A behavioral cancer pain intervention: A randomized noninferiority trial comparing in-person with videoconference delivery

Mindful Night-to-Day: A Pilot Feasibility Trial of a Mindfulness-Based Insomnia and Symptom Management Intervention for Patients with Hematologic Cancer

OBJECTIVES

Patients with hematologic cancer experience severe symptoms (i.e. insomnia, fatigue, pain, distress). Few interventions addressing insomnia and other symptoms exist for this population. Mindfulness-Based Therapy for Insomnia (MBTI) may be appropriate but has only been tested in healthy outpatients. This study aimed to develop and test an adapted MBTI protocol for hematologic cancer patients.

METHODS

Patient (n = 3) and clinician (n = 1) focus groups, and user-testing (N = 5) informed adaptation of Mindful Night-to-Day (MBTI+). A single-arm pilot trial (N = 32) evaluated feasibility (accrual, attrition, adherence), acceptability (intervention satisfaction), and changes to insomnia symptom severity (Insomnia Severity Index; primary outcome) and secondary outcomes (fatigue, pain, distress, pre-sleep arousal, mindfulness, symptom management self-efficacy) at baseline, post-intervention, and 1-month post-intervention. Descriptive statistics and paired sample t-tests were conducted.

RESULTS

Qualitative feedback informed MBTI+ content, format, and delivery. Mindfulness was used to increase symptom awareness (sleepiness vs. fatigue). Meditations and behavioral skills were applied to inpatient treatment. MBTI+ met feasibility (N = 32/12 months; 8.1% attrition; 83.8% adherence) and acceptability (M = 3.52/4.00) benchmarks. Insomnia symptom severity decreased (d = 1.20) from baseline to post-intervention, as did most secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

MBTI+ was feasible, acceptable, and showed promise for benefits throughout inpatient and outpatient treatment. Findings warrant further evaluation in a randomized trial.

Cancer Patients' Perspectives and Requirements of Digital Health Technologies: A Scoping Literature Review

Digital health technologies have the potential to alleviate the increasing cancer burden. Incorporating patients' perspectives on digital health tools has been identified as a critical determinant for their successful uptake in cancer care. The main objective of this scoping review was to provide an overview of the existing evidence on cancer patients' perspectives and requirements for patient-facing digital health technologies. Three databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, Science Direct) were searched and 128 studies were identified as eligible for inclusion. Web-based software/platforms, mobile or smartphone devices/applications, and remote sensing/wearable technologies employed for the delivery of interventions and patient monitoring were the most frequently employed technologies in cancer care. The abilities of digital tools to enable care management, user-friendliness, and facilitate patient-clinician interactions were the technological requirements predominantly considered as important by cancer patients. The findings from this review provide evidence that could inform future research on technology-associated parameters influencing cancer patients' decisions regarding the uptake and adoption of patient-facing digital health technologies.

A perspective on a precision approach to pain in cancer; moving beyond opioid therapy

PURPOSE

Cancer-related pain is primarily treated with opioids which while effective can add significant patient burden due to side effects, associated stigma, and timely access. The purpose of this perspective discussion is to argue for a precision approach to pain in cancer based on a biopsychosocial and spiritual model which we argue can offer a higher quality of life while limiting opioid use.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain in cancer represents a heterogenous process with multiple contributing and modulating factors. Specific characterization of pain as either nociceptive, neuropathic, nociplastic, or mixed can allow for targeted treatments. Additional assessment of biopsychosocial and spiritual issues can elucidate further points of targeted intervention which can lead to overall greater pain control.

Meaning-centered pain coping skills training for patients with metastatic cancer: Protocol for a randomized controlled efficacy trial

BACKGROUND

Many patients with advanced cancer describe pain as a debilitating symptom that greatly interferes with daily activities and enjoyment of life. Psychosocial interventions can improve cancer-related pain but rarely address spiritual concerns (e.g., loss of meaning, peace), which can influence the pain experience for those facing life-threatening illness. To address these needs, we systematically developed and pilot tested a novel psychosocial intervention called Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training (MCPC). In this randomized controlled trial, we aim to determine MCPC's efficacy for reducing pain interference (primary outcome) and improving secondary outcomes. We will also estimate MCPC's cost-effectiveness.

METHOD/DESIGN

Patients (target N = 210) with advanced solid tumor malignancies (Stage IV) and clinically-elevated pain interference will be enrolled and block randomized with equal allocation to MCPC + enhanced usual care or enhanced usual care alone. MCPC's four, videoconferenced, 45-60 min weekly sessions will be individually delivered by trained study therapists. Primary (pain interference) and secondary (pain severity, anxiety and depressive symptoms, pain self-efficacy, social support, spiritual well-being) patient-reported outcomes will be assessed at baseline, and 8-weeks (primary endpoint) and 12-weeks after baseline.

