Patients' and Radiographers' Experiences and Views of Comfort Management in Radiotherapy
NCT ID: NCT03984435
Last Updated: 2019-06-13
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
UNKNOWN
50 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2019-02-08
2019-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Recommendations for a Radiotherapy Comfort Intervention Package Radiotherapy
NCT05149521
Interest of Touch-massage in Hospital Day Care
NCT04348955
Qualitative Exploration of Head & Neck Cancer Patient Reported Experience of Radiotherapy
NCT04543045
Comfort Talk (CT) During Outpatient Chemotherapy
NCT04173195
Cognitively-Based Compassion Training for Breast Cancer Survivors
NCT03305952
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
With the consent of the patient, it is intended to establish the patients' experience and views of comfort and comfort management during radiotherapy. Radiographers' experiences and views of managing patient comfort during radiotherapy will also be explored. It will also be essential to explore what would be the most ideal solution to comfort management, or how comfort could be improved, from the perspective of both patients and radiographers.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
CASE_ONLY
RETROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Patients
Patients with a diagnosed malignancy who have been referred for radiotherapy with extended treatment time (\>10 minutes)
No interventions assigned to this group
Radiographers
Radiographers from radiotherapy departments in the UK who deliver radiotherapy
No interventions assigned to this group
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
1. diagnosed with a malignancy;
2. aged over 18 years owing to different treatment options for children and young adults;
3. recently referred for radiotherapy, currently receiving treatment or had had radiotherapy within the previous 3 months;
4. treatment delivery time exceeding 10 minutes (the time the patient is immobilised on the radiotherapy couch).
Therapeutic radiographers:
1. practicing Therapeutic radiographers;
2. administering radiotherapy with treatment delivery times exceeding 10 minutes per radiotherapy treatment session (the time the patient is immobilised on the radiotherapy couch).
Exclusion Criteria
1. patients with treatment delivery time below 10 minutes;
2. unable to communicate in English.
Therapeutic Radiographers:
1. student Therapeutic radiographers,
2. no more than two radiographers from the same radiotherapy department.
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Somerset NHS Foundation Trust
OTHER
University of the West of England
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Simon D Goldsworthy, MSc
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Principal Research Radiographer
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Musgrove Park Hospital
Taunton, Somerset, United Kingdom
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Schnur JB, Ouellette SC, Bovbjerg DH, Montgomery GH. Breast cancer patients' experience of external-beam radiotherapy. Qual Health Res. 2009 May;19(5):668-76. doi: 10.1177/1049732309334097.
Arcangeli S, Scorsetti M, Alongi F. Will SBRT replace conventional radiotherapy in patients with low-intermediate risk prostate cancer? A review. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2012 Oct;84(1):101-8. doi: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2011.11.009. Epub 2012 Jan 17.
Gestaut MM, Thawani N, Kim S, Gutti VR, Jhavar S, Deb N, Morrow A, Ward RA, Huang JH, Patel M. Single fraction spine stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy with volumetric modulated arc therapy. J Neurooncol. 2017 May;133(1):165-172. doi: 10.1007/s11060-017-2428-6. Epub 2017 Apr 13.
Chang JH, Gandhidasan S, Finnigan R, Whalley D, Nair R, Herschtal A, Eade T, Kneebone A, Ruben J, Foote M, Siva S. Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy for the Treatment of Spinal Oligometastases. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2017 Jul;29(7):e119-e125. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2017.02.004. Epub 2017 Feb 23.
Dawson LA, Balter JM. Interventions to reduce organ motion effects in radiation delivery. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2004 Jan;14(1):76-80. doi: 10.1053/j.semradonc.2003.10.010.
Cheng. F, Wang.W. Factors influencing comfort level in head and neck neoplasm patients receiving radiotherapy. Int J Nur Scie. 2014; 1 (4): 394-399
Cox.J. Davison.A. Comfort as a determiner of treatment position in radiotherapy of the male pelvis. Radiog. 2005; 11 (2): 109-115
Goldsworthy.SD, Tuke.K, Latour.J.M. A focus group consultation round exploring patient experiences of comfort during radiotherapy for head and neck cancer; Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice; 2016; 15 (2)143-149
Pineau,C. The psychological meaning of comfort. International Review of Applied Psychology. 1982. Vol 31, 271-283
Kolcaba K, Steiner R. Empirical evidence for the nature of holistic comfort. J Holist Nurs. 2000 Mar;18(1):46-62. doi: 10.1177/089801010001800106.
Kolcaba K, Tilton C, Drouin C. Comfort Theory: a unifying framework to enhance the practice environment. J Nurs Adm. 2006 Nov;36(11):538-44. doi: 10.1097/00005110-200611000-00010.
Braun V. Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology; 2006 July 3: 77-101
Carter N, Bryant-Lukosius D, DiCenso A, Blythe J, Neville AJ. The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2014 Sep;41(5):545-7. doi: 10.1188/14.ONF.545-547.
Goldsworthy S, Latour JM, Palmer S, McNair HA, Cramp M. A thematic exploration of patient and radiation therapist solutions to improve comfort during radiotherapy: A qualitative study. J Med Imaging Radiat Sci. 2023 Dec;54(4):603-610. doi: 10.1016/j.jmir.2023.07.008. Epub 2023 Jul 20.
Related Links
Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.
COMFORT study Twitter account
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
HAS.19.02.126
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.