Poster Presentation Clinical Oncology Society of Australia Annual Scientific Meeting 2026

The evolving role and potential of the Cancer Care Nurse Practitioner in optimising rural cancer care. (146439)

Kacy Ringshaw 1 , Martina O'Neill 1 , Cassandra Mazza 1 , Michael J Allen 2 3 , Cassie Turner 4 5 6 , Bryan Chan 7 8 9
  1. Cancer Care Services, Sunshine Coast University Hospital, Sunshine Coast, QLD, Australia
  2. Medical Oncology, Sunshine Coast University Hospital, Sunshine Coast, QLD, Australia
  3. School of Medicine and Dentistry, Griffith University, Sunshine Coast, QLD, Australia
  4. School of Medicine and Dentistry, Griffith University, Sunshine Coast, QLD, Australia
  5. Medical Oncology, Sunshine Coast University Hospital, Sunshine Coast, QLD, Australia
  6. School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
  7. Medical Oncology, Sunshine Coast University Hospital, Sunshine Coast, QLD, Australia
  8. School of Medicine and Dentistry, Griffith University, Sunshine Coast, QLD, Australia
  9. Faculty of Health, Medicine and Behavioural Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

Background:

Rural cancer services face growing workforce challenges and increasing demand for timely care. Historically, routine reviews within the Gympie Cancer Care Day Therapy Unit (DTU) were completed by a rotating Resident Medical Officer with limited onsite specialist supervision. Since March 2026, a Cancer Care Nurse Practitioner (NP) has provided advanced clinical assessment, toxicity management and coordinated, person-centred care. This evaluation describes the clinical scope, complexity and autonomy of the NP-led model.

Methods:

A retrospective service evaluation of NP encounters between 30 March and 30 July 2026 was undertaken. Data were extracted from the integrated electronic medical record and chemotherapy prescribing system. Descriptive statistical analyses were undertaken to characterise the clinical scope of the NP service, review modality, presentation type (planned versus unplanned), tumour stream, referral source, NP interventions, escalation requirements, and clinical outcomes.

Results:

A total of 187 NP encounters was recorded during the study period, Reviews included both planned pre-treatment reviews and unplanned presentations, with 44% comprising acute clinical presentations requiring timely assessment and management. Patients had a broad range of malignancies across Medical Oncology (80%) and Haematology (20%). Most encounters (63.8%) were managed independently by the NP, while 36.2% required escalation to Senior Medical Officers for treatment modifications, significant treatment related toxicities, disease complications, complex comorbidities or deteriorating performance status. NP interventions included comprehensive assessment, diagnostic investigation and interpretation, prescribing and medication optimisation, supportive care, patient education and multidisciplinary coordination.

Conclusion:

This evaluation highlights the evolving role of the NP in delivering advanced assessment, toxicity management and clinical decision-making across diverse planned and emergent cancer presentations. Within a collaborative NP-SMO model, autonomous practice with appropriate escalation supports equitable, sustainable rural cancer care, reducing travel and financial burden through same-day local review.