CONCLUSION

Our MCPC intervention is the first to systematically address the biopsychosocial-spiritual aspects of pain in patients with advanced cancer. If MCPC demonstrates efficacy, next steps will involve hybrid efficacy-effectiveness and implementation work to broaden access to this brief, manualized, remotely-delivered intervention, with the goal of reducing suffering in patients with life-threatening illness.

Behavioral cancer pain intervention dosing: results of a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial

ABSTRACT

Behavioral pain management interventions are efficacious for reducing pain in patients with cancer. However, optimal dosing of behavioral pain interventions for pain reduction is unknown, and this hinders routine clinical use. A Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) was used to evaluate whether varying doses of Pain Coping Skills Training (PCST) and response-based dose adaptation can improve pain management in women with breast cancer. Participants (N = 327) had stage I-IIIC breast cancer and a worst pain score of > 5/10. Pain severity (a priori primary outcome) was assessed before initial randomization (1:1 allocation) to PCST-Full (5 sessions) or PCST-Brief (1 session) and 5 to 8 weeks later. Responders ( > 30% pain reduction) were rerandomized to a maintenance dose or no dose and nonresponders (<30% pain reduction) to an increased or maintenance dose. Pain severity was assessed again 5 to 8 weeks later (assessment 3) and 6 months later (assessment 4). As hypothesized, PCST-Full resulted in greater mean percent pain reduction than PCST-Brief (M [SD] = -28.5% [39.6%] vs M [SD]= -14.8% [71.8%]; P = 0.041). At assessment 3 after second dosing, all intervention sequences evidenced pain reduction from assessment 1 with no differences between sequences. At assessment 4, all sequences evidenced pain reduction from assessment 1 with differences between sequences ( P = 0.027). Participants initially receiving PCST-Full had greater pain reduction at assessment 4 ( P = 0.056). Varying PCST doses led to pain reduction over time. Intervention sequences demonstrating the most durable decreases in pain reduction included PCST-Full. Pain Coping Skills Training with intervention adjustment based on response can produce sustainable pain reduction.

Meaning-centered pain coping skills training for patients with metastatic cancer: Results of a randomized controlled pilot trial

OBJECTIVE

For patients with advanced cancer, pain is a common and debilitating symptom that can negatively impact physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being. This trial examined the feasibility and initial effects of Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training (MCPC), a cognitive-behavioral pain management intervention with an emphasis on enhancing meaning (i.e., a personal sense of purpose, worth, and significance) and peace.

METHODS

We enrolled 60 adults with stage IV solid tumor cancers and moderate-severe pain between February 2021 and February 2022. Participants were randomized 1:1 to MCPC + usual care or usual care alone. Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training consisted of four weekly 60-min individual sessions via videoconference or telephone, delivered by a trained therapist using a manualized protocol. Participants completed validated measures of pain severity, pain interference, pain self-efficacy, spiritual well-being (i.e., meaning, peace, and faith), and psychological distress at baseline and 5-week and 10-week follow-ups.

RESULTS

All feasibility metrics exceeded prespecified benchmarks. Fifty-eight percent of screened patients were eligible, and 69% of eligible patients consented. Of those assigned to MCPC, 93% completed all sessions and 100% of those who completed follow-ups reported using coping skills weekly. Retention was strong at 5-week (85%) and 10-week (78%) follow-ups. Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training participants reported better scores than control participants across outcome measures, including moderate-to-large sized differences at 10-week follow-up in pain severity (Cohen's d = -0.75 [95% confidence interval: -1.36, -0.14]), pain interference (d = -0.82 [-1.45, -0.20]), and pain self-efficacy (d = 0.74 [0.13, 1.35]).

CONCLUSIONS

MCPC is a highly feasible, engaging, and promising approach for improving pain management in advanced cancer. Future efficacy testing is warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04431830, registered 16 June 2020.

mHealth Coping Skills Training for Symptom Management (mCOPE) for colorectal Cancer patients in early to mid-adulthood: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) patients in early to mid-adulthood (≤50 years) are challenged by high symptom burden (i.e., pain, fatigue, distress) and age-related stressors (e.g., managing family, work). Cognitive behavioral theory (CBT)-based coping skills training interventions reduce symptoms and improve quality of life in cancer patients. However, traditional CBT-based interventions are not accessible to these patients (e.g., in-person sessions, during work day), nor designed to address symptoms within the context of this stage of life. We developed a mobile health (mHealth) coping skills training program for pain, fatigue and distress (mCOPE) for CRC patients in early to mid-adulthood. We utilize a randomized controlled trial to test the extent to which mCOPE reduces pain, fatigue and distress (multiple primary outcomes) and improves quality of life and symptom self-efficacy (secondary outcomes).

Methods/Design

Patients (N = 160) ≤50 years with CRC endorsing pain, fatigue and/or distress are randomized 1:1 to mCOPE or standard care. mCOPE is a five-session CBT-based coping skills training program (e.g., relaxation, activity pacing, cognitive restructuring) that was adapted for CRC patients in early to mid-adulthood. mCOPE utilizes mHealth technology (e.g., videoconference, mobile app) to deliver coping skills training, capture symptom and skills use data, and provide personalized support and feedback. Self-report assessments are completed at baseline, post-treatment (5-8 weeks post-baseline; primary endpoint), and 3- and 6-months later.

Conclusions

mCOPE is innovative and potentially impactful for CRC patients in early to mid-adulthood. Hypothesis confirmation would demonstrate initial efficacy of a mHealth cognitive behavioral intervention to reduce symptom burden in younger CRC patients.

The efficacy of telemedicine for pain management in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Pain is the most common cancer-related symptom, but it is often undertreated. Telemedicine is widely used in cancer treatment, but its effectiveness is uncertain.

Objective

We aimed to evaluate the impact of telemedicine intervention on pain in patients with cancer.

Design

Methodological quality and risk-of-bias evaluation were conducted, and the sources of heterogeneity were explored through subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis.

Data Sources and Methods

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and clinical trial databases were searched up to 16 August 2022. Randomized controlled trials of the impact of telemedicine intervention regarding pain in patients with cancer were included, and the results related to pain were extracted.

Results

Twenty-one randomized controlled trials were selected from 1810 articles. A total of 1454 patients received telemedicine interventions, and 2213 received conventional medical services. Telemedical intervention had a positive effect on improving pain intensity [standard mean deviation (SMD) = -0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.49 to -0.06, p = 0.01] and pain interference (SMD = -0.41, 95% CI: -0.54 to -0.28, p < 0.00001), with statistical difference between the two groups. The subgroup analysis results showed that the telemedicine subgroup based on an application (SMD = -0.54, 95% CI: -0.91 to -0.18, p = 0.004) and the subgroup with intervention time ⩾ 6 months (SMD = -0.33, 95% CI: -0.52 to -0.13, p = 0.001), both demonstrated significant improvement regarding pain intensity, with significant statistical difference between the two groups. When the follow-up time was ⩾ 6 months, there was no significant difference (SMD = -0.24, 95% CI: -0.55 to 0.07, p = 0.13).

Conclusion

Compared with conventional medical services, telemedicine intervention can improve the pain of patients with cancer and is effective and acceptable regarding symptom monitoring. Integrating telemedicine interventions into cancer pain management may be a feasible option. But its long-term effects still need to be confirmed with more high-quality randomized controlled trials in the future.

Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/; CRD42022361990.

Efficacy of Telemedicine Using Videoconferencing Systems in Outpatient Care for Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

This systematic review aimed to investigate the efficacy of telemedicine (TM) using videoconferencing systems in outpatient care for patients with cancer.

METHODS

We searched six electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov) through June 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials that evaluated the use of TM using videoconferencing systems compared with usual face-to-face care in outpatient care for patients with cancer. We assessed the certainty of evidence on the basis of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.

RESULTS

From the 2,400 articles screened, six randomized controlled trials were eligible for this study. Two studies evaluated the use of TM in cancer follow-up and four investigated psychotherapy for cancer. TM using videoconferencing systems may result in no differences in primary outcomes such as patient satisfaction (standardized mean difference, 0.11; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.40) and outpatient attendance complete proportion (risk difference, 0.02%; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.09), and secondary outcomes such as medical professional satisfaction, time devoted to outpatient care, and depression score. The certainty of evidence for these outcomes was low. Although the average money spent on outpatient visit was a primary outcome, the level of evidence was uncertain.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that TM using videoconferencing systems in outpatient care for patients with cancer may be as effective as usual face-to-face care. Use of TM more frequently may be considered for patients with cancer who are expected to obtain benefit from TM using videoconference systems.

Improving well-being for individuals with persistent pain after surgery for breast cancer, lobular carcinoma in situ, or ductal carcinoma in situ: A randomized clinical trial

>276,000 Americans will be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer, lobular carcinoma in situ, or ductal carcinoma in situ this year and most will undergo breast surgery as part of their care. Although prognosis is excellent, many patients experience persistent post-surgical pain (PSP), which has no satisfactory pharmacological treatment. The causal contributions of pain-associated psychological factors (e.g., catastrophic thoughts about pain, psychological flexibility, self-efficacy) to the continuing burden of PSP have not yet been determined and may be opportune intervention targets. The randomized trial described here will compare the benefits of three manualized behavioral interventions for individuals with PSP. Participants will receive either: 1) self-guided health education (SGHE); 2) interventionist-guided health education (IGHE); or 3) interventionist-guided pain coping skills training with elements of acceptance and commitment therapy that specially target catastrophic thoughts about pain, self-efficacy, and psychological flexibility (CST-PSP). Participants will prospectively complete validated assessments of primary outcomes (PSP severity and interference) at baseline (pre-intervention) and 3-, 6-, and 12-months later. Validated measures of emotional distress and cancer-specific distress will be assessed as secondary outcomes. To test their roles as drivers of PSP, catastrophic thoughts about pain, self-efficacy, and psychological flexibility, will be assessed and statistically analyzed as mediators of hypothesized beneficial effects. The interventions' impacts on pain sensitivity and central sensitization will be investigated to test these physiological pathways as proximal drivers of PSP. To better characterize the patient experience, additional validated measures will be explored for associations with PSP, along with demographic and clinical factors. Trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04225585, registered January 13, 2020.

Designing Psychosocial Intervention Pilot Studies: A Tutorial for Palliative Care Investigators

This is a tutorial on designing a persuasive pilot study of a psychosocial intervention (e.g., behavioral symptom management) in the palliative care setting. This tutorial is most relevant for early stages of intervention research that aims to progress toward a randomized controlled trial with a high degree of internal validity. Broadly, a pilot study aims to address multiple elements of feasibility and acceptability so that investigators are well positioned for the next study in their program of research. To assist investigators in writing compelling grant applications we designed this tutorial as an annotated checklist of goals that a pilot study within the palliative care domain should seek to accomplish. These goals include the following: 1) begin with the end in mind, 2) use a formal conceptual model, 3) use measures with strong psychometric properties, 4) justify the timing of study sessions and assessments, 5) test recruitment methods, 6) estimate retention, 7) assess interventionist fidelity, 8) assess acceptability of the intervention, 9) assess feasibility, and 10) identify barriers to the next study. We elaborate on these goals by describing an ongoing pilot study testing the feasibility and acceptability of a psychosocial pain management intervention for patients with advanced cancer. Pilot studies are crucial for building a successful program of research, but they are also limited in terms of their sample size and overall objectives. A persuasive pilot study is one that is limited yet useful rather than limited and trivial.

Psychological and Non-Pharmacologic Treatments for Pain in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

CONTEXT

Pain is the most fearful symptom in cancer. Although there is a relationship between psychosocial variables and oncologic pain, psychological and non-pharmacological treatments for pain management in cancer patients are not very widespread.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the efficacy of psychological and non-pharmacological treatments for reducing pain in cancer patients.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review following the PRISMA protocol. In January 2021, data were extracted from PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus, including randomised controlled trials (RCT) published in the last five years (from 28 January, 2015 to December 15, 2020), in the English language and whose sample was patients with cancer pain. The database search used the following keywords: cancer, cancer-related pain, psychological intervention, non-pharmacologic intervention. The Cochrane risk of bias assess ment for randomised trials (RoB 2) was used for quality appraisal.

RESULTS

After the inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, ten papers were fully screened. The evidence suggested that the most effective interventions to reduce cancer pain were mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, guided imagery and progressive muscle relaxation and emotional and symptom focused engagement (EASE). Music therapy and brief cognitive behavioral strategies (CBS) require more research, while coping skills training and yoga did not show positive effects. Overall, we obtained a moderate size effect (d = 0.642, 95% CI: 0.125-1.158) favourable to psychological and non-pharmacologic treatments at post-treatment, which increased at follow-up (k = 5, d = 0.826, 95% CI: 0.141-1.511).

CONCLUSION

This study provides insight into psychological interventions which might be applied and contribute to cancer-related pain reduction in adults. Although the results are not completely consistent, they may shed light on psychology applications in the oncology environment.

Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training: A Pilot Feasibility Trial of a Psychosocial Pain Management Intervention for Patients with Advanced Cancer

Background: Pain from advanced cancer can greatly reduce patients' physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being. Objective: To examine the feasibility and acceptability of a behavioral pain management intervention, Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training (MCPC). Design: This trial used a single-arm feasibility design. Setting/Subjects: Thirty participants with stage IV solid tumor cancer, moderate-to-severe pain, and clinically elevated distress were enrolled from a tertiary cancer center in the United States. The manualized protocol was delivered across four 45- to 60-minute videoconference sessions. Measurements: Feasibility and acceptability were assessed through accrual, session/assessment completion, intervention satisfaction, and coping skills usage. Participants completed validated measures of primary outcomes (i.e., pain severity, pain interference, and spiritual well-being) and secondary outcomes at baseline, post-intervention, and four-week follow-up. Results: Eighty-eight percent (38/43) of patients who completed screening met inclusion criteria, and 79% (30/38) consented and completed baseline assessment. Sixty-seven percent (20/30) of participants were female (mean age = 57). Most participants were White/Caucasian (77%; 23/30) or Black/African American (17%; 5/30) with at least some college education (90%; 27/30). Completion rates for intervention sessions and both post-intervention assessments were 90% (27/30), 87% (26/30), and 77% (23/30), respectively. At the post-intervention assessment, participants reported a high degree of intervention satisfaction (mean = 3.53/4.00; SD = 0.46), and 81% (21/26) reported weekly use of coping skills that they learned. Participants also showed improvement from baseline on all primary outcomes and nearly all secondary outcomes at both post-intervention assessments. Conclusions: MCPC demonstrated strong feasibility and acceptability. Findings warrant further evaluation of MCPC in a randomized controlled trial. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03207360.

Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training: A Pilot Feasibility Trial of a Psychosocial Pain Management Intervention for Patients with Advanced Cancer

Background: Pain from advanced cancer can greatly reduce patients' physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being. Objective: To examine the feasibility and acceptability of a behavioral pain management intervention, Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training (MCPC). Design: This trial used a single-arm feasibility design. Setting/Subjects: Thirty participants with stage IV solid tumor cancer, moderate-to-severe pain, and clinically elevated distress were enrolled from a tertiary cancer center in the United States. The manualized protocol was delivered across four 45- to 60-minute videoconference sessions. Measurements: Feasibility and acceptability were assessed through accrual, session/assessment completion, intervention satisfaction, and coping skills usage. Participants completed validated measures of primary outcomes (i.e., pain severity, pain interference, and spiritual well-being) and secondary outcomes at baseline, post-intervention, and four-week follow-up. Results: Eighty-eight percent (38/43) of patients who completed screening met inclusion criteria, and 79% (30/38) consented and completed baseline assessment. Sixty-seven percent (20/30) of participants were female (mean age = 57). Most participants were White/Caucasian (77%; 23/30) or Black/African American (17%; 5/30) with at least some college education (90%; 27/30). Completion rates for intervention sessions and both post-intervention assessments were 90% (27/30), 87% (26/30), and 77% (23/30), respectively. At the post-intervention assessment, participants reported a high degree of intervention satisfaction (mean = 3.53/4.00; SD = 0.46), and 81% (21/26) reported weekly use of coping skills that they learned. Participants also showed improvement from baseline on all primary outcomes and nearly all secondary outcomes at both post-intervention assessments. Conclusions: MCPC demonstrated strong feasibility and acceptability. Findings warrant further evaluation of MCPC in a randomized controlled trial. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03207360.

The efficacy of web or mobile-based interventions to alleviate emotional symptoms in people with advanced cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This review aims to critically evaluate the efficacy of web or mobile-based (WMB) interventions impacting emotional symptoms in patients with advanced cancer.

METHOD

Articles published from 1991 to 2019 were identified using PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus. Only interventions involving adults with advanced cancer using a WMB intervention to manage emotional symptoms were included. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I and ROB2 tools. Studies that reported mean symptom scores were pooled using a random-effects model, and standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% CIs were calculated.

RESULTS

Twenty-three of the 1177 screened studies met the inclusion criteria, and a total sample of 2558 patients were included. The sample was 57% female, and 33% had advanced cancer with mean age of 57.15 years. Thirteen studies evaluated anxiety, nineteen evaluated depression, and eleven evaluated distress. Intervention components included general information, tracking, communication, multimedia choice, interactive online activities, tailoring/feedback, symptom management support content, and self-monitoring. Overall pooled results showed that WMB interventions' effects on decreasing anxiety (SMD - 0.20, - 0.45 to 0.05, I² = 72%), depression (SMD - 0.10, - 0.30 to 0.11, I² = 73%), and distress (SMD - 0.20, - 0.47 to 0.06, I² = 60%) were not significant for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In contrast, WMB interventions significantly decreased symptoms of anxiety (p = .002) in a sub-group analysis of non-RCTs.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated that WMB interventions were not efficacious in alleviating emotional symptoms in adults with advanced cancer. Considering the diversity of interventions, the efficacy of WMB interventions and its impacts on emotional symptoms should be further explored.

Virtual Care in Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review

Virtual care in cancer care existed in a limited fashion globally before the COVID-19 pandemic, mostly driven by geographic constraints. The pandemic has required dramatic shifts in health care delivery, including cancer care. We conducted a systematic review of comparative studies evaluating virtual versus in-person care in patients with cancer. Embase, APA PsycInfo, Ovid MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for literature from January 2015 to 6 August 2020. We adhered to PRISMA guidelines and used the modified GRADE approach to evaluate the data. We included 34 full-text publications of 10 randomized controlled trials, 13 non-randomized comparative studies, and 5 ongoing randomized controlled trials. Evidence was divided into studies that provide psychosocial or genetic counselling and those that provide or assess medical and supportive care. The limited data in this review support that in the general field of psychological counselling, virtual or remote counselling can be equivalent to in-person counselling. In the area of genetic counselling, telephone counselling was more convenient and noninferior to usual care for all outcomes (knowledge, decision conflict, cancer distress, perceived stress, genetic counseling satisfaction). There are few data for clinical outcomes and supportive care. Future research should assess the role of virtual care in these areas. Protocol registration: PROSPERO CRD42020202871.

Predictors of Response to an Evidence-Based Behavioral Cancer Pain Management Intervention: An Exploratory Analysis From a Clinical Trial

CONTEXT

Interventions that teach patients cognitive and behavioral strategies for managing cancer pain have demonstrated effectiveness. Systematic reviews of such interventions call for research to inform their implementation in practice, including investigations into which patients are most likely to benefit.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to identify predictors of response to an evidence-based behavioral intervention for cancer pain, pain coping skills training (PCST).

METHODS

We conducted an exploratory secondary analysis of a randomized noninferiority trial comparing in-person to videoconference-based PCST. Using modified Poisson regression, we estimated the adjusted associations of patient characteristics with clinically meaningful reductions (≥30%) in pain severity and pain interference.

RESULTS

Of the 178 patients who were randomized, 135 completed at least one follow-up assessment and were included in this analysis. Proportions of patients experiencing reductions in pain severity and pain interference were 34% and 46%, respectively. In multivariable analysis, education level was associated with a reduction in pain severity (adjusted relative risk, some college or technical school vs. college or higher: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.26-0.93). Patients with colorectal cancer were 61% more likely to experience a reduction in pain interference than patients with breast cancer (95% CI:1.21-2.34). Marital status was also statistically significantly associated with pain interference reduction, with married patients less likely to experience a reduction in pain interference (adjusted relative risk, married vs. not: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.49-0.98).

CONCLUSION

Our findings elucidate several subgroups of patients who may be especially likely to benefit from PCST, informing both targeted implementation efforts and opportunities to improve delivery for diverse patients.

Web and mobile-based symptom management interventions for physical symptoms of people with advanced cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Symptom management is a critical aspect of comprehensive palliative care for people with advanced cancer. Web and mobile-based applications are promising e-Health modalities that can facilitate timely access to symptom management interventions for this population.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of web and mobile-based symptom management interventions in alleviating physical symptom burden in people with advanced cancer.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. PROSPERO ID = CRD42020155295.

DATA SOURCES

We searched databases including PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL from 1991 until 2019. Inclusion criteria were: adults with advanced cancer, web or mobile-based interventions targeting symptom management, and report of physical symptom data. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I and RoB2. Using RevMan, standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. An assessment of interventions was conducted by evaluating the delivery mode, duration, and evaluation of application feature and theoretical elements.

RESULTS

A total of 19 studies are included in the systematic review and 18 in the meta-analysis. Majority of the studies were deemed to have high risk of bias. Most of the interventions used a web-application for delivering their education (n = 17). While the interventions varied regarding duration and content, they were mainly guided by a symptom management theory. Web and mobile-based interventions significantly improved the overall physical symptom burden (SMD = -0.18; 95% CI = -0.28 to -0.09; I² = 0%; p = 0.0002).

CONCLUSIONS

Web and mobile-based intervention are efficacious in decreasing the overall physical symptom burden in people with advanced cancer.

The Society for Integrative Oncology Practice Recommendations for online consultation and treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

The Society for Integrative Oncology (SIO) Online Task Force was created in response to the challenges facing continuity of integrative oncology care resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. The Task Force set out to guide integrative oncology practitioners in providing effective and safe online consultations and treatments for quality-of-life-concerns and symptom management. Online treatments include manual, acupuncture, movement, mind-body, herbal, and expressive art therapies.

METHODS

The SIO Online Practice Recommendations employed a four-phase consensus process: (1) literature review and discussion among an international panel of SIO members, identifying key elements essential in an integrative oncology visit; (2) development, testing, and refinement of a questionnaire defining challenges and strategies; (3) refinement input from integrative oncology experts from 19 countries; and (4) SIO Executive Committee review identifying the most high-priority challenges and strategies.

RESULTS

The SIO Online Practice Recommendations address ten challenges, providing practical suggestions for online treatment/consultation. These include overcoming unfamiliarity, addressing resistance among patients and healthcare practitioners to online consultation/treatment, exploring ethical and medical-legal aspects, solving technological issues, preparing the online treatment setting, starting the online treatment session, maintaining effective communication, promoting specific treatment effects, involving the caregiver, concluding the session, and ensuring continuity of care.

