Premium
School and educational support programmes for paediatric oncology patients and survivors: A systematic review of evidence and recommendations for future research and practice
Author(s) -
Burns Mary A.,
Fardell Joanna E.,
Wakefield Claire E.,
Cohn Richard J.,
Marshall Glenn M.,
Lum Alistair,
Ellis Sarah J.,
Donnan Barb,
Walwyn Thomas,
Carter Amanda,
Barton Belinda,
Lah Suncica
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
psycho‐oncology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.41
H-Index - 137
eISSN - 1099-1611
pISSN - 1057-9249
DOI - 10.1002/pon.5606
Subject(s) - cinahl , medicine , psycinfo , medical education , psychosocial , psychosocial support , medline , evidence based practice , family medicine , nursing , alternative medicine , political science , psychological intervention , psychiatry , law , pathology
Objectives The Psychosocial Standards of Care (PSSC) in paediatric oncology prescribe the minimum standards for education support. It is unknown, however, if published education support programmes for children with cancer meet the PSSC standards for education support. Successful implementation of standards for education support is challenging but may be achieved with guidance. We aimed to (1) review education support programmes for childhood cancer patients and survivors against the PSSC standards and (2) provide practical recommendations for future research and implementation of education support programmes. Methods We searched PsycINFO, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Educational Resources Information and Center databases. We reviewed the education support programmes using five evaluation criteria derived from the PSSC and summarised the structure of identified programmes. We examined the features and limitations of programmes that met all evaluation criteria. Results We identified 20 education support programmes in paediatric oncology, including peer programmes ( n = 3), teacher programmes ( n = 5), and school re‐entry programmes (SRPs n = 12). We found that three SRPs met all evaluation criteria and that SRP components were timed according to the child's position on the cancer trajectory (e.g., diagnosis and treatment, school re‐entry, and follow up throughout schooling). The supporting evidence of the programmes, however, is unclear due to the lack of adequately designed studies. Conclusions SRPs provide a promising structure for future education support programmes. We recommend strategies for developing and evaluating education support that adheres to the PSSC and adapts to international and local contexts.