Vienna, Austria

ESTRO 2023

Session Item

Monday
May 15
09:00 - 10:00
Business Suite 1-2
Education is the RTT superpower
Mary Coffey, Ireland
Poster Discussion
RTT
Evaluation of a radiotherapy late effects service
Samantha Bostock, United Kingdom
PD-0739

Abstract

Evaluation of a radiotherapy late effects service
Authors:

Samantha Bostock1, Gillian Bestwick2, Elaine Smith1

1Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Radiotherapy - Gloucestershire Oncology Centre, Cheltenham, United Kingdom; 2Gloucestershire NHS Foundation Trust, Radiotherapy - Gloucestershire Oncology Centre, Cheltenham, United Kingdom

Show Affiliations
Purpose or Objective

Radiotherapy can result in debilitating late effects that greatly impact on a person's physical and psychological health. To address this a Therapeutic Radiographer-led Late Effects Service was piloted. Patients were given the opportunity to talk about their symptoms and the impact they have - physically and emotionally. A joint management and support action plan was created aimed at reducing the impact late effects have on each individual’s daily life and ability to function. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of the late effects service on the patient’s using it.

Material and Methods

Those patients seen within the Late Effects Service from May 2020 to July 2022 were invited to complete a questionnaire (dichotomous yes / no and free text responses) after their 1st appointment and a second questionnaire (10-point Likert scale questions and free text responses) after 3-4 months of using the service. The patients had completed radiotherapy between 6 months and 20 years previously. Quantitative data was used to evaluate how well the service met patient’s needs - if a difference were made to how late effects impacted on their daily life/ if the patient found it helpful. Thematic analysis of patient’s comments provided qualitative evidence on the impact the service has had.

Results

Questionnaires were returned from 34 patients after their initial Late Effects consultation and 17 patients after 3 months of using the service. 97% patients reported their initial appointment met their expectations, that they had a positive outcome and gained a better understanding of their symptoms and how to manage them.
After 3-4 months of using the service 100% patients scored at least 8 out of 10 for how satisfied they are with the service (mean 9.65, standard deviation 0.61). When asked how much difference the late effects service has made to how symptoms affect their daily life the mean response was 7.47 (SD 2.65) with 76% of patients scoring 7 or higher. Patients were also asked how the service has met their needs. Again, the mean response score was high at 8.88 (SD 1.80). 76% of patients scored 8 or higher and 65% of patients scored 10. The lowest score was 5.
Themes identified from patient comments on both questionnaires were 1) positive emotions - patients reported feeling more hopeful, positive and reassured; 2) information - patients reported that the information provided helped them understand their symptoms better; 3) positive outcomes - including symptoms resolved or reduced with action plans implemented and 4) praise for the therapeutic radiographer leading the service.

Conclusion

The pilot Radiotherapy Late Effects Service had a considerable positive impact on patients’ ability to understand and manage their symptoms. This led to quality-of-life improvements alongside a reduction in the significance of symptoms. The pilot demonstrated the continued need for this service in delivering holistic person-centred care and supporting patients to move forward after cancer treatment.