CONCLUSIONS

The SIO Online Practice Recommendations are relevant for ensuring continuity of care beyond the present pandemic. They can be implemented for patients with limited accessibility to integrative oncology treatments due to geographic constraints, financial difficulties, physical disability, or an unsupportive caregiver. These recommendations require further study in practice settings.

Enhancing meaning in the face of advanced cancer and pain: Qualitative evaluation of a meaning-centered psychosocial pain management intervention

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to obtain patient evaluations of the content, structure, and delivery modality of Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training (MCPC), a novel psychosocial intervention for patients with advanced cancer and pain. MCPC aims to help patients connect with valued sources of meaning in their lives (e.g., family relationships), while providing training in evidence-based cognitive and behavioral skills (e.g., guided imagery) to reduce pain.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 patients with stage IV solid tumor cancers and persistent pain. Transcripts were analyzed using methods from applied thematic analysis.

RESULTS

When evaluating MCPC's educational information and skills training descriptions, participants described ways in which this content resonated with their experience. Many coped with their pain and poor prognosis by relying on frameworks that provided them with a sense of meaning, often involving their personally held religious or spiritual beliefs. They also expressed a need for learning ways to cope with pain in addition to taking medication. A few participants offered helpful suggestions for refining MCPC's content, such as addressing common co-occurring symptoms of sleep disturbance and fatigue. Concerning MCPC's structure and delivery modality, most participants preferred that sessions include their family caregiver and described remote delivery (i.e., telephone or videoconference) as being more feasible than attending in-person sessions.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Participants were interested in an intervention that concurrently focuses on learning pain coping skills and enhancing a sense of meaning. Using remote delivery modalities may reduce access barriers (e.g., travel) that would otherwise prevent many patients from utilizing psychosocial services.

Behavioral cancer pain intervention using videoconferencing and a mobile application for medically underserved patients: Rationale, design, and methods of a prospective multisite randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Women with breast cancer in medically underserved areas are particularly vulnerable to persistent pain and disability. Behavioral pain interventions reduce pain and improve outcomes. Cancer patients in medically underserved areas receive limited adjunctive cancer care, as many lack access to pain therapists trained in behavioral interventions, face travel barriers to regional medical centers, and may have low literacy and limited resources. mHealth technologies have the potential to decrease barriers but must be carefully adapted for, and efficacy-tested with, medically underserved patients. We developed an mHealth behavioral pain coping skills training intervention (mPCST-Community). We now utilize a multisite randomized controlled trial to: 1) test the extent mPCST-Community reduces breast cancer patients' pain severity (primary outcome), pain interference, fatigue, physical disability, and psychological distress; 2) examine potential mediators of intervention effects; and 3) evaluate the intervention's cost and cost-effectiveness.

METHODS/DESIGN

Breast cancer patients (N = 180) will be randomized to mPCST-Community or an attention control. mPCST-Community's four-session protocol will be delivered via videoconferencing at an underserved community clinic by a remote pain therapist at a major medical center. Videoconference sessions will be supplemented with a mobile application. Participants will complete self-report measures at baseline, post-intervention, and 3- and 6-month follow-ups.

CONCLUSIONS

mPCST-Community has the potential to reduce pain and disability, and decrease barriers for cancer patients in medically underserved areas. This is one of the first trials to test an mHealth behavioral cancer pain intervention developed specifically for medically underserved communities. If successful, it could lead to widespread implementation and decreased health disparities.

Are videoconferenced mental and behavioral health services just as good as in-person? A meta-analysis of a fast-growing practice

The use of videoconferencing technologies (VCT) is on the rise given its potential to close the gap between mental health care need and availability. Yet, little is known about the effectiveness of these services compared to those delivered in-person. A series of meta-analyses were conducted using 57 empirical studies (43 examining intervention outcomes; 14 examining assessment reliability) published over the past two decades that included a variety of populations and clinical settings. Using conventional and HLM3 meta-analytical approaches, VCT consistently produced treatment effects that were largely equivalent to in-person delivered interventions across 281 individual outcomes and 4336 clients, with female clients and those treated in medical facilities tending to respond more favorably to VCT than in-person. Results of an HLM3 model suggested assessments conducted using VCT did not appear to lead to differential decisions compared to those conducted in-person across 83 individual outcomes and 332 clients/examinees. Although aggregate findings support the use of VCT as a viable alternative to in-person service delivery of mental healthcare, several limitations in the current literature base were revealed. Most concerning was the relatively limited number of randomized controlled trials and the inconsistent (and often incomplete) reporting of methodological features and results. Recommendations for reporting the findings of telemental health research are provided.

Self-Administered Skills-Based Virtual Reality Intervention for Chronic Pain: Randomized Controlled Pilot Study

Background

Patients with chronic pain often have limited access to comprehensive care that includes behavioral pain management strategies. Virtual reality (VR) is an immersive technology and emerging digital behavioral pain therapy with analgesic efficacy for acute pain. We found no scientific literature on skills-based VR behavioral programs for chronic pain populations.

