Wendy Oldenmenger

Dr. Wendy Oldenmenger

Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

25Years (2002-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 June 2013 in Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
WOWendy Oldenmenger
Wendy Oldenmenger
PRPleun J. de Raaf
Pleun J. de Raaf
CKCora de Klerk
Cora de Klerk
CRCarin C.D. van der Rijt
Carin C.D. van der Rijt

1 May 2009 in European Journal of Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
WOWendy Oldenmenger
Wendy Oldenmenger
PSPeter A.E. Sillevis Smitt
Peter A.E. Sillevis Smitt
SDSilvia van Dooren
Silvia van Dooren
GSGerrit Stoter
Gerrit Stoter
CRCarin C.D. van der Rijt
Carin C.D. van der Rijt

1 October 2018 in International Journal of Nursing Studies
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ACAndreas Charalambous
Andreas Charalambous
MWMary Wells
Mary Wells
PCPauline Campbell
Pauline Campbell
CTClaire Torrens
Claire Torrens
UÖUlrika Östlund
Ulrika Östlund
DKDaniel Kelly
Daniel Kelly

1 February 2018 in Cancer Treatment Reviews
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
WOWendy Oldenmenger
Wendy Oldenmenger
JGJenske I. Geerling
Jenske I. Geerling
IMIrina Mostovaya
Irina Mostovaya
KVKris C. P. C.P. Vissers
Kris C. P. C.P. Vissers
AGAlexander de Graeff
Alexander de Graeff
YLYvette van der linden
Yvette van der linden
Despite existing guidelines to assess and manage pain, the management of cancer-related pain is often suboptimal with patients often being undertreated. Inadequate pain management may be due to patient-related barriers. Educating patients may decrease these barriers. However, the effect of pain education on patient-related outcomes is still unclear. This review aimed to study the effect of educational interventions on cancer-related pain. We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified from Medline and Cinahl, from 1995 to May 2017. Two reviewers independently selected trials comparing educational intervention to usual care or an active control intervention. The methodological quality was assessed and data extraction was done independently. Primary outcome measures were pain intensity and interference. Secondary outcome measures were knowledge/barriers, medication adherence and self-efficacy. Twenty-six RCTs totaling 4735 patients met our inclusion criteria. Compared to the control group, 31% of the studies (including 19% of all patients) reported a significant difference in pain intensity in favor of the intervention group. Twelve studies measured pain interference and four (30%) found a significant improvement. With regard to secondary endpoints, significant differences in favor of the experimental arms were found for pain knowledge or barriers (15/22 studies; 68%), medication adherence (3/6 studies; 50%) and self-efficacy (1/2 studies). Patient-based pain educational programs may result in improvements of relevant patient-reported outcomes. However, the interventions are heterogeneous and improvement of pain was only seen in less than one third of the studies and in less than 20% of all included patients.

2 February 2020 in Palliative Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SDSophie I van Dongen
Sophie I van Dongen
KNKim de Nooijer
Kim de Nooijer
JCJane M Cramm
Jane M Cramm
AFAnneke L Francke
Anneke L Francke
WOWendy Oldenmenger
Wendy Oldenmenger
JRJudith Ac Rietjens
Judith Ac Rietjens
Background: Patients with advanced cancer are increasingly expected to self-manage. Thus far, this topic has received little systematic attention. Aim: To summarise studies describing self-management strategies of patients with advanced cancer and associated experiences and personal characteristics. Also, to summarise attitudes of relatives and healthcare professionals towards patient self-management. Design: A systematic review including non-experimental quantitative and qualitative studies. Data were analysed using critical interpretive synthesis. Included studies were appraised on methodological quality and quality of reporting. Data sources: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science and Google Scholar (until 11 June 2019). Results: Of 1742 identified articles, 31 moderate-quality articles describing 8 quantitative and 23 qualitative studies were included. Patients with advanced cancer used self-management strategies in seven domains: medicine and pharmacology, lifestyle, mental health, social support, knowledge and information, navigation and coordination and medical decision-making (29 articles). Strategies were highly individual, sometimes ambivalent and dependent on social interactions. Older patients and patients with more depressive symptoms and lower levels of physical functioning, education and self-efficacy might have more difficulties with certain self-management strategies (six articles). Healthcare professionals perceived self-management as desirable and achievable if based on sufficient skills and knowledge and solid patient–professional partnerships (three articles). Conclusion: Self-management of patients with advanced cancer is highly personal and multifaceted. Strategies may be substitutional, additional or even conflicting compared to care provided by healthcare professionals. Self-management support can benefit from an individualised approach embedded in solid partnerships with relatives and healthcare professionals.

20 February 2013 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
PRPleun J. de Raaf
Pleun J. de Raaf
CKCora de Klerk
Cora de Klerk
RTReinier Timman
Reinier Timman
JBJan J.V. Busschbach
Jan J.V. Busschbach
WOWendy Oldenmenger
Wendy Oldenmenger
CRCarin C.D. van der Rijt
Carin C.D. van der Rijt
Purpose Several guidelines on the treatment of cancer-related fatigue recommend optimizing treatment of accompanying symptoms. However, evidence for this recommendation from randomized clinical trials is lacking. We investigated whether monitoring and protocolized treatment of physical symptoms alleviates fatigue. Patients and Methods In all, 152 fatigued patients with advanced cancer were randomly assigned to protocolized patient-tailored treatment (PPT) of symptoms or care as usual. The PPT group had four appointments with a nurse who assessed nine symptoms on a 0 to 10 numeric rating scale (NRS). Patients received a nonpharmacologic intervention for symptoms with a score ≥ 1 and a medical intervention for symptoms with a score ≥ 4. Fatigue dimensions, fatigue NRS score, interference of fatigue with daily life, symptom burden, quality of life, anxiety, and depression were measured at baseline and after 1, 2, and 3 months. Differences between the groups over time were assessed by using mixed modeling. Results Seventy-six patients were randomly assigned to each study arm. Mean age was 58 ± 10 years, 57% were female, and 65% were given palliative chemotherapy. We found significant improvements over time in favor of PPT for the primary outcome general fatigue (P = .01), with significant group differences at month 1 (effect size, 0.26; P = .007) and month 2 (effect size, 0.35; P = .005). Improvements in favor of PPT were also found for the following secondary outcomes: fatigue dimensions “reduced activity” and “reduced motivation,” fatigue NRS, symptom burden, interference of fatigue with daily life, and anxiety (all P ≤ .03). Conclusion In fatigued patients with advanced cancer, nurse-led monitoring and protocolized treatment of physical symptoms is effective in alleviating fatigue.