Explore the vast range of titles available.

ObjectivesTo explore healthcare workers’ (HCWs) experiences, barriers and facilitators in managing patients with symptoms of possible breast, cervical or colorectal cancer.DesignA qualitative in-depth interview study with HCWs managing patients with breast, cervical and colorectal cancer symptoms. We also conducted workshops with a group of HCWs to check the credibility of the interview findings.SettingThe study was conducted with staff working in primary, secondary and tertiary public health facilities in the Eastern and Western Cape in South Africa (SA), and Harare and Bulawayo and their referral provinces in Zimbabwe.ParticipantsHCWs with experience in managing patients with symptoms of possible breast, cervical or colorectal cancer were recruited for the study. Participants were purposively sampled based on region, healthcare level and job role. A total of 56 participants (26 in SA and 30 in Zimbabwe) participated in the in-depth interviews. 26 (12 in SA and 14 in Zimbabwe) participated in four clinical advisory group workshops across both countries.ResultsDrawing on the Model of Pathways to Treatment, HCWs’ perceptions of patient-level factors influencing the diagnostic interval included financial limitations, patients’ absence and delays in attendance. Healthcare provider and system factors included: challenges with referral and feedback systems; training needs; low awareness of protocols and guidelines; inappropriate and suboptimal clinical assessments; and broader socioeconomic factors and resource limitations.ConclusionImproving the timely diagnosis of breast, cervical and colorectal cancer in Southern Africa necessitates targeted strategies that address both patient-related, provider and health-system delays.

Abstract Background Cancer is a main driver of death and serious health-related suffering. The growing body of evidence for early integration of palliative care alongside oncological treatment to optimizes patient-reported outcomes is almost exclusively from high-income countries, while the greatest need is in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We aimed to explore the perspectives of patients, families and clinical staff on what constitutes a feasible, acceptable and appropriate model of integrated palliative and oncology care in Zimbabwe. Materials and Methods We conducted an exploratory qualitative study underpinned by indicators for integrated oncology and palliative care. Participants comprised healthcare professionals, patients, and families. Semistructured guides were developed and iteratively refined. Deductive framework analysis was conducted to Hui’s evidence-based framework of integrated oncology and palliative care indicators. The data were then further inductively coded into the framework. Results Analysis of data from 45 stakeholders (n = 15 per group) identified 19 of 38 indicators (50%) aligned with Hui’s model, indicating partial and uneven integration. Alignment was strongest in clinical processes (n = 9) and education (n = 5), with more limited support for administration (n = 3) and structure (n = 2). No findings aligned with the research domain. Inductive coding identified 3 indicators that aligned with clinical processes (routine discussion of prognosis, advance care planning and goals), clinical structure (physical environment) and education (training needs). Discussion While the Hui model is broadly applicable, substantial contextual adaptation is required. Integration cannot be achieved through coordination alone and requires system-level investment in workforce, training, infrastructure, and policy. We propose a phased “minimum package” for integration tailored to Zimbabwe and similar LMIC settings.