Objective

The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of a self-administered VR program that included content and skills informed by evidence-based behavioral treatment for chronic pain. The secondary aim is to determine the preliminary efficacy of the VR program in terms of average pain intensity and pain-related interference with activity, stress, mood, and sleep, and its impact on pain-related cognition and self-efficacy. The tertiary aim was to conduct a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and compare the VR treatment with an audio-only treatment. This comparison isolated the immersive effects of the VR program, thereby informing potential mechanisms of effect.

Methods

We conducted an RCT involving a web-based convenience sample of adults (N=97) aged 18-75 years with self-reported chronic nonmalignant low back pain or fibromyalgia, with an average pain intensity >4 over the past month and chronic pain duration >6 months. Enrolled participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 unblinded treatments: (1) VR: a 21-day, skills-based VR program for chronic pain; and (2) audio: an audio-only version of the 21-day VR program. The analytic data set included participants who completed at least 1 of 8 surveys administered during the intervention period: VR (n=39) and audio (n=35).

Results

The VR and audio groups launched a total of 1067 and 1048 sessions, respectively. The majority of VR participants (n=19/25, 76%) reported no nausea or motion sickness. High satisfaction ratings were reported for VR (n=24/29, 83%) and audio (n=26/33, 72%). For VR efficacy, symptom improvement over time was found for each pain variable (all P<.001), with results strengthening after 2 weeks. Importantly, significant time×group effects were found in favor of the VR group for average pain intensity (P=.04), pain-related inference with activity (P=.005), sleep (P<.001), mood (P<.001), and stress (P=.003). For pain catastrophizing and pain self-efficacy, we found a significant declining trend for both treatment groups.

Conclusions

High engagement and satisfaction combined with low levels of adverse effects support the feasibility and acceptability of at-home skills-based VR for chronic pain. A significant reduction in pain outcomes over the course of the 21-day treatment both within the VR group and compared with an audio-only version suggests that VR has the potential to provide enhanced treatment and greater improvement across a range of pain outcomes. These findings provide a foundation for future research on VR behavioral interventions for chronic pain.

Predictors of Intervention Session Completion in a Randomized Clinical Trial of a Behavioral Cancer Pain Intervention

CONTEXT

Some patients with cancer are able to complete psychosocial pain management intervention sessions, and others find it difficult to do so.

OBJECTIVES

Conduct a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial (N = 178) that compared delivery formats (in-person vs. videoconference) of a pain coping skills training (PCST) intervention for patients with cancer to examine if intervention session completion predicts postintervention outcomes of pain severity and interference, psychological distress, physical well-being, and pain self-efficacy; and identify predictors (i.e., demographics, medical characteristics, baseline outcome scores) of session completion.

METHODS

Session completion (i.e., completing all four sessions vs. missing at least one session) was tested as a predictor of postintervention outcomes. Predictors of session completion were then examined.

RESULTS

In both study conditions combined, PCST session completion predicted improvement from baseline to postintervention in pain severity (β = -0.27; P = 0.03), pain interference (β = -0.25; P = 0.048), and pain self-efficacy (β = 0.23; P = 0.07). Participants in the videoconference condition were significantly more likely than those in the in-person condition to complete all sessions (83% vs. 65%; P = 0.006). Participants with at least some college education (odds ratio [OR] 4.36; P = 0.04), a diagnosis of breast cancer (OR 6.73; P = 0.04), and higher levels of pain self-efficacy (OR 2.32; P = 0.02) were more likely to complete videoconference sessions. Participants who lived closer to the medical center (OR 0.64; P = 0.07), had early stage cancer (OR 3.82; P = 0.07), and fewer medical comorbidities (OR 0.59; P = 0.04) were more likely to complete in-person sessions.

CONCLUSION

Completing PCST sessions is important for improving pain outcomes. Efforts to increase session completion (e.g., videoconference delivery) should be considered.

The increasing value of eHealth in the delivery of patient-centred cancer care

The increasing use of eHealth has ushered in a new era of patient-centred cancer care that moves beyond the traditional in-person care model to real-time, dynamic, and technology-assisted assessments and interventions. eHealth has the potential to better the delivery of cancer care through improved patient-provider communication, enhanced symptom and toxicity assessment and management, and optimised patient engagement across the cancer care continuum. In this Review, we provide a brief, narrative appraisal of the peer reviewed literature over the past 10 years related to the uses of patient-centred eHealth to improve cancer care delivery. These uses include the addressal of symptom management, health-related quality of life, and other patient-reported outcomes across cancer care. In addition, we discuss the challenges of, and opportunities for, accessibility, scalability, and implementation of these technologies, important areas for further development, and future research directions.