Patient perceptions of advanced practice radiation therapists prescribing medication in radiation therapy
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine patient perceptions of an advanced practice radiation therapist (APRT) prescribing medication for radiation therapy treatment-related side effects. By comprehending patient perceptions, it is important to implement change in order to improve patients' quality of life. METHODS: A literature review was conducted on advanced practice (AP) roles in Canada and world-wide; the roles searched were: APRT, nurse practitioner and pharmacist. The search focused on evidence demonstrating improvements made to patient care due to the implementation of these roles. Based on this review and input from a team of experts a qualitative semi-structured interview survey was designed, and pilot tested. The survey consisted of five open-ended questions, which were designed to determine patient satisfaction of an APRT prescribing medication over the course of their radiation therapy treatments. Patients undergoing head and neck radiation therapy treatments at a large, academic cancer centre were invited to participate. Six patients who had a head and neck APRT involved in their treatment were interviewed. A comprehensive thematic analysis was then conducted using the transcripts created from these interviews, which was followed by two independent blinded analyses to ensure validity of the results. DISCUSSION: The thematic analysis produced four salient themes which were: side effect management, care provided by the APRT in comparison to other healthcare workers, patients' access to care, and overall patient satisfaction. Common medications for head and neck radiation therapy treatment related side effects were discussed and these were: Magic Mouthwash, Xylocaine, Nystatin, Benadryl, Advil, Tylenol, Dexamethasone, Tantum, Biotene, Mucaine, Flamazine, Hydrocortisone, Ondansetron, Senokot, and narcotics. CONCLUSION: This study was valuable to understand patient experiences and provide evidence to change processes in order to improve quality of patient centered care. The study revealed that although patients were happy with the process of prescribing medication, they all agreed that having an advanced practice radiation therapist prescribe would improve care. Patient responses further demonstrated the need for future research in regards to side effect management as a whole by APRTs as well as how role clarification can impact patient perceptions of APRTs.
