Objective: To clarify administrators' awareness of outpatient cancer nursing clinics.Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews of six administrators overseeing outpatient cancer nursing clinics and performed a qualitative, inductive analysis.Results and discussion: In this study, interviews with the administrators led to the identification of ten categories for outpatient cancer nursing clinics such as [the nurses' role in easing the concerns and worries of patients with cancer and their families], [challenges in training and securing outpatient cancer nursing clinic personnel], and [the influence of the passion and confidence of nurses on practice in outpatient cancer nursing clinics]. These interviews revealed that, in practice, outpatient cancer nursing is a useful skill for elucidating the real needs of patients and supporting their decision-making. Coordinated efforts and collaboration among human resources/disciplines may affect day-to-day outpatient cancer nursing clinics.Conclusion: This study revealed that the development of assessment indices to substantiate the accomplishment of outpatient cancer nursing clinics and the training of personnel with a high level of practical skills are two challenges for the expansion of outpatient cancer nursing clinics.

The purpose of this research was to develop a reflection program to support the practice of end-of-life care for nurses and to examine its effectiveness and feasibility. We developed and examined the effectiveness of a facilitator-based reflection program (FRP) and card-based reflection program (CRP). Average scores for both the FRP and CRP were measured using a Knowledge, Attitude and Difficulty Scale for palliative care and Self-education Ability Scale implemented before, immediately after, and 3 months after the program. The changes in scores were compared. This research was conducted with approval from the ethics review committee. Nine people participated in the FRP, and 15 in the CRP. FRP significantly reduced difficulty concerning palliative care compared to CRP. FRP significantly increased knowledge compared to CRP. Similar results were obtained within the FRP group. Both FRP and CRP were considered highly feasible because the program evaluation was high. In the future, it is necessary to clarify the effect of the reflection program by reviewing the research design.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to develop a “Multidisciplinary Collaboration Ability Scale (MCAS)” and examine the reliability and validity for medical professionals engaged in cancer care. Method: The first MCAS draft was created, and the content validity and surface validity of the scale were examined for medical professionals. Next, a cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted on medical professionals engaged in cancer care who worked in medical institutions. Exploratory factor analysis and known-groups technique were carried out, coefficient α calculated, and concurrent validity examined. This study was conducted with the approval of the research ethics review. Result: Exploratory factor analysis resulted in 33 items of 4 factors (ability to promote discussion, foundational relationship building, self-control, and problem-solving activities). The MCAS score was significantly higher for those who had participated in a multidisciplinary workshop and those who had more years of experience. Coefficient α for the entire scale and for each factor was .80 and above. Examination of concurrent validity showed a moderate correlation. Conclusion: The reliability and validity of MCAS in its development stage were generally verified.