An evaluation of clinical interactions in TYA non psychologist staff

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    An evaluation of the clinical interactions relating to psychological wellbeing and distress between teenagers and young adults (TYA’s) diagnosed with cancer and non-psychologist TYA staff.

  • IRAS ID

    170701

  • Contact name

    D Stark

  • Contact email

    d.p.stark@leeds.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    University of Leeds

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    0 years, 6 months, 30 days

  • Research summary

    Psychological distress is reported to be common in cancer sufferers (Holland et al., 2013, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, 2004) yet despite its pervasiveness it often goes unrecognised and untreated by oncology professionals (Jacobsen, 2007, Fallowfield et al., 2001). Moreover, the evidence for the best model of psychosocial provision for cancer sufferers under the age of 18 is poor and represents an area of unmet need (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, 2005). Future research therefore needs to focus on the components of a best model. We are currently working on the development of validated measures tailored for teenagers and young adults which effectively identify and assess psychological distress, and a process for their use. In addition, an evaluation of how psychological support is delivered to this age group is also required. This study therefore aims to employ a qualitative method to identify and characterise the communication skills and specific psychological care skills already in use by non-psychologist Teenage and Young Adult (TYA) healthcare professionals. Clinical interactions between Clinical Nurse Specialists, Social Workers, Youth Support Coordinators and TYAs with cancer will be audiotaped. These will be subjected to qualitative analysis to categorise and evaluate the skills in use and their delivery.

  • REC name

    East Midlands - Derby Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    15/EM/0030

  • Date of REC Opinion

    3 Feb 2015

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion