Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Development of a Model to Guide Conversations About Internet Use in Cancer Experiences: Applications for Hospice and Palliative Care

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Hospice Palliative Home Care and Bereavement Support

Abstract

People with cancer have unique information and supportive care needs across the illness trajectory, including palliative hospice care and at the end of life. Use of smart phones and internet information is trending upwards amongst all ages, as these technologies become ubiquitous. In this chapter, I draw on a recent study elucidating the growing use of internet health information by people of all ages with cancer, including older adults. I present the ALERT model, a research-derived model with promising potential to guide nurses as they work through conversations with people diagnosed with cancer about their internet use. Emphasizing a patient-centred focus, the intent of the model is on optimizing and supporting people with cancer as they engage with internet information. By using the model, we hope to present strategies for clinicians working in inpatient, outpatient, and community settings with people diagnosed with cancer and other chronic and life-limiting illnesses.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Canadian Cancer Society. Canadian cancer statistics. Toronto, ON: Canadian Cancer Society; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bultz BD, Carlson LE. Emotional distress: the sixth vital sign-future directions in cancer care. Psycho-Oncology. 2006;15(2):93–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Matsuyama RK, Kuhn LA, Molisani A, Wilson-Genderson MC. Cancer patients’ information needs the first nine months after diagnosis. Patient Edu Counsel. 2013;90(1):96–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. IWS. Internet World Stats: usage and population statistics. 2019. http://www.internetworldstats.com

    Google Scholar 

  5. Shea-Budgell MA, Kostaras X, Myhill KP, Hagen NA. Information needs and sources of information for patients during cancer follow-up. Curr Oncol. 2014;21(4):165–73.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Greer JA, Amoyal N, Nisotel L, Fishbein JN, MacDonald J, Stagl J, et al. A systematic review of adherence to oral antineoplastic therapies. Oncologist. 2016;21(3):354–76.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Perrin A. Social media usage. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Statistics Canada. Population projections for Canada, provinces and territories – 2009–2036: Statistics Canada. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/100526/dq100526b-eng.htm

  9. Hurria A, Naylor M, Cohen HJ. Improving the quality of cancer care in an aging population: recommendations from an IOM report. JAMA. 2013;310(17):1795–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hurria A, Mohile SG, Dale W. Research priorities in geriatric oncology: addressing the needs of an aging population. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2012;10(2):286–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wildiers H, Heeren P, Puts M, Topinkova E, Janssen-Heijnen ML, Extermann M, et al. International Society of Geriatric Oncology consensus on geriatric assessment in older patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(24):2595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Thorne S. Interpretive description. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press; 2016.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Cresswell JW. Basic features of mixed methods research. A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2014. p. 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Haase KR, Thomas R, Gifford W, Holtslander L. Managing cancer experiences: an interpretive description study of internet information use. Cancer Nurs. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0000000000000619.

  15. Haase KR, Thomas R, Gifford W, Holtslander L. Ways of knowing on the internet: a qualitative review of cancer websites from a critical nursing perspective. Nurs Inq. 2018;25(3).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Haase KR, Thomas R, Gifford W, Holtslander L. Healthcare professional views on the intersection of patient internet use, relationships, and health service use in cancer care. Eur J Cancer Care. 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Cresswell JW, Plano Clark VL. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Alfaro-LeFevre R. Overview of nursing process, clinical reasoning, and nursing practice today. Applying nursing process: the foundation for clinical reasoning. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2014. p. 1–45.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Scott IA, Mitchell GK, Reymond E, Daly MP. Difficult but necessary conversations—the case for advance care planning. Med J Austr. 2013;199:4.

    Google Scholar 

  20. McCabe C, Timmins F. Communication skills. Communication skills for nursing practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2013. p. 71–92.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Strang S, Henoch I, Danielson E, Browall M, Melin-Johansson C. Communication about existential issues with patients close to death—nurses’ reflections on content, process and meaning. Psycho-Oncology. 2014;23(5):4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Clover A, Browne J, McErlain P, Vandenberg B. Patient approaches to clinical conversations in the palliative care setting. J Adv Nurs. 2004;48(4):8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Registered Nurses Association of Ontario. Facilitating client centred learning: clinical best practice guidelines 2012. Toronto, ON: Registered Nurses Association of Ontario. http://rnao.ca/sites/rnao-ca/files/BPG_CCL_2012_FA.pdf.

  24. Sanford RC. Caring through relation and dialogue: a nursing perspective for patient education. Adv Nurs Sci. 2000;22(3):1–15.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Feeley N, Gottlieb L. Nursing approaches for working with family strengths and resources. J Fam Nurs. 2000;16(3):9–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Thomas-MacLean RL, Hack TF, Kwan W, Towers A, Miedema B, Tilley A. Arm morbidity and disability after breast cancer: new directions for care. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2008;35(1):65–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Clarke A, Ross H. Influences on nurses’ communications with older people at the end of life: perceptions and experiences of nurses working in palliative care and general medicine. Int J Older People Nurs. 2006;1(1):9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. McDonnell M, Johnson G, Gallagher A, McGlade K. Palliative care in district general hospitals: the nurse's perspective. Int J Palliat Nurs. 2002;8:6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Willis L, Demiris G, Oliver DP. Internet use by hospice families and providers: a review. J Med Syst. 2007;31(2):4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Jensen R, Meyer L, Sternberger C. Three technological enhancements in nursing education: informatics instruction, personal response systems, and human patient simulation. Nurs Edu Pract. 2009;9(2):86–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Iwasiw CL, Goldenberg D, Andrusyszyn M. Creation of an evidence-informed, context-relevant, unified curriculum. Curriculum development in nursing education. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Publishers; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ehnfors M, Grobe SJ. Nursing curriculum and continuing education: future directions. Int J Med Inform. 2004;73(7):591–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ruchala PL. Curriculum development and approval processes in changing educational environments. In: Keating SB, editor. Curriculum development and evaluation in nursing. New York, NY: Springer; 2014. p. 33–47.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by a grant from the Canadian Association of Nurses in Oncology. I would like to gratefully acknowledge the patients and healthcare professionals who took part in this research and gave freely of their time. I would also like to acknowledge Drs. Roanne Thomas, Wendy Gifford, Lorraine Holtslander and Dave Holmes for their generous contributions to the evolution and development of this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada

    Kristen R. Haase

  2. Saskatchewan Centre for Patient-Oriented Research, Saskatoon, SK, Canada

    Kristen R. Haase

Authors
  1. Kristen R. Haase
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristen R. Haase .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada

    Lorraine Holtslander

  2. College of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada

    Shelley Peacock

  3. College of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada

    Jill Bally

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Haase, K.R. (2019). Development of a Model to Guide Conversations About Internet Use in Cancer Experiences: Applications for Hospice and Palliative Care. In: Holtslander, L., Peacock, S., Bally, J. (eds) Hospice Palliative Home Care and Bereavement Support. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19535-9_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19535-9_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-19534-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-19535-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation