Building resilience in oncology teams: Protocol for a realist evaluation of multiple cases

Measuring Team Functioning During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Perspectives of Cancer Care Team Members

Background

In a public health crisis such as COVID-19, cancer teams face significant challenges including acute work disruptions, rapid shifts in clinical practice, and burnout. Within this context, it is crucial to explore team functioning from the perspectives of multiple stakeholders.

Objective

This quantitative pilot study aimed to 1) measure perceptions of multi-stakeholders on key indicators of team functioning (Team Effectiveness, TE, and Team Relational Coordination, TRC) during COVID-19 and its transition, and 2) document whether patient perceptions of TE/TRC are significantly associated with their cancer care experiences.

Methods

A descriptive design with repeated measures was used. Through convenience sampling, participants were recruited from two outpatient cancer clinics at a large university-affiliated hospital, in Montréal, Qc, Canada. Sixty-six participants (ie, 13 healthcare professionals, 40 patients, 6 informal caregivers, and 7 volunteers) completed e-measures at T1 (years 2021-2022) and n = 44 at T2 (year 2023).

Results

At T1, participants reported high perceptions of Team Effectiveness (scale 1 to 6) M = 4.47; SD = 0.7 (Mdn = 4.54; IQR: 4.06-5) and Relational Coordination (scale 1 to 5) M = 3.77; SD = 0.77 (Mdn = 3.81; IQR: 3.12-4.38) with no significant differences in perceptions across the four groups. At T2, no significant changes in TE/TRC perceptions were found. At both time points, patient perceptions of TE/TRC were significantly correlated with positive cancer care experiences (Spearman rank correlation rs ranging from 0.69 and 0.83; p < 0.01).

Conclusion

To our knowledge, this is the first study documenting perceptions of cancer team functioning amidst the pandemic as reported by multiple stakeholders. Significant relationships between patient perceptions of TE/TRC and their cancer care experiences underscore the importance of including patients' views in team functioning processes. Future work should rely on larger sample sizes to further explore key elements of optimal team functioning.

Cancer Care Team Functioning during COVID-19: A Narrative Literature Review and Synthesis

Amid pandemics, health care teams face unprecedented challenges, requiring significant efforts to sustain optimal functioning and navigate rapid practice changes. It is therefore crucial to identify factors affecting team functioning in these contexts. The present narrative review more specifically summarizes the literature on key elements of cancer teams' functioning during COVID-19. The search strategy involved four main databases (i.e., Medline OVID, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL), as well as Google Scholar, from January 2000 to September 2022. Twenty-three publications were found to be relevant. Each was read thoroughly, and its content summarized. Across publications, three key themes emerged: (1) swiftly adopting virtual technology for communication and interprofessional collaboration, (2) promoting team resilience, and (3) encouraging self-care and optimizing team support. Our findings underscore key team functioning elements to address in future pandemics. More research is needed to document the perspectives of broader-based team members (such as patients and lay carers) to inform more comprehensive evidence-based team functioning guidelines.

Resilience at Work among Healthcare Professionals in Oncology during and beyond the Pandemic: Report from A Deliberative Multi-Stakeholder Reflexive Symposium

The chronic distress faced by healthcare professionals (HCPs) in oncology was exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, heightening the need to improve their resilience. The Entretiens Jacques Cartier symposium provided an opportunity for participants from France and Quebec to share perspectives on resilience at work and discuss interventions at individual and organizational levels to support HCP health and well-being. Fifty-eight stakeholders were invited to the symposium, including HCPs, government decision-makers, researchers, and patient representatives. The symposium began with presentations on the nature of professional resilience at work in oncology and promising interventions developed in France and Quebec. Participants were then engaged in deliberation on how evidence and experiential knowledge could contribute to workplace strategies to strengthen resilience. Small-group reflexive sessions using the photovoice method, and an intersectoral roundtable, elicited the expression and deliberation of multiple perspectives on the nature and building blocks of resilience. Four main themes emerged from the discussions: (1) that resilience remains a muddy concept and can be associated pejoratively with "happycracy"; (2) that resilience must contend with bounded autonomy and captors; (3) that it relies on a sense of coherence at work; and (4) that patients play a role in improving HCP resilience. Stakeholders from healthcare systems in different countries view resilience at work as a means of equipping teams to handle chronic and punctual stresses in cancer care. The symposium emphasized the importance of better defining what resilience at work means and pursuing explorations of multicomponent interventions to support oncology HCPs and the patients they care for. The themes raised by participants at the symposium suggest pathways for furthering this exploration.

Second Opinion in the Italian Organ Procurement Transplantation: The Pathologist Is In

Second opinion consultation is a well-established practice in different clinical settings of diagnostic medicine. However, little is known about second opinion consultation activity in transplantation, and even less is known about it concerning donor assessment. The consultations provided by the second opinion service led to the safer and homogeneous management of donors with a history of malignancy or ongoing neoplasm by transplant centers. Indeed, two of the most important aspects are the reduction of semantic differences in cancer reporting and the standardization of procedures, which are mainly due to the different settings and logistics of different pathology services. This article aims to discuss the role and the future of the second opinion in Italy during organ procurement, highlighting the critical issues and areas for improvement.