: a method for patient and family engagement in system-level quality improvement. Patient Exp J 4(2):53–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Haines KJ, Holdsworth C, Cranwell K, Skinner EH, Holton S, MacLeod-Smith B et al (2019) Development of a peer support model using experience-based co-design to improve critical care recovery. Crit Care Explor 1(3):e0006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Palmer VJ, Chondros P, Piper D, Callander R, Weavell W, Godbee K, Potiriadis M, Richard L, Densely K, Herrman H, Furler J, Pierce D, Schuster T, Iedema R, Gunn J (2015) The CORE study protocol: a stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial to test a co-design technique to optimise psychosocial recovery outcomes for people affected by mental illness in the community mental health setting. BMJ Open 5(3):e006688. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006688

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Robert G, Cornwell J, Locock L, Purushotham A, Sturmey G, Gager M (2015) Patients and staff as codesigners of healthcare services. BMJ 350:g7714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Malterud K, Siersma VD, Guassora AD (2015) Sample size in qualitative interview studies: guided by information power. Qual Health Res 26(13):1753–1760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444

  17. Starks H, Trinidad SB (2007) Choose your method: a comparison of phenomenology, discourse analysis, and grounded theory. Qual Health Res 17(10):1372–1380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 3. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

  19. Kirkman M, Young K, Evans S, Millar J, Fisher J, Mazza D, Ruseckaite R (2017) Men’s perceptions of prostate cancer diagnosis and care: insights from qualitative interviews in Victoria, Australia. BMC Cancer 17(1):704. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3699-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia (2019) Information for men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer. https://pcfa.org.au/publications/. Accessed 7th December 2019

  21. Gray RE, Fitch M, Phillips C, Labrecque M, Fergus K (2000) To tell or not to tell: patterns of disclosure among men with prostate cancer. Psycho-Oncologia 9:273–282. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-1611(200007/08)9:4<273::aid-pon463>3.0.co;2-f

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. James LJ, Wong G, Craig JC, Hanson CS, Ju A, Howard K, Usherwood T, Lau H, Tong A (2017) Men’s perspectives of prostate cancer screening: a systematic review of qualitative studies. PLoS One 12(11):e0188258. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188258

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Nguyen T-UN, Tran JH, Kagawa-Singer M, Foo MA (2011) A qualitative assessment of community-based breast health navigation services for southeast Asian women in Southern California: recommendations for developing a navigator training curriculum. Am J Public Health 101(1):87–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Robinson-White S, Conroy B, Slavish KH, Rosenzweig M (2010) Patient navigation in breast cancer: a systematic review. Cancer Nurs 33(2):127–140. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0b013e3181c40401

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2019) The health of Australia’s males. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/men-women/male-health, Accessed 7th December 2019

  26. Shanley C, Boughtwood D, Adams J, Santalucia Y, Kyriazopoulos H, Pond D, Rowland J (2012) A qualitative study into the use of formal services for dementia by carers from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities. BMC Health Serv Res 12(1):354. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-12-354

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the staff and patients at Western Health and Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre for participating in the study. We will like to extend our gratitude to Dr. John Violet and Dr. Shirley Wong for assisting with the development of the study.

Funding

This study received funding support from the Western & Central Melbourne Integrated Cancer Service (WCMICS).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physiotherapy, Western Health, Gordon Street, Footscray, VIC, 3011, Australia

    Clarice Y. Tang, Monica Turczyniak, Alesha Sayner & Kimberley Haines

  2. Department of Physiotherapy, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia

    Clarice Y. Tang

  3. School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, 3086, Australia

    Clarice Y. Tang

  4. Department of Cancer Services, Western Health, Furlong Road, St Albans, VIC, 3011, Australia

    Sally Butzkueven

  5. Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia

    Helen E. O’Connell

  6. Department of Urology, Western Health, St Albans, Australia

    Helen E. O’Connell

Authors
  1. Clarice Y. Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Monica Turczyniak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alesha Sayner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kimberley Haines
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sally Butzkueven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Helen E. O’Connell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Clarice Tang, Monica Turczyniak, Alesha Sayner and Sally Butzkueven. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Clarice Tang, and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Clarice Y. Tang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Peter MacCallum Low Risk Ethics Committee (HREC/18/PMCC/14) and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tang, C.Y., Turczyniak, M., Sayner, A. et al. Adopting a collaborative approach in developing a prehabilitation program for patients with prostate cancer utilising experience-based co-design methodology. Support Care Cancer 28, 5195–5202 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-020-05341-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-020-05341-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation