PTOTSLPRNSystematic ReviewRevista brasileira de enfermagem2025

Care for patients with hematologic neoplasms: contextual analysis resulting from a scoping review.

Isabelle Campos de Azevedo, Larissa Arielly Cunha da Silva, Estéfany Alves Augusto and 3 others

PMID 41370452

WHAT IT FOUND

Care for blood cancer patients is shaped by gaps in training, communication, and access.

Advance care planning and symptom self-management are underused due to lack of formal education and infrastructure, while technologies like mobile apps help monitor symptoms and reduce hospital stays.

Key findings

01Advance care planning is infrequent in onco-hematologic care due to a lack of formal training among healthcare teams.

02Barriers to care include patient discomfort, lack of knowledge about procedures, infrastructure limitations, and distance from services.

03Mobile health applications help reduce hospital length of stay by allowing continuous monitoring of vital signs and treatment progress.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPsWhat it means for RNs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The review only included studies available in full text, which may have excluded relevant work. The included studies generally had low levels of evidence (levels III and IV) and noted methodological weaknesses. The review maps contexts and barriers but does not test the effectiveness of any specific intervention.

Declared interests

The study was supported by non-U.S. government funding. No specific commercial conflicts of interest were reported in the provided text.

The easy way to misread this

Do not interpret this review as evidence that specific interventions like mobile apps or advance care planning improve clinical outcomes. The review maps the existence of these practices and barriers in the literature, but the included studies had low levels of evidence and the review itself did not measure efficacy.

Read it on PubMed →