The role of implementation science in improving distress assessment and management in oncology: a commentary on "Screening for psychosocial distress among patients with cancer: implications for clinical practice, healthcare policy, and dissemination to enhance cancer survivorship"

Implementing a Clinical Pathway for Needs Assessment and Supportive Care Interventions

Despite advances in clinical cancer care, cancer survivors frequently report a range of persisting issues, unmet needs, and concerns that limit their ability to participate in life roles and reduce quality of life. Needs assessment is recognized as an important component of cancer care delivery, ideally beginning during active treatment to connect patients with supportive services that address these issues in a timely manner. Despite the recognized importance of this process, many health care systems have struggled to implement a feasible and sustainable needs assessment and management system. This article uses an implementation science framework to guide pragmatic implementation of a needs assessment clinical system in cancer care. According to this framework, successful implementation requires four steps including (1) choosing a needs assessment tool; (2) carefully considering the provider level, clinic level, and health care system-level strengths and barriers to implementation and creating a pilot system that addresses these factors; (3) making the assessment system actionable by matching needs with clinical workflow; and (4) demonstrating the value of the system to support sustainability.

Suicide Risk Screening for Head and Neck Cancer Patients: An Implementation Study

OBJECTIVES

 There is limited research on suicide risk screening (SRS) among head and neck cancer (HNC) patients, a population at increased risk for suicide. To address this gap, this single-site mixed methods study assessed oncology professionals' perspectives about the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of an electronic SRS program that was implemented as a part of routine care for HNC patients.

METHODS

Staff who assisted with SRS implementation completed (e.g., nurses, medical assistants, advanced practice providers, physicians, social workers) a one-time survey (N = 29) and interview (N = 25). Quantitative outcomes were assessed using previously validated feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness measures. Additional qualitative data were collected to provide context for interpreting the scores.

RESULTS

 Nurses and medical assistants, who were directly responsible for implementing SRS, reported low feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness, compared with other team members (e.g., physicians, social workers, advanced practice providers). Team members identified potential improvements needed to optimize SRS, such as hiring additional staff, improving staff training, providing different modalities for screening completion among individuals with disabilities, and revising the patient-reported outcomes to improve suicide risk prediction.

CONCLUSION

 Staff perspectives about implementing SRS as a part of routine cancer care for HNC patients varied widely. Before screening can be implemented on a larger scale for HNC and other cancer patients, additional implementation strategies may be needed that optimize workflow and reduce staff burden, such as staff training, multiple modalities for completion, and refined tools for identifying which patients are at greatest risk for suicide.

A Positive Distress Screen…Now What? An Updated Call for Integrated Psychosocial Care

How can we move collaborative care from evidence-based practice to everyday practice for those living with cancer and distress?

Diving deeper into distress screening implementation in oncology care

BACKGROUND

Responding to calls for additional research that identifies effective distress screening (DS) processes, including referral practices subsequent to screening and receipt of recommended care, we engaged in qualitative research as part of a larger (mixed methods) study of distress screening. This qualitative inquiry of oncology professionals across different facilities in the United States examined routine DS implementation, facilitators and challenges staff encounter with DS processes, and staff members' perceived value of DS.

PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS

We conducted key informant interviews and focus groups with staff in 4 Commission on Cancer (CoC)-accredited oncology facilities (a total of 18 participants) to understand implementation of routine DS within oncology care. We used a rigorous data analysis design, including inductive and deductive approaches.

RESULTS

Respondents believe DS enhances patient care and described ways to improve DS processes, including administering DS at multiple points throughout oncology care, using patient-administrated DS methods, and enhancing electronic health records infrastructure to better collect, record, and retrieve DS data. Respondents also identified the need for additional psychosocial staff at their facilities to provide timely psychosocial care.

CONCLUSIONS

Results reinforce the value of DS in cancer care, including the importance of follow-up to screening with psychosocial oncology providers. Understanding and resolving the barriers and facilitators to implementing DS are important to ensure appropriate psychosocial care for people with cancer. Insights from oncology staff may be used to enhance the quality of DS and subsequent psychosocial care, which is an essential component of oncology care.

Barriers and facilitators to implementation and sustainment of guideline-recommended depression screening for patients with breast cancer in medical oncology: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Implementation of guideline-recommended depression screening in oncology presents numerous challenges. Implementation strategies that are responsive to local context may be critical elements of adoption and sustainment. We evaluated barriers and facilitators to implementation of a depression screening program for breast cancer patients in a community medical oncology setting as part of a cluster randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we employed qualitative methods to evaluate clinician, administrator, and patient perceptions of the program using semi-structured interviews. We used a team-coding approach for the data; thematic development focused on barriers and facilitators to implementation using a grounded theory approach. The codebook was refined through open discussions of subjectivity and unintentional bias, coding, and memo applications (including emergent coding), and the hierarchical structure and relationships of themes.

RESULTS

We conducted 20 interviews with 11 clinicians/administrators and 9 patients. Five major themes emerged: (1) gradual acceptance and support of the intervention and workflow; (2) compatibility with system and personal norms and goals; (3) reinforcement of the value of and need for adaptability; (4) self-efficacy within the nursing team; and (5) importance of identifying accountable front-line staff beyond leadership "champions."

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest a high degree of acceptability and feasibility due to the selection of appropriate implementation strategies, alignment of norms and goals, and a high degree of workflow adaptability. These findings will be uniquely helpful in generating actionable, real-world knowledge to inform the design, implementation, and sustainment of guideline-recommended depression screening programs in oncology.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT02941614.

CancerSupportSourceTM -Caregiver: Development of a distress screening measure for cancer caregivers

OBJECTIVE

Given the substantial demands of cancer caregiving, practical and psychometrically sound tools to evaluate distress among cancer caregivers are needed. CancerSupportSource^TM -Caregiver is a distress screening, referral, and support program designed to identify the unmet needs of cancer caregivers and link caregivers to desired resources and support. This study refined and finalized the CancerSupportSource-Caregiver screening measure and examined its psychometric properties.

METHODS

Using an analytic sample of 400 caregivers to people with cancer, we first performed item reduction by assessing exploratory factor analysis, external/internal item quality, and judging theoretical and practical implications of items. Confirmatory factor analysis along with reliability and validity analyses were then conducted to corroborate dimensionality and psychometric properties of the final measure. Nonparametric receiver operating characteristic curve analyses determined scoring thresholds for depression and anxiety risk subscales.

RESULTS

Scale refinement resulted in an 18-item measure plus one screening item assessing tobacco and substance use. Items represented five domains of caregiver concerns: emotional well-being, patient well-being, caregiving tasks, finances, and healthy lifestyle. Our analyses showed strong internal consistency and test-retest reliability, a replicable factor structure, and adequate convergent, discriminant, and known groups validity. Sensitivity of 2-item depression and 2-item anxiety risk subscales were 0.95 and 0.87, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

CancerSupportSource-Caregiver is a reliable and valid multidimensional measure of caregiver distress that also screens for risk for clinically significant depression and anxiety. It can be implemented within a distress screening, referral, and follow-up program to rapidly assess caregivers' unmet needs and enhance caregiver well-being across the care continuum.

Implementing an Inclusive, Multidisciplinary Supportive Care Model to Provide Integrated Care to Breast and Gynaecological Cancer Survivors: A Case Study at an Asian Ambulatory Cancer Centre

Introduction

Supportive care models considering inclusivity and community services to improve integrated care for cancer survivors are limited. In this case study, we described the implementation of a multidisciplinary care model employing routine distress screening and embedded integrated care pathways to integrate care across disciplines and care sectors, while remaining inclusive of the multi-ethnic and multilingual population in Singapore. We reported implementation outcomes after 18 months of implementation.

Description

We reviewed the model's process indicators from September 2019 to February 2021 at the largest public ambulatory cancer centre. Outcomes assessed included penetration, fidelity to screening protocol, and feasibility in three aspects - inclusiveness of different ethnic and language groups, responsiveness to survivors reporting high distress, and types of community service referrals.

Discussion/conclusion

We elucidated opportunities to promote access to community services and inclusivity. Integration of community services from tertiary settings should be systematic through mutually beneficial educational and outreach initiatives, complemented by their inclusion in integrated care pathways to encourage systematic referrals and care coordination. A hybrid approach to service delivery is crucial in ensuring inclusivity while providing flexibility towards external changes such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Future work should explore using telehealth to bolster inclusiveness and advance community care integration.

Evaluation of distress management in inpatients with cancer by means of the distress thermometer: A mixed methods approach

OBJECTIVES

To improve psychosocial care for oncology inpatients, we implemented screening for distress by means of distress thermometer (DT) at the Comprehensive Cancer Centre Zurich in 2011. Since then, several screening barriers have been reported regarding the application of the DT. This study aimed to evaluate the distress screening process between 2012 and 2016 to identify barriers preventing sustainability.

METHODS

In this sequential explanatory mixed methods study, we synthesized the results of 2 quantitative retrospective descriptive studies and 1 qualitative focus group study. To compare and analyze the data, we used thematic triangulation.

RESULTS

Nurses screened 32% (N = 7034) of all newly admitted inpatients with the DT, and 47% of the screenings showed a distress level ≥5. Of these cases, 9.7% were referred to psycho-oncological services and 44.7% to social services. In 15.7% of these cases, nurses generated a psychosocial nursing diagnosis. In focus group interviews, nurses attributed the low screening rate to the following barriers: adaptation to patients' individual needs, patient-related barriers and resistance, timing, communication challenges, established referral practice, and lack of integration in the nursing process.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

To improve distress screening performance, the screening process should be tailored to patients' needs and to nurses' working conditions (e.g., timing, knowledge, and setting-specific factors). To gain more evidence on distress management as a basis for practical improvements, further evaluations of distress screening are required.

Barriers and facilitators for implementation of the SWORD evidence-based psychological intervention for fear of cancer recurrence in three different healthcare settings

Purpose

Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) interventions are effective, but few are implemented. This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators for implementing the evidence-based blended SWORD intervention in routine psycho-oncological care.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews with 19 cancer survivors and 18 professionals from three healthcare settings assessed barriers and facilitators in six domains as described by the determinant frameworks of Grol and Flottorp: (1) innovation, (2) professionals, (3) patients, (4) social context, (5) organization, and (6) economic and political context.

Results

In the innovation domain, there were few barriers. Facilitators included high reliability, accessibility, and relevance of SWORD. In the professional domain, physicians and nurses barriers were lack of self-efficacy, knowledge, and skills to address FCR whereas psychologists had sufficient knowledge and skills, but some were critical towards protocolized treatments, cognitive behavioral therapy, or eHealth. Patient domain barriers included lack of FCR awareness, negative expectations of psychotherapy, and unwillingness/inability to actively engage in treatment. A social context domain barrier was poor communication between different healthcare professionals. Organization domain barriers included inadequate referral structures to psychological services, limited capacity, and complex legal procedures. Economic and political context domain barriers included lack of a national implementation structure for evidence-based psycho-oncological interventions and eHealth platform costs.

Conclusions

Implementation strategies should be targeted at patient, professional, organizational and economic and political domains. Identified barriers and facilitators are relevant to other researchers in psycho-oncology that aim to bridge the research-practice gap.

Implications for cancer survivors

This study contributes to the implementation of evidence-based psychological interventions for cancer survivors, who can benefit from these services.

Financial Assistance Processes and Mechanisms in Rural and Nonrural Oncology Care Settings

PURPOSE

Patients with cancer are at heightened risk of experiencing financial hardship. Financial navigation (FN) is an evidence-based approach for identifying and addressing patient and caregiver financial needs. In preparation for the implementation of a multisite FN intervention, we describe existing processes (ie, events and actions) and mechanisms (ie, how events work together) connecting patients to financial assistance, comparing rural and nonrural practices.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth, semistructured interviews with stakeholders (ie, administrators, providers, and staff) at each of the 10 oncology care sites across a single state (five rural and five nonrural practices). We developed process maps for each site and analyzed stakeholder perspectives using thematic analysis. After reporting findings back to stakeholders, we synthesized themes and process maps across rural and nonrural sites separately.

RESULTS

Eighty-three stakeholders were interviewed. We identified six core elements of existing financial assistance processes across all sites: distress screening (including financial concerns), referrals, resource connection points, and pharmaceutical, insurance, and community/foundation resources. Processes differed by rurality; however, facilitators and barriers to identifying and addressing patient financial needs were consistent. Open communication between staff, providers, patients, and caregivers was a primary facilitator. Barriers included insufficient staff resources, challenges in routinely identifying needs, inadequate preparation of patients for anticipated medical costs, and limited tracking of resource availability and eligibility.

CONCLUSION

This study identified a clear need for systematic implementation of oncology FN to equitably address patient and caregiver financial hardship. Results have informed our current efforts to implement a multisite FN intervention, which involves comprehensive financial toxicity screening and systematization of intake and referrals.

Designing a Framework for Remote Cancer Care Through Community Co-design: Participatory Development Study

BACKGROUND

Recent shifts to telemedicine and remote patient monitoring demonstrate the potential for new technology to transform health systems; yet, methods to design for inclusion and resilience are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to design and implement a participatory framework to produce effective health care solutions through co-design with diverse stakeholders.

METHODS

We developed a design framework to cocreate solutions to locally prioritized health and communication problems focused on cancer care. The framework is premised on the framing and discovery of problems through community engagement and lead-user innovation with the hypothesis that diversity and inclusion in the co-design process generate more innovative and resilient solutions. Discovery, design, and development were implemented through structured phases with design studios at various locations in urban and rural Kentucky, including Appalachia, each building from prior work. In the final design studio, working prototypes were developed and tested. Outputs were assessed using the System Usability Scale as well as semistructured user feedback.

RESULTS

We co-designed, developed, and tested a mobile app (myPath) and service model for distress surveillance and cancer care coordination following the LAUNCH (Linking and Amplifying User-Centered Networks through Connected Health) framework. The problem of awareness, navigation, and communication through cancer care was selected by the community after framing areas for opportunity based on significant geographic disparities in cancer and health burden resource and broadband access. The codeveloped digital myPath app showed the highest perceived combined usability (mean 81.9, SD 15.2) compared with the current gold standard of distress management for patients with cancer, the paper-based National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer (mean 74.2, SD 15.8). Testing of the System Usability Scale subscales showed that the myPath app had significantly better usability than the paper Distress Thermometer (t63=2.611; P=.01), whereas learnability did not differ between the instruments (t63=-0.311; P=.76). Notable differences by patient and provider scoring and feedback were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Participatory problem definition and community-based co-design, design-with methods, may produce more acceptable and effective solutions than traditional design-for approaches.

Clinical Decision Support for Symptom Management in Lung Cancer Patients: A Group RCT

CONTEXT

Clinical guidelines are available to enhance symptom management during cancer treatment but often are not used in the practice setting. Clinical decision support can facilitate the implementation and adherence to clinical guidelines. and improve the quality of cancer care.

OBJECTIVES

Clinical decision support offers an innovative approach to integrate guideline-based symptom management into oncology care. This study evaluated the effect of clinical decision support-based recommendations on clinical management of symptoms and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) among outpatients with lung cancer.

METHODS

Twenty providers and 179 patients were allotted in group randomization to attention control (AC) or Symptom Assessment and Management Intervention (SAMI) arms. SAMI entailed patient-report of symptoms and delivery of recommendations to manage pain, fatigue, dyspnea, depression, and anxiety; AC entailed symptom reporting prior to the visit. Outcomes were collected at baseline, two, four and six-months. Adherence to recommendations was assessed through masked chart review. HR-QOL was measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung questionnaire. Descriptive statistics with linear and logistic regression accounting for the clustering structure of the design and a modified chi-square test were used for analyses.

RESULTS

Median age of patients was 63 years, 58% female, 88% white, and 32% ≤high school education. Significant differences in clinical management were evident in SAMI vs. AC for all target symptoms that passed threshold. Patients in SAMI were more likely to receive sustained-release opioids for constant pain, adjuvant medications for neuropathic pain, opioids for dyspnea, stimulants for fatigue and mental health referrals for anxiety. However, there were no statistically significant differences in HR-QOL at any time point.

CONCLUSION

SAMI improved clinical management for all target symptoms but did not improve patient outcomes. A larger study is warranted to evaluate effectiveness.

Effect of a Community-Based Medical Oncology Depression Screening Program on Behavioral Health Referrals Among Patients With Breast Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Implementation of guideline-recommended depression screening in medical oncology remains challenging. Evidence suggests that multicomponent care pathways with algorithm-based referral and management are effective, yet implementation of sustainable programs remains limited and implementation-science guided approaches are understudied.

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of an implementation-strategy guided depression screening program for patients with breast cancer in a community setting.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A pragmatic cluster randomized clinical trial conducted within Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC). The trial included 6 medical centers and 1436 patients diagnosed with new primary breast cancer who had a consultation with medical oncology between October 1, 2017, through September 30, 2018. Patients were followed up through study end date of May 31, 2019.

Interventions

Six medical centers in Southern California participated and were randomized 1:1 to tailored implementation strategies (intervention, 3 sites, n = 744 patients) or education-only (control, 3 sites, n = 692 patients) groups. The program consisted of screening with the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and algorithm-based scoring and referral to behavioral health services based on low, moderate, or high score. Clinical teams at tailored intervention sites received program education, audit, and feedback of performance data and implementation facilitation, and clinical workflows were adapted to suit local context. Education-only controls sites received program education.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was percent of eligible patients screened and referred (based on PHQ-9 score) at intervention vs control groups measured at the patient level. Secondary outcomes included outpatient health care utilization for behavioral health, primary care, oncology, urgent care, and emergency department.

Results

All 1436 eligible patients were randomized at the center level (mean age, 61.5 years; 99% women; 18% Asian, 17% Black, 26% Hispanic, and 37% White) and were followed up to the end of the study, insurance disenrollment, or death. Groups were similar in demographic and tumor characteristics. For the primary outcome, 7.9% (59 of 744) of patients at tailored sites were referred compared with 0.1% (1 of 692) at education-only sites (difference, 7.8%; 95% CI, 5.8%-9.8%). Referrals to a behavioral health clinician were completed by 44 of 59 patients treated at the intervention sites (75%) intervention sites vs 1 of 1 patient at the education-only sites (100%). In adjusted models patients at tailored sites had significantly fewer outpatient visits in medical oncology (rate ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.86-0.89; P = .001), and no significant difference in utilization of primary care, urgent care, and emergency department visits.

Conclusions and Relevance

Among patients with breast cancer treated in community-based oncology practices, tailored strategies for implementation of routine depression screening compared with an education-only control group resulted in a greater proportion of referrals to behavioral care. Further research is needed to understand the clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of this program.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02941614.

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.

Not seeing the forest for the trees: a systematic review of comprehensive distress management programs and implementation strategies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Clinically significant distress is common in patients with cancer and if untreated can be associated with adverse outcomes. This article offers a review of current approaches to implementing and reporting the minimum components of distress screening and management interventions in cancer services.

RECENT FINDINGS

Twenty-two relevant published articles were identified from January 2018 to February 2020. The reporting of recommended minimum components of distress screening and management interventions in these articles was not consistent. The majority of studies used validated tools to conduct initial screening. However, recommendations were either not reported or not followed regarding subsequent pathway components, secondary assessment, referral pathways linked to screening results and rescreening. The majority of studies did not include a description of the implementation of the distress screening program. A small number of studies described a comprehensive set of implementation strategies.

SUMMARY

Distress screening and management interventions in cancer are an important component of comprehensive cancer care. To improve patient outcomes and guide researchers and services to identify effective models, studies must include and evaluate minimum recommended components and implementation strategies. Addressing these limitations with high-quality, robust interventions is vital for advancing the implementation of effective distress management.

Optimal communication associated with lower risk of acute traumatic stress after lung cancer diagnosis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the role of the patient's background and perceived healthcare-related factors in symptoms of acute stress after lung cancer diagnosis.

METHODS

The study population consisted of 89 individuals referred for diagnostic work-up at Landspitali National University Hospital in Iceland and subsequently diagnosed with lung cancer. Before diagnosis, the patients completed questionnaires on sociodemographic characteristics, pre-diagnostic distress (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), social support, and resilience. At a median of 16 days after diagnosis, the patients reported symptoms of acute stress on the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) and experience of communication and support from healthcare professionals and family during the diagnostic period.

RESULTS

Patients were on average 68 years and 52% reported high levels of post-diagnostic acute stress (IES-R > 23) while 24% reported symptoms suggestive of clinical significance (IES-R > 32). Prior history of cancer (β = 6.7, 95% CI: 0.1 to 13.3) and pre-diagnostic distress were associated with higher levels of post-diagnostic acute stress (β = 8.8, 95% CI: 2.7 to 14.9), while high educational level (β = - 7.9, 95% CI: - 14.8 to - 1.1) was associated with lower levels. Controlling for the abovementioned factors, the patients' perception of optimal doctor-patient (β = - 9.1, 95% CI: - 14.9 to - 3.3) and family communication (β = - 8.6, 95% CI: - 14.3 to - 2.9) was inversely associated with levels of post-diagnostic acute stress after lung cancer diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

A high proportion of patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer experience high levels of acute traumatic stress of potential clinical significance. Efforts to improve doctor-patient and family communication may mitigate the risk of these adverse symptoms.

Partnering with healthcare facilities to understand psychosocial distress screening practices among cancer survivors: pilot study implications for study design, recruitment, and data collection

BACKGROUND

We sought to understand barriers and facilitators to implementing distress screening (DS) of cancer patients to inform and promote uptake in cancer treatment facilities. We describe the recruitment and data collection challenges and recommendations for assessing DS in oncology treatment facilities.

METHODS

We recruited CoC-accredited facilities and collected data from each facility's electronic health record (EHR). Collected data included cancer diagnosis and demographics, details on DS, and other relevant patient health data. Data were collected by external study staff who were given access to the facility's EHR system, or by facility staff working locally within their own EHR system. Analyses are based on a pilot study of 9 facilities.

RESULTS

Challenges stemmed from being a multi-facility-based study and local institutional review board (IRB) approval, facility review and approval processes, and issues associated with EHR systems and the lack of DS data standards. Facilities that provided study staff remote-access took longer for recruitment; facilities that performed their own extraction/abstraction took longer to complete data collection.

CONCLUSION

Examining DS practices and follow-up among cancer survivors necessitated recruiting and working directly with multiple healthcare systems and facilities. There were a number of lessons learned related to recruitment, enrollment, and data collection. Using the facilitators described in this manuscript offers increased potential for working successfully with various cancer centers and insight into partnering with facilities collecting non-standardized DS clinical data.

Wie erleben und beurteilen Pflegende das Screening von stationären onkologischen Patient_innen mit dem Belastungsthermometer?

How do nurses experience and interpret the screening of hospitalised cancer patients by means of the distress thermometer? - A qualitative study Abstract. Background: People with cancer experience distress and may need professional support. In 2012, the University Hospital Zurich introduced its distress thermometer (DT) screening, whereby all inpatients were to be screened to gauge their support need. However, after five years, the screening rate was 40 % and the referral rate to psycho oncology was 7.9 %, surprisingly low. Aim: The aim of this qualitative study was to describe how nurses experience the screening and how they interpret the screening and referral rate. Methods: The evaluation of three focus group interviews with 14 nurses followed the principles of qualitative content analysis according to Mayring. Results: The analysis revealed four main categories. The first category "Trying to perform useful screening in a complex daily routine" comprises three subcategories: "Using the benefits of screening for comprehensive care", "The best way to recognize the individuality of the counterpart" and "Failing due to structural and personal barriers". Three further main categories addressing nurses' personal attitudes complete the screening experience: "Experiencing fewer difficulties due to competence and experience", "Being careful due to hesitations", and "Reflecting one's responsibility". Conclusions: Nurses want to use the DT. However, they need more practical and scientific support to usefully integrate screening into their everyday life.

CancerSupportSource®-15+: development and evaluation of a short form of a distress screening program for cancer patients and survivors

Purpose

CancerSupportSource® (CSS) is a distress screening program implemented at community-based organizations and hospitals nationwide. The 25-item CSS assesses distress across five domains, with capacity to screen for clinically significant depression and anxiety. This study examined psychometric properties of a shortened form to enhance screening opportunities when staff or patient burden considerations are significant.

Methods

Development and validation were completed in multiple phases. Item reduction decisions were made with 1436 cancer patients by assessing external/internal item quality and judging theoretical and practical implications of items. Pearson correlations and confirmatory factor analysis were conducted on a separate sample of 957 patients to corroborate psychometric properties and dimensionality of the shortened scale. Nonparametric receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses determined scoring thresholds for depression and anxiety risk scales.

