Experiences of Difficulty in Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Nurses: A Qualitative Systematic Review Protocol

Rationale for the Review

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) nursing is a highly specialized field that presents numerous challenges. HSCT is a treatment in which a patient’s bone marrow is destroyed through intensive chemotherapy and total body irradiation, followed by transplantation of hematopoietic stem cells derived from the bone marrow, peripheral blood, or umbilical cord blood to restore hematopoiesis (Kanda, 2015). HSCT was first introduced in 1974 in Japan, and currently, more than 5,500 procedures are performed annually (Japan Data Center for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation, 2023).

However, HSCT carries life-threatening complications, such as graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and severe infections. The five-year survival rate for acute myeloid leukemia patients remains challenging (44–56%), depending on the donor type and stem cell source (Japan Data Center for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation, 2023). Post-transplant patients face fatal risks from complications (Ishida et al., 2002) and continue to suffer psychological distress due to fear of relapse, even after the acute phase (Ishida et al., 2005).

Patients undergoing rigorous treatment require strong support from nurses with specialized knowledge (Takahashi & Onishi, 2007). For example, post-transplant infection prevention requires strict dietary guidelines (Japan Society for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation, 2017), which nurses often find challenging to explain to their patients. Additionally, patients in isolation rooms may exhibit various psychological states such as anger or emotional numbness (Akaho, 2007), making psychological support a challenge for nurses.

Under these circumstances, transplant nurses must manage not only technical challenges such as infection control and complex treatment planning, but also psychological and ethical dilemmas. In particular, nurses experience a significant burden when providing end-of-life care and supporting patients’ decision-making autonomy. HSCT nurses must possess advanced clinical knowledge and the ability to provide emotional support.

Justification for Inclusion Criteria

This review focuses on qualitative and mixed-methods studies that examine the psychological, emotional, and ethical challenges in HSCT and hematologic oncology nursing, with the aim of clarifying the complexity of nurses’ experiences and perceptions. Studies focusing on pediatric patients were excluded because their challenges and contexts differ significantly from those of adult patients.

The inclusion of hematologic oncology nursing is justified because of the limited number of studies specifically addressing HSCT nursing. By integrating broader findings, this review aimed to highlight the unique difficulties and coping strategies specific to HSCT nursing.

Regional Differences in Understanding

The challenges and ethical dilemmas faced by nurses may vary owing to cultural and healthcare system differences. For example, decision-making support in end-of-life care is influenced by cultural values regarding life and death as well as medical ethics. This review aimed to integrate findings that reflect diverse backgrounds while considering regional differences.

Key Terms and Their Operational Definitions

The question of this review is

What are the experiences of psychological, emotional, and ethical challenges among HSCT and hematologic oncology nurses?

Sub-questions

Participants

This review includes nurses involved in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Additionally, since research on HSCT nursing is limited, nurses who care for patients with hematologic malignancies will be included. However, studies focusing primarily on nurses caring for pediatric patients or healthcare professionals other than nurses were excluded.

Phenomena of interest

This review considers studies that explore the psychological, emotional, and ethical challenges experienced by nurses in HSCT and hematologic oncology settings. Specifically, it includes studies that discuss how nurses cope with these challenges and the types of support needed in clinical practice.

Context

This review focuses on the challenges experienced by HSCT and hematologic oncology nursing. The relevant contexts include nursing practice in acute care hospitals and specialized transplant centers. Geographically, this review will consider multicultural healthcare settings, including Japan, taking into account how cultural and social backgrounds influence nurses’ experiences.

Types of studies

This review considers studies that have focused on qualitative data. Specifically, it includes studies that explore the experiences of nurses caring for HSCT and hematologic oncology patients. The review will consider, but is not limited to, the following research design:

• - Phenomenology

• - Grounded theory

• - Ethnography

• - Action research

Additionally, this review will include interpretive studies that analyze the psychological, emotional, and ethical challenges faced by nurses, as well as critical studies that examine these challenges from a broader analytical perspective.

Search strategy

This review employed a comprehensive three-step search strategy to locate both published and unpublished studies.

Sources of Information

The following sources of information will be searched:

• - Databases: PubMed (MEDLINE), EBSCO (CINAHL), Ichushi Web

• - Unpublished Studies: Conference proceedings, relevant websites, and direct contact with researchers.

Language and Time Frame

This review will include studies published in any language, and no timeframe restrictions will be applied.

Validation and Transparency

The search strategy uses tools and filters to identify keywords and index terms. A peer review of the search strategy was conducted when necessary to ensure accuracy and transparency. Detailed descriptions of the search methods and processes are provided in the Appendix.

Study selection

All identified citations from the search were collated and uploaded into EndNote 21 (Clarivate), a bibliographic management software, and duplicates were removed. Following a pilot test to evaluate the applicability of the screening criteria, the titles and abstracts were screened by two or more independent reviewers. Studies deemed potentially relevant were retrieved in full, and their citation details were imported into the JBI System for Unified Management, Assessment, and Review of Information (JBI SUMARI).

The full text of the selected citations will be thoroughly assessed against the inclusion criteria by two or more independent reviewers. Reasons for the exclusion of studies at the full-text stage that do not meet the inclusion criteria will be recorded and reported in the systematic review. Any disagreements between the reviewers at any stage of the selection process will be resolved through discussion or with the involvement of additional reviewers.

The search results and study selection process will be reported in the final systematic review and presented in a flow diagram based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.

Assessment of methodological quality

Eligible studies were critically appraised by at least two independent reviewers using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research. Appraisal assesses the following ten domains:

1. Is there congruity between the stated philosophical perspective and the research methodology?

2. Is there congruity between the research methodology and the research question or objectives?

3. Is there congruity between the research methodology and the methods used to collect data?

4. Is there congruity between the research methodology and the representation and analysis of data?

5. Is there congruity between the research methodology and the interpretation of results?

6. Is there a statement locating the researcher culturally or theoretically?

7. Is the influence of the researcher on the research, and vice-versa, addressed?

8. Are participants, and their voices, adequately represented?

9. Is the research ethical according to current criteria or, for recent studies, and is there evidence of ethical approval by an appropriate body?

10. Do the conclusions drawn in the research report flow from the analysis, or interpretation, of the data?

If necessary, the authors of the papers will be contacted to request for missing or additional data for clarification. Any disagreements between the reviewers will be resolved through discussion or, if needed, by involving a third reviewer.

The results of the critical appraisal were reported in both narrative and tabular formats.

Incorporation of Critical Appraisal Results into the Review

All studies were included in the review, regardless of methodological quality. However, studies with low methodological quality should be considered cautiously when interpreting and drawing conclusions from these findings. The details and results of the critical appraisal will be summarized in the main text and provided in full in the supplementary materials.

Data extraction

Data will be extracted from the studies included in the review by two independent reviewers using the JBI standardized data extraction tool. While the standard tool will be used, any modifications will be described in the text, and the revised version will be appended if necessary.

The extracted data will include the following:

1. Methods for data collection and analysis

2. Country

3. Phenomena of interest

4. Setting/context/culture

5. Participant characteristics and sample size

6. Description of main results

The findings from these studies will be extracted verbatim and assigned a level of credibility as follows:

• - Unequivocal: The relationship between the illustration (participant narratives) and findings (research results) is clear and well-supported.

Credible: The relationship between the illustration and findings is not entirely clear, but the results are not completely unreliable.

• - Not Supported: No relevant illustration is provided, or the findings are not adequately substantiated.

The following strategies were employed to minimize errors during the data extraction process: Independent data extraction: Two reviewers will independently extract the data.

• - Resolution of discrepancies: Any disagreements between the reviewers will be resolved through discussion, and if unresolved, a third reviewer will intervene.

Verification of missing information: If any data are missing or unclear, the authors of the study will be contacted for clarification or additional information.

Transparency in assumptions: Any assumptions made regarding missing or unclear data are explicitly stated in the review.

These measures will ensure the transparency and consistency of the review process.

Data synthesis

This review employs a meta-aggregation approach to synthesize qualitative research findings using JBI SUMARI. This approach involves the following steps.

Presentation in Narrative Form

If textual pooling is not feasible, the findings will be presented in narrative format, maintaining the integrity of each study’s results while providing contextual interpretations.

Only findings that meet the following criteria will be included in the synthesis:

• - Unequivocal: Findings clearly supported by data and well substantiated.

• - Credible: Findings that are reliable but may lack complete clarity.

Findings that are unclear or lack credibility are excluded from the synthesis to ensure the robustness and reliability of the conclusions.

Assessing confidence in the findings

In this review, synthesized findings are assessed based on the ConQual approach to establish the level of confidence in qualitative research synthesis. The evaluation results are summarized in the Summary of Findings table, which includes the following elements:

• - Type of research

• - Dependability score

• - Credibility score

• - Overall ConQual score

Additionally, the process and criteria for calculating the ConQual score are detailed to ensure transparency in the evaluation. This approach demonstrates the applicability of synthesized qualitative findings to practice and reinforces the reliability of evidence-based decision making.