Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Priorities for caregiver research in cancer care: an international Delphi survey of caregivers, clinicians, managers, and researchers

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

With an increased investment in psychosocial caregiving research, it becomes critical to establish the need for data of key stakeholders and future strategic directions. The purpose of this international Delphi study was to engage caregivers, clinicians, researchers, and managers to identify priority topics for caregiver research in cancer care.

Methods

A three-round, online Delphi survey took place. In round 1, stakeholders generated caregiver research topics by answering an open-ended question. Content analysis of stakeholders’ answers identified topics to be included in the round 2 survey to rate their importance. The round 3 survey included topics with less than 80% agreement for stakeholders to reconsider in light of other participants’ responses.

Results

In round 1, eighty-six topics were generated by 103 clinicians, 63 researchers, 61 caregivers, and 22 managers and grouped into 10 content areas: impact of cancer, support programs, vulnerable caregivers, technology, role in health care, caregiver-centered care, knowledge translation, environmental scan, financial cost of caregiving, and policy. Across rounds 2 and 3, nine topics achieved consensus for all stakeholder panels (e.g., home care interventions), with three of these emphasizing more research needed on the financial impact of informal caregiving (e.g., financial impact of “burnout” for caregivers and society). Of note, vulnerable caregivers and use of technology were content areas prioritized particularly by managers and researchers, but not caregivers.

Conclusion

By establishing a confluence of perspectives around research priorities, this study ensures the interests of key stakeholders are integrated in strategic directions, increasing the likelihood of research capable of influencing practice, education, and policy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alake-Tuenter E, Biemans HJA, Tobi H, Mulder M (2013) Inquiry-based science teaching competence of primary school teachers: a Delphi study. Teach Teach Educ 35:13–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Beatty L, Lambert S (2013) A systematic review of internet-based self-help therapeutic interventions to improve distress and disease-control among adults with chronic health conditions. Clin Psychol Rev 33:609–622

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Browne N, Robinson L, Richardson A (2002) A Delphi study on the research priorities of European oncology nurses. Eur J Oncol Nurs 6:133–144

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Chang L (1994) A psychometric evaluation of 4-point and 6-point Likert-type scales in relation to reliability and validity. Appl Psychol Meas 18:205–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Donetto S, Tsianakas V, Robert G (2014) Using Experience-based Co-design to improve the quality of healthcare: mapping where we are now and establishing future directions. In: Editor (ed)^(eds) Book Using Experience-based Co-design to improve the quality of healthcare: mapping where we are now and establishing future directions. King’s College London, City, London

  6. Garrett M, Fitzmaurice NML, Ware JH (2011) Applied longitudinal analysis, 2nd edn. Wiley,Hoboken, p 740

  7. Girgis A, Lambert SD (2017) Cost of informal caregiving in cancer care. Cancer Forum 41:16–22

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gysels M, Richardson A, Higginson IJ (2004) Communication training for health professionals who care for patients with cancer: a systematic review of effectiveness. Support Care Cancer 12:692–700

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hanly P, Céilleachair AÓ, Skally M, O’Leary E, Staines A, Kapur K, Fitzpatrick P, Sharp L (2013) Time costs associated with informal care for colorectal cancer: an investigation of the impact of alternative valuation methods. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 11:193–203

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Heiko A (2012) Consensus measurement in Delphi studies: review and implications for future quality assurance. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 79:1525–1536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Holroyd-Leduc JM, McMillan J, Jette N, Brémault-Phillips SC, Duggleby W, Hanson HM, Parmar J (2017) Stakeholder meeting: integrated knowledge translation approach to address the caregiver support gap. Can J Aging 36:108–119

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hosmer D, Lemeshow S, Sturdivant RX (2013) Applied logistic regression, 3rd edn. Wiley,Hoboken, p 528

  13. Hsu C-C, Sandford BA (2007) The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Pract Assess Res Eval 12:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  14. Keeney S, Hasson F, McKenna H (2006) Consulting the oracle: ten lessons from using the Delphi technique in nursing research. J Adv Nurs 53:205–212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kent EE, Rowland JH, Northouse L, Litzelman K, Chou W-YS, Shelburne N, Timura C, O'Mara A, Huss K (2016) Caring for caregivers and patients: Research and clinical priorities for informal cancer caregiving. CNCR Cancer 122:1987–1995

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kim Y, Schulz R (2008) Family caregivers’ strain: comparative analysis of cancer caregiving with dementia, diabetes, and frail elderly caregiving. J Aging Health 20:483–503

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lambert SD, Girgis A, Levesque J (2016) The impact of cancer and chronic conditions on caregivers and family members. In: Koczwara B (ed) Cancer and chronic conditions: addressing the problem of multimorbidity in Cancer patients and survivors. Springer Science+Business Media, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  18. Mitchell AJ, Vahabzadeh A, Magruder K (2011) Screening for distress and depression in cancer settings: 10 lessons from 40 years of primary-care research. Psychooncology 20:572–584

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Moniz-Cook E, Elston C, Gardiner E, Agar S, Silver M, Win T, Wang M (2008) Can training community mental health nurses to support family carers reduce behavioural problems in dementia? An exploratory pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 23:185–191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (2004) Improving supportive and palliative care for adults with cancer. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CSG4. Accessed 17 July 2018

  21. Northouse LL, McCorkle R (2010) Spouse caregivers of cancer patients. In: Holland JC, Breitbart WS, Jacobsen PB, Lederberg MS, Loscalzo MJ, McCorkle R (eds) Psycho-oncology. Oxford university press, New York, pp 516–521

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Okoli C, Pawlowski SD (2004) The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Inf Resour Manag J 42:15–29

    Google Scholar 

  23. Rankin N, Butow P, Price M, Evans A (2011) Views of psycho-oncology health professionals on priority psycho-oncology research questions. Support Care Cancer 19:1133–1141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rayens MK, Hahn EJ (2000) Building consensus using the policy Delphi method. Policy Polit Nurs Pract 1:308–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Shippee ND, Domecq Garces JP, Prutsky Lopez GJ, Wang Z, Elraiyah TA, Nabhan M, Brito JP, Boehmer K, Hasan R, Firwana B, Erwin PJ, Montori VM, Murad MH (2015) Patient and service user engagement in research: a systematic review and synthesized framework. Health Expect 18:1151–1166

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sinha M (2013) Spotlight on Canadians: results from the General Social Survey. Portrait of caregivers, 2012. In: Editor (ed)^(eds) Book Spotlight on Canadians: results from the General Social Survey. Portrait of caregivers, 2012., City

  27. Tang W, Chan C, So W, Leung D (2014) Web-based interventions for caregivers of cancer patients: a review of literatures. Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs 1:9–15

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Van Houtven CH, Ramsey SD, Hornbrook MC, Atienza AA, van Ryn M (2010) Economic burden for informal caregivers of lung and colorectal cancer patients. Oncologist 15:883–893

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) planning and dissemination grant. S. Lambert is the holder of a Canada Research Chair Tier 2 in self-management. A. Girgis is supported by a Cancer Institute New South Wales Grant. Y. Kim is supported by an American Cancer Society Research Scholar Grant and a National Institute of Health Grant. C. G. Loiselle is supported, in part, by the McGill University Christine and Herschel Victor/Hope & Cope Chair in Psychosocial Oncology.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sylvie D. Lambert.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lambert, S.D., Ould Brahim, L., Morrison, M. et al. Priorities for caregiver research in cancer care: an international Delphi survey of caregivers, clinicians, managers, and researchers. Support Care Cancer 27, 805–817 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-018-4314-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-018-4314-y

Keywords

Navigation