Results

Scale refinement resulted in a 15-item short form plus one screening item assessing tobacco and substance use (CSS-15+). At least two items from each CSS domain were retained to preserve multidimensionality. In confirmatory analysis, the model explained 59% of the variance and demonstrated good fit. Correlation between CSS-15+ and 25-item CSS was 0.99, p < 0.001. Sensitivity of 2-item depression and 2-item anxiety risk scales in the confirmatory sample were 0.82 and 0.83, respectively.

Conclusions

CSS-15+ is a brief, reliable, and valid multidimensional measure of distress. The measure retained excellent internal consistency (α = 0.94) and a stable factor structure. CSS-15+ is a practical and efficient screening tool for distress and risk for depression and anxiety among cancer patients and survivors, particularly in community-based settings.

Clinical management of emotions in patients with cancer: introducing the approach "emotional support and case finding"

The current approach to the management of emotions in patients with cancer is “distress screening and referral for the provision of psychosocial care.” Although this approach may have certain beneficial effects, screening and referral programs have shown a limited effect on patient psychological well-being. We argue that this limited effect is due to a mismatch between patient needs and the provision of care, and that a fundamental reconceptualization of the clinical management of emotions in patients with cancer is needed. We describe the rationale and characteristics of “emotional support and case finding” as the approach to the management of emotions in patients with cancer. The two main principles of the approach are: (1) Emotional support: (a) The treating team, consisting of doctors, nurses, and allied health staff, is responsive to the emotional needs of patients with cancer and provides emotional support. (b) The treating team provides information on external sources of emotional support. (2) Case finding: The treating team identifies patients in need of mental health care by means of case finding, and provides a referral to mental health care as indicated. We present a novel perspective on how to organize the clinical management of emotions in patients with cancer. This is intended to contribute to a fruitful discussion and to inform an innovative research agenda on how to manage emotions in patients with cancer.

Management of Distress in Patients with Cancer-Are We Doing the Right Thing?

BACKGROUND

Screening for distress and referral for the provision of psychosocial care is currently the preferred approach to the management of distress in patients with cancer. To date, this approach has shown a limited effect on the reduction of distress. Recent commentaries have argued that the implementation of distress screening should be improved. On the other hand, the underlying assumption that a referral for psychosocial care is required for distressed patients can be questioned. This has led to the development of an alternative approach, called emotional support and case finding.

PURPOSE

In the context of finding innovative solutions to tomorrow's health challenges, we explore ways to optimize distress management in patients with cancer.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We discuss three different approaches: (i) optimization of screening and referral, (ii) provision of emotional support and case finding, and (iii) a hybrid approach with multiple assessments, using mobile technology.

CONCLUSIONS

We suggest continued research on the screening and referral approach, to broaden the evidence-base on improving emotional support and case finding, and to evaluate the utility of multiple assessments of distress with new interactive mobile tools. Lessons learned from these efforts can be applied to other disease areas, such as cardiovascular disease or diabetes.

Barn-Raising on the Digital Frontier: The L.A.U.N.C.H. Collaborative

A meta-analysis of oncology papers from around the world revealed that cancer patients who lived more than 50 miles away from hospital centers routinely presented with more advanced stages of disease at diagnosis, exhibited lower adherence to prescribed treatments, presented with poorer diagnoses, and reported a lower quality of life than patients who lived nearer to care facilities. Connected health approaches-or the use of broadband and telecommunications technologies to evaluate, diagnose, and monitor patients beyond the clinic-are becoming an indispensable tool in medicine to overcome the obstacle of distance.

Advancing the science of distress screening and management in cancer care

Given the high prevalence (30-35%) of psychosocial and psychiatric morbidity amongst cancer patients in any phase of the disease trajectory, screening for emotional problems and disorders has become mandatory in oncology. As a process, screening begins at the entry to the cancer care system and continues at clinically meaningful times, periodically during active cancer care, or when clinically indicated. The goal is to facilitate proper referral to psychosocial oncology specialists for more specific assessment and care, as well as treatment and evaluation of the response, according to the implementation of distress management guidelines. In this editorial, we will provide a non-exhaustive overview of relevant protocols, with particular reference to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Distress Management in Oncology Guidelines, and review the challenges and the problems in implementing screening, and the assessment and management of psychosocial and psychiatric problems in cancer centres and community care.