IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v27y2018i1-2pe154-e161.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Family functioning and perceived support from nurses during cancer treatment among Danish and Australian patients and their families

Author

Listed:
  • Karin B. Dieperink
  • Elisabeth Coyne
  • Debra K. Creedy
  • Birte Østergaard

Abstract

Aims and objectives This study aimed to compare family functioning and perceptions of support from nurses among Danish and Australian adult oncology patients and family members. Background Family can have a strong influence on the health of individuals, providing support during a health crisis such as cancer. However, family functioning and supportive care from nurses may vary across cultures and settings. Design and methods A descriptive, cross‐sectional comparative design with patients and family members from Denmark and Australia. Participants were asked to fill in translated versions of the Iceland‐Expressive Family Functioning Questionnaire (ICE‐EFFQ) and Iceland‐Expressive Family Perceived Support Questionnaire (ICE‐FPSQ). Results In total, 232 participants were recruited. The Danish cohort consisted of 56 patients and 54 family members. The Australian cohort consisted of 83 patients and 39 family members. Mean age was 59 years. No significant differences were found between Danish and Australian families. However, compared to patients, family members reported significantly lower overall family functioning, expressive emotions and communication, as well as less emotional support from nurses. Conclusions Family functioning was comparable between Denmark and Australia. Family members reported less emotional support than patients. Nurses need to consider the patient and the family as a unit with complex needs that require monitoring and attention during oncology treatment. Implications for practice Families supporting a member with cancer have significant and often unmet needs. Assessment, information‐sharing and health education need to include the family. Supportive care information may be shared between Denmark and Australia and inspires the development of common guidelines for optimal family nursing practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Karin B. Dieperink & Elisabeth Coyne & Debra K. Creedy & Birte Østergaard, 2018. "Family functioning and perceived support from nurses during cancer treatment among Danish and Australian patients and their families," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1-2), pages 154-161, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:27:y:2018:i:1-2:p:e154-e161
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13894
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13894
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.13894?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Susanne Kean & Marion Mitchell, 2014. "How do intensive care nurses perceive families in intensive care? Insights from the United Kingdom and Australia," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(5-6), pages 663-672, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pernilla Garmy & Liselotte Jakobsson, 2018. "Experiences of cancer rehabilitation: A cross‐sectional study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(9-10), pages 2014-2021, May.
    2. Sara Lemos & Luísa Andrade & Maria do Céu Barbieri-Figueiredo & Teresa Martins & Lígia Lima, 2022. "Psychometric Properties of the Portuguese Version of the Iceland-Family Perceived Support Questionnaire in Parents of Children and Adolescents with Chronic Condition," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-10, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:27:y:2018:i:1-2:p:e154-e161. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.