PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11894487

Self-help groups: oncology nurses' perspectives.

M I Fitch·R E Gray·M Greenberg·J Carroll·P Chart·V Orr
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

During the past decade in North America, the number of self-help groups for cancer patients has grown dramatically. Nurses' knowledge and attitudes about self-help groups could influence their practice behaviours and the information they provide to cancer patients. However, little is known about oncology nurses' views regarding self-help groups. This study used a cross-sectional survey to gather information about knowledge, attitudes, and practice behaviours of Canadian oncology nurses regarding self-help groups. A total of 676 nurses completed the survey (response rate of 61.3%). The respondents had spent, on average, 21.6 years in nursing and 11.6 years in oncology nursing. Results indicated that a large majority of nurses knew about available self-help groups. Approximately one-fifth of the nurses are speaking frequently about self-help groups with patients (20.7%) and are initiating the conversation on a frequent basis (22.0%). Overall, oncology nurses rated self-help groups as helpful with regards to sharing common experiences (79.5%), sharing information (75.6%), bonding (74.0%), and feeling understood (72.0%). The most frequently identified concern regarding the groups was about misinformation being shared (37.9%), negative effects of associating with the very ill (22.1%), and promoting unconventional therapies (21.2%). Implications from the study suggest that oncology nurses would benefit from learning more about the nature of self-help groups and being able to talk with patients about the self-help experience.

Explore related subjects

Attitude of Health PersonnelHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansNursesOncology NursingSelf-Help GroupsSurveys and QuestionnairesWorkforceJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M I Fitch, R E Gray, M Greenberg, J Carroll, P Chart, V Orr. 2001. Self-help groups: oncology nurses' perspectives.. https://doi.org/10.5737/1181912x1127681

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2003

Perceptions and attitudes of clinical oncologists on complementary and alternative medicine: a nationwide survey in Japan.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is increasing worldwide because of the growing public interest in natural or holistic therapies and because of the flow of information through the Internet. However, there is a lack of communication between cancer patients and their physicians on topics relating to CAM. The authors performed a cross-sectional survey to evaluate the perceptions and attitudes of Japanese clinical oncologists toward cancer CAM. METHODS: The CAM questionnaires were sent to 2118 clinical oncologists. The questionnaires gathered data on background (age, gender, years in practice, specialty, and knowledge of cancer CAM), perception (effectiveness/ineffectiveness, scientific evidence, and drug interactions), and attitude (experience with and response to CAM users). Questions about oncologists' perceptions and attitudes to CAM were limited to herbs and other natural products that were sold over the counter. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-six questionnaires were returned as undeliverable. Of the remaining questionnaires, 751 were returned (a response rate of 39%). Two-thirds of the responders were surgical oncologists and most of the remaining responders were medical oncologists. The majority of oncologists (82%) believed that CAM products were ineffective against cancer. The main reason for this belief was a lack of reliable information (as cited by 85% of oncologists). Only 13% of oncologists had experienced CAM-associated disease improvement in their cancer patients. Of all the oncologists, 84% considered the possibility of drug interactions between anticancer drugs and CAM products. The majority of oncologists (80%) replied that they could neither promote the use of CAM products nor recommend quitting the products, when they were asked about the use of CAM products by cancer patients. CONCLUSIONS: Negative perceptions of CAM products persist among clinical oncologists. A lack of proven effectiveness of CAM products and concerns about drug interactions with anticancer treatment suggest a need for both accurate information on CAM products and clinical trials.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