Evaluating therapeutic radiographers’ role in instigating prehabilitation and rehabilitation advice
Daniel Hutton ,
United Kingdom
PD-0656
Abstract
Evaluating therapeutic radiographers’ role in instigating prehabilitation and rehabilitation advice
Authors: Yuchen Wang1, Daniel Hutton2, Joanna McNamara3, Hazel Pennington4, Robert Appleyard5
1The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom; 2The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, North West Radiotherapy Operational Delivery Network, Manchester, United Kingdom; 3Sheffield Hallam University, Faculty of Health and Wellbeing, Sheffield, United Kingdom; 4Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Allied Health Professionals, Preston, United Kingdom; 5Sheffield Hallam University, College of Health, Wellbeing and Life Sciences, Sheffield, United Kingdom
Show Affiliations
Hide Affiliations
Purpose or Objective
To investigate therapeutic radiographers’ (TR) perception of their role in delivering prehabilitation and rehabilitation advice before and after completing an e-learning resource. This e-learning resource aims to provide knowledge and professional skills to enable TRs’ incorporation of prehabilitation and rehabilitation into cancer pathways.
Material and Methods
A questionnaire was developed to establish TRs’ baseline knowledge, confidence and barriers of instigating prehabilitation and rehabilitation advice to people with cancer prior to undertaking the e-learning resource. Participants were asked to complete two online training from PRosPer e-learning resources, a post-questionnaire was then undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness of the online training course. Questions with multiple choice answer options were analysed using quantitative methods. Open-ended questions with free-text comment boxes were analysed using thematic analysis, coding and theme development was generated by the content of the comment.
The diagram below shows the process of the study:
Results
In total, 62 TRs were recruited from three radiotherapy departments in the northwest of England. 36 TRs responded to the pre-questionnaire (58% response rate) and 18 participants submitted the post questionnaire (response rate 29%) after completing the e-learning resource. Findings showed the level of confidence to deliver prehabilitation and rehabilitation advice was low, with less than 25% of participants having high confidence levels. Lack of knowledge, training, confidence, time and concern about upsetting patients were identified as barriers. Surveys also identified 24% of participants have considered prehabilitation and rehabilitation as part of a TR’s role. After the completion of the online course, TRs reported their knowledge and skills in delivering prehabilitation and rehabilitation services have improved significantly by taking the e-learning resource. With more than 90% of participants have increased their confidence in delivering prehabilitation and rehabilitation advice and support. Post questionnaires showed 100% of participants have considered providing prehabilitation and rehabilitation advice as part of a TR’s role.
Conclusion
There was a gap of knowledge and skills for TRs in providing prehabilitation and rehabilitation advice. The e-learning resource has improved TRs’ knowledge and increased awareness of prehabilitation and rehabilitation. The e-learning resource equipped TRs with the necessary tools to initiate a conversation about prehabilitation and rehabilitation and refer patients to other cancer support. There are remaining challenges for TRs to incorporate a comprehensive prehabilitation and rehabilitation service. It is also vital to eliminate barriers and support TRs in implementing the prehabilitation and rehabilitation advice and will increase the number of cancer patients receiving support during their treatment pathways.