Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
A comprehensive review of European clinical practice guidelines on psychological and cognitive assessment and support for cancer patients and their families.
СтатьяСистематический обзорОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Durosini Ilaria, Monzani Dario, Coppini Veronica, Grigis Asia, Mulè Giorgia, Ferrari Maria Vittoria, Bovolenta Chiara, Andritsch Elisabeth, Farkas Clemens, Meyerheim Marcel, Ciria-Suarez Laura, Brasiuniene Birute, Charalambous Andreas, van der Weijst Lotte, Dodlek Nikolina, Grassi Luigi, Graf Norbert, Heifez Melissa, Arnedo Cristian Ochoa, Van Hemelrijck Mieke, Rutenkröger Mareike, Scholl Isabelle, Magnoni Francesca, Lange Marie, Pravettoni Gabriella
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Cancer remains a leading cause of mortality worldwide and, consequently, awareness of the psychological and cognitive challenges faced by patients and their families increases. To address these needs, psycho-oncological Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) and recommendations have been progressively developed. This systematic review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of existing European CPGs and recommendations regarding psychological and cognitive assessment and support for cancer patients and their families.
METHODS: A literature search was conducted on PsycINFO, Scopus, and Medline (PubMed interface), supplemented by a secondary search strategy. Only CPGs published in the last 15 years were considered. Data extraction focused on guideline characteristics, target population, symptoms addressed, assessment tools, recommended interventions, and quality appraisal.
RESULTS: After the screening phase, 38 publications were included. An increase in the publication of psycho-oncological guidelines emerges across European countries and the rise of a multidisciplinary approach. Most CPGs address adult cancer patients and prioritise distress, anxiety, and depression. Common screening tools are the Distress Thermometer and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Concerning interventions, psychosocial support and counselling are the most recommended forms of support, while digital and family-centred interventions are scarcely mentioned. Looking at the level of evidence and strength of recommendations, heterogeneity was observed across CPGs.
CONCLUSION: The rise of CPGs represents an effort to integrate psycho-oncological assistance into cancer care in Europe, but gaps in inclusivity, protocols, and implementation remain. Future guidelines should address underserved groups, enhance methodological quality of the CPGs, and include digital and family-centred interventions to improve equitable access and holistic care.
METHODS: A literature search was conducted on PsycINFO, Scopus, and Medline (PubMed interface), supplemented by a secondary search strategy. Only CPGs published in the last 15 years were considered. Data extraction focused on guideline characteristics, target population, symptoms addressed, assessment tools, recommended interventions, and quality appraisal.
RESULTS: After the screening phase, 38 publications were included. An increase in the publication of psycho-oncological guidelines emerges across European countries and the rise of a multidisciplinary approach. Most CPGs address adult cancer patients and prioritise distress, anxiety, and depression. Common screening tools are the Distress Thermometer and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Concerning interventions, psychosocial support and counselling are the most recommended forms of support, while digital and family-centred interventions are scarcely mentioned. Looking at the level of evidence and strength of recommendations, heterogeneity was observed across CPGs.
CONCLUSION: The rise of CPGs represents an effort to integrate psycho-oncological assistance into cancer care in Europe, but gaps in inclusivity, protocols, and implementation remain. Future guidelines should address underserved groups, enhance methodological quality of the CPGs, and include digital and family-centred interventions to improve equitable access and holistic care.