Aims: To systematically review and synthesize qualitative research exploring the Breast Cancer Survivors (BCSs)’ perception of health promotion interventions and informing strategies to mitigate recurrence risk within five years post-treatment and improve clinical outcomes. Specifically, this study addresses the question: “How do women diagnosed with breast cancer perceive health promotion interventions for recurrence prevention?” Design: A systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis were performed. Data Sources: A systematic search of scientific databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Scopus) was undertaken in November 2024. The reference list was cross-referenced and hand-searched to identify additional articles. Review Methods: Studies were included if they met the following criteria: they were primary qualitative studies focusing on BCSs within five years post-treatment, involving participants who had completed surgery, radiotherapy, or chemotherapy in the same time frame, as this period is critical for monitoring recurrence and implementing health promotion interventions. Only studies published in peer-reviewed journals and written in Italian, English, French, or Spanish were considered, provided that an abstract and the full text were available. Moreover, eligible studies had to be conducted in high-income or middle-income countries. Studies were excluded if they focused exclusively on advanced or metastatic breast cancer, if they involved mixed cancer populations without reporting separate data for BCSs, or if they were non-qualitative studies or gray literature. The review study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42024626033). Results: The literature search identified 490 records, 13 articles from databases, and 3 articles identified via other methods (web and citation searching) that met inclusion criteria. A narrative synthesis approach allowed the emerging five themes: (I) Challenges, (II) Self-motivation and empowerment, (III) The relationships as a facilitator, (IV) Barriers to change, and (V) Proactive support strategies. Conclusions: Addressing internal and external factors that influence health behaviors is essential to improve adherence, reduce recurrence risk, and enhance quality of life. Tailored interventions, social support, and healthcare engagement are crucial in this effort. Impact: Our meta-synthesis highlighted significant challenges as well as valuable resources for health promotion among BCSs, suggesting practical and tailored approaches to improving the adoption of healthy behaviors, supported by relationships and targeted support strategies.

Background/Objectives: Chemotherapy can negatively affect cognitive functioning through direct and indirect mechanisms, with 15–50% of patients experiencing a decline that impacts quality of life. While neurocognitive tests are the main assessment tool, self-reported measures provide valuable additional insights. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cognitive decline of patients during the early stages of chemotherapy treatment and its impact on their quality of life, as well as to outline future perspectives for an early intervention model. Materials and Methods: This prospective longitudinal study was conducted on 40 patients aged 18 to 64 years. Data were collected using the FACT-Cog v.3 questionnaire, administered at the beginning of the first chemotherapy cycle (T0), and then again after approximately 3–4 weeks (T1) and 6–8 weeks (T2). Results: The data show a progressive decline in perceived cognitive abilities (PCI: 72.10 → 64.43; PCA: 25.70 → 20.90) and overall quality of life (9.73 → 8.75) from T0 to T2. A significant positive correlation was found between perceived cognitive abilities and quality of life, supporting the link between cognitive decline and quality of life. Questionnaire variables reliably predicted changes in quality of life two months after chemotherapy [F(4, 35) = 3.91, p = 0.01]. Conclusions: The findings show a decline in quality of life as chemotherapy progresses. However, this decline can be predicted from the second month of treatment using the FACT-Cog v.3 questionnaire. The findings further highlight even more the value of integrating early empowerment, rehabilitative and psychoeducational programs to mitigate cognitive decline and improve quality of life.

Background/Objectives: Oral mucositis (OM) is a common complication in onco-hematological patients undergoing chemotherapy and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, negatively affecting comfort, nutrition, and quality of life. Despite existing assessment tools and recommendations, OM management—particularly non-pharmacological approaches—remains inconsistent, and evidence on nurses’ perspectives and contextual factors is limited. This study explored nurses’ perceptions and experiences regarding non-pharmacological treatments for OM, including educational needs and barriers and facilitators to implementation in clinical practice. Methods: A qualitative descriptive study using inductive content analysis was conducted. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with nurses working in onco-hematological settings in Italy. Data were analysed according to the Elo and Kyngäs framework. Results: Twelve nurses with extensive experience in onco-hematology and transplant care participated in the study. Five main themes emerged: (1) education and training pathways; (2) approaches to mucositis management; (3) nursing competence in OM care; (4) interprofessional collaboration; and (5) governance of practice, including protocols and guidelines. Findings highlighted strong experiential competence, high levels of nursing autonomy in assessment and patient education, and effective interprofessional collaboration, particularly in specialised settings. However, training pathways were predominantly informal, and the availability and use of protocols varied widely across clinical contexts. Conclusions: Non-pharmacological management of OM appears to be sustained primarily by advanced nursing competence and a specialised clinical culture rather than by structured education and standardised governance. Addressing educational gaps and promoting shared protocols may enhance the consistency, quality, and equity of supportive care while ensuring that the findings are clearly reflective of nurses’ experiences.

Background/Objectives: The placement of central venous access devices, including peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and PICC-PORTs, is a routine procedure in oncology care. Usually associated with limited physical pain, these procedures may nevertheless generate significant anxiety and negatively influence the overall procedural experience. Virtual reality (VR) has emerged as a non-pharmacological intervention capable of modulating attentional and emotional responses during medical procedures; however, evidence in adult oncology patients undergoing vascular access placement remains scarce. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of VR on an oncological patient’s overall procedural experience. Methods: This manuscript outlines the design and methodology of a prospective, single-centre randomised controlled trial. Adult oncology patients scheduled for PICC/PICC-PORT placement are randomised to receive standard care alone or standard care combined with an immersive VR intervention delivered via a head-mounted display during the procedure under pragmatic, real-world clinical conditions. The primary outcome is a composite patient-reported procedural experience endpoint, assessed through a non-aggregated framework encompassing procedural anxiety, comfort, satisfaction and procedural tolerability. Procedural anxiety constitutes the main quantitative driver; the remaining domains are analysed as individual component dimensions and interpreted jointly to contextualise the overall experience. Secondary outcomes include procedural pain, physiological parameters and procedural characteristics. A mixed-methods approach integrates quantitative assessment with qualitative phenomenological analysis. Results: The study is expected to provide methodological and clinical insight into the role of immersive VR in improving procedural experience and support future multicentre trials. Conclusions: This trial will contribute to the expanding field of digital and immersive health technologies by evaluating VR as a patient-centred adjunct intervention in oncological procedural care using a predefined patient-reported experience-based primary endpoint. The protocol has been submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov with the registration number NCT07384741.