Screening for psychosocial distress: a national survey of oncology social workers

Disparities in Psychosocial Distress Screening and Management of Lung and Ovarian Cancer Survivors

PURPOSE

Since 2016, the American College of Surgeons' Commission on Cancer (CoC) has required routine distress screening (DS) of cancer survivors treated in their accredited facilities to facilitate early identification of survivors with psychosocial concerns. Lung and ovarian cancer survivors have relatively low 5-year survival rates and may experience high levels of distress. We examined the extent to which ovarian and lung cancer survivors received CoC-mandated DS and whether DS disparities exist on the basis of diagnosis, sociodemographic factors, or facility geography (urban/rural).

METHODS

This study included a quantitative review of DS documentation and follow-up services provided using existing electronic health records (EHRs). We worked with 21 CoC-accredited facilities across the United States and examined EHRs of 2,258 survivors from these facilities (1,618 lung cancer survivors and 640 ovarian cancer survivors) diagnosed in 2016 or 2017.

RESULTS

Documentation of DS was found in half (54.8%) of the EHRs reviewed. Disparities existed across race/ethnicity, cancer type and stage, and facility characteristics. Hispanic/Latino and Asian/Pacific Islander survivors were screened at lower percentages than other survivors. Patients with ovarian cancer, those diagnosed at earlier stages, and survivors in urban facilities had relatively low percentages of DS. Non-Hispanic Black survivors were more likely than non-Hispanic White survivors to decline further psychosocial services.

CONCLUSION

Despite the mandate for routine DS in CoC-accredited oncology programs, gaps remain in how many and which survivors are screened for distress. Improvements in DS processes to enhance access to DS and appropriate psychosocial care could benefit cancer survivors. Collaboration with CoC during this study led to improvement of their processes for collecting DS data for measuring standard adherence.

Detection of psychosocial distress in cancer patients: A survey of Mexican oncologists

Purpose: Identification of patients' distress is relevant for an on-time referral to psychosocial treatment. The objective was to assess the implementation of the guidelines for distress managing in Mexican oncologists based on the NCCN guidelines.Design: The study was non-experimental and cross-sectional.Sample: Two hundred thirty-one oncologists participated with an average age of 38 ± 11 years.Methods: The likelihood of distress assessment was quantitatively evaluated.Findings: A high percentage of oncologists knew and used procedures to assess psychosocial discomfort. However, a smaller percentage used a valid and reliable instrument. Factors associated with performing distress identification procedures were knowing the distress guidelines and lack of time. Factors for questionnaire usage are the availability of brief instruments and the percentage of patients suffering from stress.Implications for Psychosocial Providers: Psychosocial providers should develop strategies to educate and ensure that oncologists are familiar with guidelines on distress in oncology. More dissemination of screening procedures and referral to psychosocial programs in oncology is required. Integrating a distress screening program involving psychosocial providers and oncologists should be approached as a routine in high-quality cancer care, to reduce the stigma associated with mental health services.

Addressing distress management challenges: Recommendations from the consensus panel of the American Psychosocial Oncology Society and the Association of Oncology Social Work

Distress management (DM) (screening and response) is an essential component of cancer care across the treatment trajectory. Effective DM has many benefits, including improving patients' quality of life; reducing distress, anxiety, and depression; contributing to medical cost offsets; and reducing emergency department visits and hospitalizations. Unfortunately, many distressed patients do not receive needed services. There are several multilevel barriers that represent key challenges to DM and affect its implementation. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used as an organizational structure to outline the barriers and facilitators to implementation of DM, including: 1) individual characteristics (individual patient characteristics with a focus on groups who may face unique barriers to distress screening and linkage to services), 2) intervention (unique aspects of DM intervention, including specific challenges in screening and psychosocial intervention, with recommendations for resolving these challenges), 3) processes for implementation of DM (modality and timing of screening, the challenge of triage for urgent needs, and incorporation of patient-reported outcomes and quality measures), 4) organization-inner setting (the context of the clinic, hospital, or health care system); and 5) organization-outer setting (including reimbursement strategies and health-care policy). Specific recommendations for evidence-based strategies and interventions for each of the domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research are also included to address barriers and challenges.

Understanding the Factors Related to Trauma-Induced Stress in Cancer Patients: A National Study of 17 Cancer Centers

Objective: Posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS), defined as continued trauma, has been found to negatively impact mental and physical health. Many cancer centers routinely assess level of psychological distress but assessment of symptoms related to PTSS is less routine. Understanding the mechanisms by which psychological distress results in, or influences, PTSS will aid in developing protocols to more effectively identify PTSS in cancer patients. Methods: Survey data were analyzed from intake data at 17 cancer centers across the U.S. Patients reported distress ratings on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Distress Thermometer (DT), responded to questions related to intrusive cognitive symptoms of PTSS and provided information about current symptoms and social support systems. Hypotheses were tested using a conditional process model, and paths were provided for direct and indirect effects, including moderation and mediated moderation. Results: Findings indicated that, while distress scores were influential in the total model, the direct effect of distress on intrusive cognitive symptoms of PTSS was negated by the model’s indirect effects. The effects of social support and older age were independent protective factors, and there was a moderation effect that varied across groups. Lastly, physical cancer symptoms as a mediating variable further explained the relationship between psychological distress and intrusive cognitive symptoms of PTSS. Conclusions: Study results provide evidence for a potential mechanism by which distress relates to intrusive cognitive symptoms of PTSS. Furthermore, findings suggest that older age and social support may be protective factors for certain groups and risk factors for others. This study provides formative data for potential next steps that could lead to improvements in routine psychosocial screenings in cancer treatment settings.

Barriers and facilitators to implementing the commission on cancer's distress screening program standard

OBJECTIVE

Many cancer centers struggle to implement standardized distress screening despite the American College of Surgeons' Commission on Cancer 2012 mandate for a distress screening program standard of care by 2015. This paper presents outcomes for the first cohort of participants (n = 36) of a Screening for Psychosocial Distress Program (SPDP), a 2-year training program designed to assist clinicians in implementing routine distress screening as mandated by the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer. Specifically, participants' success with distress screening implementation, institutional barriers and facilitators to implementation, and the role of the SPDP are described.

METHOD

This research followed a longitudinal pre- and posttest mixed methods design. An investigator-developed questionnaire collected qualitative (distress screening goals, institutional barriers and facilitators, facilitators associated with participation in the SPDP) and quantitative (level of goal achievement) data at 6, 12, and 24 months of participation in the SPDP. Conventional content analysis was applied to qualitative data. Mixed methods data analysis in Dedoose evaluated (1) types and number of distress screening goals, barriers, and facilitators, and (2) goal achievement at 6, 12, and 24 months of participation.ResultNinety-five percent of distress screening implementation goals were completed after 2 years of participation. Most common institutional barriers to distress screening implementation were "lack of staff," "competing demands," and "staff turn-over." Most common institutional facilitators were "buy-in," "institutional support," and "recognition of participants' expertise." The number of reported facilitators associated with SPDP participation was higher than the number associated with any institutional factor, and increased over time of participation.Significance of resultsParticipating in training programs to implement distress screening may facilitate successful achievement of the Commission on Cancer's distress screening standard, and benefits seem to increase with time of participation. Training programs are needed to promote facilitators and overcome barriers to distress screening.

Cancer patients' motives for psychosocial consultation-Oncology social workers' perceptions of 226 patient cases

OBJECTIVE

Although oncology social workers (OSWs) have emerged as a core profession in the provision of psychosocial services, there is a lack of empirical studies that describe their daily clinical work with patients. The overall aim of this study was to explore cancer patients' motives for consulting an OSW.

METHODS

From a nationwide survey, we used data from 226 patient cases that OSWs met face to face. The OSWs were asked to describe how the case was referred to them, the patient's characteristics, and what they perceived as the patient's motives for contacting them as well as additional motives that came up during the consultations.

RESULTS

Patients have different motives for consulting an OSW, and these motives change over the course of consultations; while feelings associated with being diagnosed with cancer were often the initial motive, questions associated with moving on in life and dealing with relationships and the overall life situation were added over time.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that Swedish OSWs' function is multifaceted and that the initial motives among patients rarely predict the content in consultations over time. Based on the diversity of motives, it seems obvious that OSWs (at least in Sweden) need a broad education in the psychology of counselling. It also seems obvious that even if patients initially were referred by health care staff to the OSW due to psychological reactions to being ill, staff should also be attentive to the fact that relational and socio-economic/juridical issues are of great concern for the patients.