Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Lynley Aldridge is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Lynley Aldridge.


Lancet Oncology | 2011

Psychological morbidity and quality of life of ethnic minority patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Tim Luckett; David Goldstein; Phyllis Butow; Val Gebski; Lynley Aldridge; Joshua A. McGrane; Weng Ng; Madeleine King

BACKGROUND Ethnic minority is associated with higher cancer incidence and poorer survival than is being in the majority group. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether psychological morbidity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were affected by minority status. METHODS We searched Medline, AMED, PsycINFO, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PubMed, Sociological Abstracts, and Web of Science for English-language articles published between Jan 1, 1995, and October, 2009. Articles were eligible if they reported original data on anxiety, depression, distress (for psychological morbidity), or HRQoL in minority and majority cancer patients or survivors. Minority status was defined as being an immigrant or having an ethnic, linguistic, or religious background different to the majority of the population in the country where the research was done. We excluded African Americans and indigenous groups. Eligible articles were rated for quality of reporting, external validity, internal validity, sample size, and power. Each quality criterion was rated independently by two reviewers until inter-rater reliability was achieved. In a meta-analysis we compared mean scores adjusted for socioeconomic status and other sociodemographic and clinical variables, where available. Effect sizes greater than 0·5 and 95% CI that included 0·5 or -0·5 were deemed clinically important, with negative values indicating worse outcomes in minority patients. We assessed publication bias by estimating the number of potential unpublished studies and the number of non-signficant studies with p=0·05 required to produce a non-significant overall result. FINDINGS We identified 21 eligible articles that included 18 datasets collected in the USA and one in each of Canada, Romania, and the UK. Ethnic minority groups were Hispanic, Asian or Pacific Islander, or Hungarian (one dataset). Overall, we found minority versus majority groups to have significantly worse distress (mean difference -0·37, 95% CI -0·46 to -0·28; p<0·0001), depression (-0·23, -0·36 to -0·11; p=0·0003), and overall HRQoL (-0·33, -0·58 to -0·07; p=0·013). Further analyses found disparities to be specific to Hispanic patients in the USA, in whom poorer outcomes were consistent with potentially clinically important differences for distress (effect size -0·37, 95% CI -0·54 to -0·20; p<0·0001), social HRQoL (-0·45, -0·87 to -0·03; p=0·035), and overall HRQoL (-0·49, -0·78 to -0.20; p=0·0008). Results were significantly heterogeneous for overall HRQoL and all domains. Tests for interaction, for adjusted versus unadjusted and comparisons of high-quality, medium-quality, and low-quality articles, were generally non-significant, which suggests no bias. We found no evidence of any substantive publication bias. INTERPRETATION Hispanic cancer patients in the USA, but not other ethnic minority groups, report significantly worse distress, depression, social HRQoL, and overall HRQoL than do majority patients, of which all but depression might be clinically important. Heterogeneous results might, however, have limited the interpretation. Data for other minority groups and for anxiety are scarce. More studies are needed from outside the USA. Future reports should more clearly describe their minority group samples and analyses should control for clinical and sociodemographic variables known to predict outcomes. Understanding of why outcomes are poor in US Hispanic patients is needed to inform the targeting of interventions. FUNDING Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, Australia.


Supportive Care in Cancer | 2012

A bridge between cultures: interpreters' perspectives of consultations with migrant oncology patients.

Phyllis Butow; Elizabeth Lobb; Michael Jefford; David Goldstein; Maurice Eisenbruch; Araf Girgis; Madeleine King; Ming Sze; Lynley Aldridge; Penelope Schofield

BackgroundMigration is increasing worldwide. In previous research into people with cancer from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, interpreter accuracy, professionalism and continuity have emerged as key concerns for patients. Little is known about interpreters’ perceptions of their role and the challenges they face. This study aimed to obtain their perspective.MethodsThirty interpreters (Greek n = 7, Chinese n = 11, and Arabic n = 12) participated in four focus groups which were audio-taped, transcribed and analysed for themes using N-Vivo software.ResultsSkills as an interpreter were broadly perceived as conveying information accurately, being confidential and impartial. Three broad dilemmas faced by interpreters emerged: accuracy versus understanding; translating only versus cultural advocacy and sensitivity; and professionalism versus providing support. Some saw themselves as merely an accurate conduit of information, while others saw their role in broader terms, encompassing patient advocacy, cultural brokerage and provision of emotional support. Perceived challenges in their role included lack of continuity, managing their own emotions especially after bad news consultations, and managing diverse patient and family expectations. Training and support needs included medical terminology, communication and counselling skills and debriefing. Interpreters suggested that oncologists check on interpreter/patient’s language or dialect compatibility; use lay language and short sentences; and speak in the first person.ConclusionsResolving potential conflicts between information provision and advocacy is an important area of cross-cultural communication research. Further training and support is required to enhance interpreters’ competence in managing delicate situations from a professional, cultural and psychological perspective; and to assist doctors to collaborate with interpreters to ensure culturally competent communication. Ultimately, this will improve interpreters’ well-being and patient care.


