Cancer patient utilisation of psychological care in Germany: The role of attitudes towards seeking help

Predictors of cancer patients' utilization of psychooncological support: Examining patient´s attitude and physician´s recommendation

PURPOSE

Patients with cancer suffer from a wide range of psychological distress. Nevertheless, in the literature low utilization rates of psychooncological services are reported. Various factors may influence the utilization of professional support during inpatient care. Up to now it is unclear to what extent patients' attitude towards psychooncological support and physicians' recommendation for psychooncological care may influence the utilization.

METHODS

In a multicenter longitudinal observational study in Comprehensive Cancer Centers Germany, 1398 patients with mixed cancer diagnoses were assessed at baseline during their hospital stay with respect to psychooncological distress and the need for and use of psychooncological services.

RESULTS

Psychooncological support was used by almost 28.4% of patients up to this time. A positive attitude towards psychooncological support was reported by 41.6%. A recommendation of psychooncological support by a physician was received by 16.2%. These patients reported a significant higher level of distress compared to patients who did not received a recommendation. Multivariable logistic regression detected that the utilization rate was 3.79 times higher among patients with positive attitude towards psychooncological support (OR, 3.79; 95% CI 2.51-5.73, p < 0.001). Utilization was 4.21 times more likely among patients who received a physician´s recommendation (OR, 4.21; 95% CI 2.98-5.95, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The results of the study provide evidence of the relevance of giving more attention to psychooncological distress and attitudes towards psychooncological care. To reduce reservations, patients need low-threshold information about the psychooncological services offered.

Willingness toward psychosocial support during cancer treatment: a critical yet challenging construct in psychosocial care

Psychosocial distress screening, mandated by the American College Surgeons' Commission on Cancer, continues to be implemented across cancer centers nationwide. Although measuring distress is critical to identifying patients who may benefit from additional support, several studies suggest that distress screening may not actually increase patients' utilization of psychosocial services. While various investigators have identified barriers that may impede effective implementation of distress screening, we posit that patients' intrinsic motivation, which we term patients' willingness, may be the biggest predictor for whether cancer patients choose to engage with psychosocial services. In this commentary, we define patient willingness towards psychosocial services as a novel construct, distinct from the intention toward a certain behavior described across pre-existing models of health behavior change. Further, we offer a critical perspective of models of intervention design that focus on acceptability and feasibility as preliminary outcomes thought to encompass the willingness construct described herein. Finally, we summarize several health service models that successfully integrate psychosocial services alongside routine oncology care. Overall, we present an innovative model that acknowledges barriers and facilitators and underscores the critical role of willingness in health behavior change. Consideration of patients' willingness toward psychosocial care will move the field of psychosocial oncology forward in clinical practice, policy initiatives, and study design.

Incorporating psychosocial care into routine oncological care: insights into challenges and strategies from certified cancer centers' audit data

PURPOSE

Provision of psychosocial care is obligatory in cancer centers certified in accordance with the criteria of the German Cancer Society, but the extent to which it is utilized differs greatly between centers. Anomalous utilization percentages are discussed during certification audits. This analysis aims to describe (1) how certified centers explain psychosocial care utilization percentages during audits and (2) the measures they then plan for improving psychosocial care utilization. The aim of the analysis is to help understand patterns of psychosocial care utilization in oncology and reduce potential disparities by describing the challenges that cancer centers face and their strategies for integrating psychosocial care into routine oncological care.

METHODS

The content of free-text comments regarding psychosocial utilization percentages by certified centers during certification audits in 2019 was analyzed. In total, 178 comments were analyzed from 116 prostate, colorectal, and breast cancer centers in Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Italy, and Luxembourg.

RESULTS

The explanations for utilization percentages most often mentioned involved patients' levels of interest and need, outpatient care, staff shortages, inclusion of psychosocial care in other processes in the center, documentation issues, and factors regarding different legal regulations in countries outside Germany. The measures most often planned for improving psychosocial care utilization involved adjusting work processes, increasing staff resources, optimizing documentation, and establishing quality-assurance groups/task forces.

CONCLUSION

This exploratory analysis shows that the challenges and strategies involved in incorporating psychosocial care into routine oncological care are diverse. Further research should identify process-level strategies that can promote the integration of psychosocial care. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

'Patients with Cancer are Distressed!' Indian Healthcare Provider Perspectives on Distress Screening and Referrals to Psycho-oncology Services - A Mixed Methods Study

Objectives:

Routine screening for distress is a guideline prescribed by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) to adequately assess distress in a cancer setting. Our centre conducted routine screening but failed to utilize psycho-oncology services. Our aim was to assess the extent of self-reported distress, referrals to psycho-oncology services and healthcare provider perspectives about the existing distress management system and psycho-oncology services.

Materials and Methods:

We conducted a record review of adult patients (n=372) who reported to the Out-patient department of the tertiary cancer centre. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with fourteen healthcare providers. We used a concurrent mixed methods study design. Adult patients were screened for distress using NCCN-Distress Thermometer and problem checklist. Healthcare providers from different oncology specialties were interviewed and the data was analysed using descriptive thematic analysis.

Results:

Patients screened for distress were found to report moderate to extreme levels of distress (53.5%). The total referrals to psycho-oncology support services were low (8.6%). Interviews with healthcare providers revealed three major themes: Enablers, barriers and solutions for utilization of distress management system and psycho-oncology services.

Conclusions:

Moderate to extreme distress was found among patients routinely screened for distress, although there was poor utilization of distress management system and psycho-oncology support services due to time constraints, patient’s negative attitudes towards mental health referrals, generic screening tools and use of own clinical judgement to make referrals by healthcare providers. Future research warrants implementation of strategies to integrate psycho-oncology services into routine cancer care by focusing on improving visibility of services.