Patient Education and Counseling | 2011

Grappling with cultural differences; Communication between oncologists and immigrant cancer patients with and without interpreters

Phyllis Butow; Melanie L. Bell; David Goldstein; Ming Sze; Lynley Aldridge; Sarah Abdo; Michelle Mikhail; Skye Dong; Rick Iedema; Ray Ashgari; Rina Hui; Maurice Eisenbruch

OBJECTIVE Immigrants report challenges communicating with their health team. This study compared oncology consultations of immigrants with and without interpreters vs Anglo-Australian patients. METHODS Patients with newly diagnosed incurable cancer who had immigrated from Arabic, Chinese or Greek speaking countries or were Anglo-Australian, and family members, were recruited from 10 medical oncologists in 9 hospitals. Two consultations from each patient were audio-taped, transcribed, translated into English and coded. RESULTS Seventy-eight patients (47 immigrant and 31 Anglo-Australian) and 115 family members (77 immigrant and 38 Anglo Australian) participated in 141 audio-taped consultations. Doctors spoke less to immigrants with interpreters than to Anglo-Australians (1443 vs. 2246 words, p=0.0001), spent proportionally less time on cancer related issues (p=0.005) and summarising and informing (p≤0.003) and more time on other medical issues (p=0.0008) and directly advising (p=0.0008). Immigrants with interpreters gave more high intensity cues (10.4 vs 7.4). Twenty percent of cues were not interpreted. Doctors tended to delay responses to or ignore more immigrant than Anglo-Australian cues (13% vs 5%, p=0.06). CONCLUSIONS Immigrant cancer patients with interpreters experience different interactions with their doctors than Anglo-Australians, which may compromise their well-being and decisions. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Guidelines and proven training programmes are needed to improve communication with immigrant patients, particularly those with interpreters.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2011

Interpretation in Consultations With Immigrant Patients With Cancer: How Accurate Is It?

Phyllis Butow; David Goldstein; Melaine L. Bell; Ming Sze; Lynley Aldridge; Sarah Abdo; Michelle Tanious; Skye Dong; Rick Iedema; Janette Vardy; Ray Ashgari; Rina Hui; Maurice Eisenbruch

PURPOSE Immigrants with cancer often have professional and/or family interpreters to overcome challenges communicating with their health team. This study explored the rate and consequences of nonequivalent interpretation in medical oncology consultations. PATIENTS AND METHODS Consecutive immigrant patients with newly diagnosed with incurable cancer, who spoke Arabic, Cantonese, Mandarin, or Greek, were recruited from the practices of 10 medical oncologists in nine hospitals. Their first two consultations were audio taped, transcribed, translated into English and coded. RESULTS Thirty-two of 78 participants had an interpreter at 49 consultations; 43% of interpreters were family, 35% professional, 18% both a professional and family, and 4% a health professional. Sixty-five percent of professional interpretations were equivalent to the original speech versus 50% for family interpreters (P= .02). Seventy percent of nonequivalent interpretations were inconsequential or positive; however, 10% could result in misunderstanding, in 5% the tone was more authoritarian than originally intended, and in 3% more certainty was conveyed. There were no significant differences in interpreter type for equivalency of interpretations. CONCLUSION Nonequivalent interpretation is common, and not always innocuous. Our study suggests that there may remain a role for family or telephone versus face-to-face professional interpreters. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS careful communication between oncologists and interpreters is required to ensure optimal communication with the patient.


European Journal of Cancer | 2013

Inferior health-related quality of life and psychological well-being in immigrant cancer survivors: A population-based study

Phyllis Butow; Lynley Aldridge; Melanie L. Bell; Ming Sze; Maurice Eisenbruch; Michael Jefford; Penelope Schofield; Afaf Girgis; Madeleine King; Priya Duggal-Beri; Joshua A. McGrane; David Goldstein

This study compared health-related quality of life (QOL) and psychological morbidity in a population-based sample of first generation immigrant and Anglo-Australian cancer survivors. Eligible participants, recruited via three State Cancer Registries, included those: with a new diagnosis of one of 12 most incident cancers (all stages) 1-6years earlier; aged 18-80 at diagnosis; born in a Chinese, Arabic, or Greek speaking country and able to speak one of these languages. A random sample of English-speaking Anglo-Australian-born controls frequency matched for cancer diagnosis was recruited. 596 patients (277 of whom were immigrants) participated (a 26% response rate). In multiple linear regression models adjusted for age, sex, education, marital status, socio-economic status, time since diagnosis and type of cancer, immigrants had clinically significantly worse QOL (5.4-8.5 points on Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G), P<0·0001), higher depression (P<0·0001) and higher incidence of clinical depression (P<0·01) than Anglo-Australians. Understanding the health system partially mediated this relationship for depression (P=0·0004) and QOL (P=0·001). Immigrant survivors of cancer have worse psychological and QOL outcomes than Anglo-Australians. Potential targets for intervention include assistance in navigating the health system, translated information and cultural competency training for health professionals.


Patient Education and Counseling | 2013

Should culture affect practice? A comparison of prognostic discussions in consultations with immigrant versus native-born cancer patients

Phyllis Butow; Ming Sze; Maurice Eisenbruch; Melanie L. Bell; Lynley Aldridge; Sarah Abdo; Michelle Tanious; Skye Dong; Rick Iedema; Janette Vardy; Rina Hui; Frances Boyle; Winston Liauw; David Goldstein

OBJECTIVE Poor prognosis is difficult to impart, particularly across a cultural divide. This study compared prognostic communication with immigrants (with and without interpreters) versus native-born patients in audio-taped oncology consultations. METHODS Ten oncologists, 78 patients (31 Australian-born, 47 immigrants) and 115 family members participated. The first two consultations after diagnosis of incurable disease were audiotaped, transcribed and coded. 142 consultations were included in the analysis. RESULTS Fifty percent of doctor and 59% of patient prognostic speech units were not interpreted or interpreted non-equivalently when an interpreter was present. Immigrant status predicted few prognostic facts, and oncologist characteristics no prognostic facts, disclosed. Oncologists were significantly less likely to convey hope to immigrants (p=0.0004), and more likely to use medical jargon (p=0.009) than with Australian-born patients. Incurable disease status and a limited life span were commonly acknowledged, generally with no timeframe provided. Physical issues were discussed more commonly than emotional aspects. CONCLUSIONS While culture did not appear to influence doctor speech, interpreters filtered or blocked much prognostic communication. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Initiatives to empower all patients to attain needed information, optimise communication when an interpreter is present and train cancer health professionals in culturally appropriate care, are urgently required.


Psycho-oncology | 2015

Conceptual analysis of suffering in cancer: a systematic review

Megan Best; Lynley Aldridge; Phyllis Butow; Ian Olver; Fleur Webster

Patient suffering is a neglected area of care, partly because of poor definitions. The aim of this study was to distill what is currently known about suffering in the health literature in order to generate a conceptual basis for further research.


Health Expectations | 2017

Communication challenges experienced by migrants with cancer: A comparison of migrant and English-speaking Australian-born cancer patients

Amelia Hyatt; Ruby Lipson-Smith; Penelope Schofield; Karla Gough; Ming Sze; Lynley Aldridge; David Goldstein; Michael Jefford; Melanie L. Bell; Phyllis Butow

Understanding the difficulties faced by different migrant groups is vital to address disparities and inform targeted health‐care service delivery. Migrant oncology patients experience increased morbidity, mortality and psychological distress, with this tentatively linked to language and communication difficulties. The objective of this exploratory study was to investigate the communication barriers and challenges experienced by Arabic, Greek and Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonese) speaking oncology patients in Australia.


Palliative Medicine | 2015

Treatment of holistic suffering in cancer: A systematic literature review

Megan Best; Lynley Aldridge; Phyllis Butow; Ian Olver; Melanie A. Price; Fleur Webster

Background: Holistic suffering is a debilitating problem for cancer patients. Although many treatments have been suggested for its alleviation, they have not been compared for effectiveness. Aim: This literature review seeks to identify what interventions are effective in treatment of holistic suffering of cancer patients. Design: A systematic review was conducted to identify and evaluate studies of interventions for holistic suffering in adult cancer patients. Search terms were generated iteratively from the literature. Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and PsycINFO databases were searched for the years 1992–2015. Included studies were peer-reviewed, English language reports of either a controlled trial or a randomised controlled trial focusing on therapies aimed at relieving suffering in adult cancer patients. Articles were excluded if focused predominantly on spiritual or existential issues or concerns not leading to suffering. Studies were graded for quality using the QualSyst quantitative checklist. Levels of evidence were ascertained by completing the National Health and Medical Research Council criteria. Results are reported according to AMSTAR guidelines. Results: The studies represented seven intervention types. Meaning-centred, hope-centred and stress-reduction interventions were found to be effective. Results of both psycho-educational and spiritual interventions in improving spiritual well-being were mixed. Supportive-expressive interventions – with the exception of forgiveness therapy – were not efficacious. There was little or no evidence for the efficacy of creative and healing arts and other assessed interventions such as animal therapy and haptotherapy. Conclusion: This systematic review found that spiritual well-being, meaning, hope and benefit finding can be positively impacted by a variety of treatment modalities.


The Medical Journal of Australia | 2010

Prevalence and predictors of anxiety and depression in women with invasive ovarian cancer and their caregivers

Melanie A. Price; Phyllis Butow; Daniel Costa; Madeleine King; Lynley Aldridge; Joanna E. Fardell; Anna deFazio; Penelope M. Webb

Collaboration


Dive into the Lynley Aldridge's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Phyllis Butow

University of Technology

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David Goldstein

University of New South Wales

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Ming Sze

University of Sydney

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Michael Jefford

Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Penelope Schofield

Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Rina Hui

University of Sydney

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge