The impact of a regionally based translational cancer research collaborative in Australia using the FAIT methodology

BACKGROUND

Translating research, achieving impact, and assessing impact are important aspirations for all research collaboratives but can prove challenging. The Hunter Cancer Research Alliance (HCRA) was funded from 2014 to 2021 to enhance capacity and productivity in cancer research in a regional centre in Australia. This study aimed to assess the impact and benefit of the HCRA to help inform future research investments of this type.

METHOD

The Framework to Assess the Impact from Translational health research (FAIT) was selected as the preferred methodology. FAIT incorporates three validated methodologies for assessing impact: 1) Modified Payback; 2) Economic Analysis; and 3) Narrative overview and case studies. All three FAIT methods are underpinned by a Program Logic Model. Data were collected from HCRA and the University of Newcastle administrative records, directly from HCRA members, and website searches.

RESULTS

In addition to advancing knowledge and providing capacity building support to members via grants, fellowships, scholarships, training, events and targeted translation support, key impacts of HCRA-member research teams included: (i) the establishment of a regional biobank that has distributed over 13,600 samples and became largely self-sustaining; (ii) conservatively leveraging $43.8 M (s.a.$20.5 M - $160.5 M) in funding and support from the initial $9.7 M investment; (iii) contributing to clinical practice guidelines and securing a patent for identification of stem cells for endometrial cell regeneration; (iv) shifting the treatment paradigm for all tumour types that rely on nerve cell innervation, (v) development and implementation of the world's first real-time patient treatment verification system (Watchdog); (vi) inventing the effective 'EAT' psychological intervention to improve nutrition and outcomes in people experiencing radiotherapy for head and neck cancer; (vi) developing effective interventions to reduce smoking rates among priority groups, currently being rolled out to disadvantaged populations in NSW; and (vii) establishing a Consumer Advisory Panel and Consumer Engagement Committee to increase consumer involvement in research.

CONCLUSION

Using FAIT methodology, we have demonstrated the significant impact and downstream benefits that can be achieved by the provision of infrastructure-type funding to regional and rural research collaboratives to help address inequities in research activity and health outcomes and demonstrates a positive return on investment.

Hearing the Voices of Australian Thyroid Cancer Survivors: Qualitative Thematic Analysis of Semistructured Interviews Identifies Unmet Support Needs

Background: Most thyroid cancer survivors regain their physical health-related quality of life, but psychological and social deficits persist. The nature of these detriments remains poorly understood and they are insufficiently captured by survey data alone. To address this, qualitative data exploring the breadth and depth of thyroid cancer survivors' experiences and priorities for supportive care are required. Methods: Twenty semistructured interviews were undertaken with a purposive, maximum variation sample of thyroid cancer survivors. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded independently by two researchers. A hybrid model of inductive and realistic codebook analysis was undertaken with themes developed. Results: Patient experiences centered around three themes: (1) impact of diagnosis and treatment, (2) thyroid cancer does not happen in isolation, and (3) role of clinicians and formalized support structures. The word "cancer" had negative connotations, but for many, the reality of their experience was more positive. Despite feeling "lucky" at the relative low-risk nature of thyroid cancer, many patients reported fatigue, weight gain, and difficulty returning to usual activities; concerns that were largely dismissed or minimized by clinicians. Few were offered any support beyond their treating doctors; where patients attempted to access formalized supportive care, little was available or appropriate. Life stage and concurrent family and social stressors greatly impacted patients' ability to cope with diagnosis and treatment. Addressing thyroid cancer in isolation felt inappropriate without appreciating the broader context of their lives. Interactions with clinicians were largely positive, particularly where information was communicated as a means of empowering patients to participate in shared decision-making and where clinicians "checked in" emotionally with patients. Information about initial treatments was largely adequate but information on longer term effects and follow-up was lacking. Many patients felt that clinicians focused on physical well-being and scan results, missing opportunities to provide psychological support. Conclusions: Thyroid cancer survivors can struggle to navigate their cancer journey, particularly with regard to psychological and social functioning. There is a need to acknowledge these impacts at the time of clinical encounters, as well as develop information resources and support structures that can be individualized to optimize holistic well-being for those in need.

Perceived importance of emotional support provided by health care professionals and social networks: Should we broaden our focus for the delivery of supportive care?

INTRODUCTION

Emotional support provided by health care professionals (HCPs) for people diagnosed with cancer is associated with improved outcomes. Support via social networks may also be important.

AIMS

To report among a sample of distressed patients and caregivers, (1) the importance attributed to different sources of emotional support (HCPs and social networks) by distressed cancer patients and caregivers; (2) the proportion who indicate they did not receive sufficient levels of emotional support; and (3) potential associations between respondents' demographic and clinical characteristics and reported lack of emotional support.

METHODS

This study utilised cross-sectional data from telephone interviews collected during the usual-care phase of the Structured Triage and Referral by Telephone (START) trial. Participants completed a telephone interview 6 months after their initial call to the Cancer Council Information and Support service and included recall of importance and sufficiency of emotional support.

RESULTS

More than two-thirds of patients (n = 234) and caregivers (n = 152) reported that family and friends were very important sources of emotional support. Nurses (69% and 42%) and doctors (68% and 47%) were reported very important, while a lower proportion reported that psychologists and psychiatrists were very important (39%, and 43%). Insufficient levels of support were reported by 36% of participants. Perceptions of insufficient support were significantly associated with distress levels (p < .0001) and not having a partner (p = .0115).

CONCLUSION

Social networks, particularly family, are an important source of emotional support. Higher levels of distress, those without partners, and caregivers may require targeted interventions to increase their access to emotional support.

Thyroid cancer patient reported outcome measures in clinical practice: analysing acceptability and optimizing recruitment

BACKGROUND

Patient reported outcomes measures (PROMs) can provide valuable metrics in clinical trials and cancer registries. To ensure relevance, patient participation must be optimized and PROMs be highly acceptable to patients. There are few data reporting methods to maximize recruitment and a lack of consensus regarding appropriate PROMs for thyroid cancer survivors.

METHODS

All patients with a new diagnosis of thyroid (excluding micropapillary and anaplastic) cancer within a single Australian health district between January 2020 and December 2021 were invited to complete PROMs electronically, and self-report ease of use and comprehensiveness of each tool. Participants completed Short Form-12 (SF-12), European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC-QLQ-C30), City of Hope Quality of Life-Thyroid Version (COH-TV) and Thyroid Cancer Quality of Life Survey (ThyCaQoL). Semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews explored patient priorities. An enhanced, multimodal recruitment strategy was instituted after 12 months due to low response rates.

RESULTS

Survey completion improved under enhanced recruitment (37/62, 60% versus 19/64, 30%, P = 0.0007) with no differences in demographic or clinical characteristics. Few (4%-7%) respondents rated surveys as difficult to complete. No single PROM comprehensively captured health-related quality of life, with disease-specific tools performing marginally better (54% ThyCaQoL and 52% CoH-TV) compared to generic tools (38% SF-12 and 42% EOROTC-QLQ-C30). Qualitative data suggested that concurrent diagnoses, and survey invitation prior to surgery, made surveys more difficult to complete.

CONCLUSION

A comprehensive and representative assessment of PROMs in thyroid cancer survivors requires the use of multiple survey tools and specialized staff to maximize recruitment.

Current patterns of care in low-risk thyroid cancer-A national cross-sectional survey of Australian thyroid clinicians

INTRODUCTION

De-escalated treatment of hemithyroidectomy without radioactive iodine (RAI) is now accepted for patients with low-risk, well-differentiated thyroid cancer (WDTC). The benefit of long-term follow-up care remains controversial. This study aims to describe parameters associated with less than total thyroidectomy, and discharge from specialist follow-up in patients with low-risk WDTC in Australia.

METHODS

An online survey was distributed to Australian members of Endocrine Society of Australia, Australian and New Zealand Endocrine Surgeons, and Australian Society of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery. Clinicians completed a survey of management and follow-up care preferences for four clinical vignettes (all low-risk WDTC).

RESULTS

119 clinicians (48% endocrinologists, 55% male) answered at least one question. The majority (59%) of respondents recommended less than total thyroidectomy and omission of RAI in patients with WDTC <2 cm. Most (62%) would discharge a patient with micropapillary thyroid cancer within 1 year following total thyroidectomy. In contrast, for WDTC 1-4 cm, >90% of clinicians would continue specialist follow-up for at least 5 years. The majority of clinicians felt that patients experienced disproportionate fear of recurrence and were reassured by follow-up. After multivariable analysis, clinicians who participated in multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) were more likely to choose de-escalated care for both initial treatment (p = .005) and follow-up care (>5 years, p = .05).

CONCLUSION

Clinician attitudes captured by this survey reflect recent changes in guidelines towards hemithyroidectomy for low-risk WDTC, particularly amongst MDT attendees. There is a need to further examine the impact of de-escalated care on fear of recurrence and quality of life in thyroid cancer survivors.

Acceptability and feasibility of cognitive assessments with adults with primary brain cancer and brain metastasis: A Systematic Review

Routine cognitive assessment for adults with brain cancers is seldom completed but vital for guiding daily living, maintaining quality of life, or supporting patients and families. This study aims to identify cognitive assessments which are pragmatic and acceptable for use in clinical settings. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane were searched to identify studies published in English between 1990 and 2021. Publications were independently screened by two coders and included if they: (1) were peer-reviewed; (2) reported original data relating to adult primary brain tumour or brain metastases; (3) used objective or subjective assessments; (4) reported assessment acceptability or feasibility. The Psychometric And Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scale was used. Consent, assessment commencement and completion, and study completion were extracted along with author-reported acceptability and feasibility data. PROSPERO Registration: CRD42021234794. Across 27 studies, 21 cognitive assessments had been assessed for feasibility and acceptability; 15 were objective assessments. Acceptability data were limited and heterogeneous, particularly consent (not reported in 23 studies), assessment commencement (not reported in 19 studies), and assessment completion (not reported in 21 studies). Reasons for non-completion could be grouped into patient-factors, assessment-factors, clinician-factors, and system-factors. The three cognitive assessments with the most acceptability and feasibility data reported were the MMSE, MoCA, and NIHTB-CB. Further acceptability and feasibility data are needed including consent, commencement and completion rates. Cost, length, time, and assessor burden are needed for the MMSE, MoCA, and NIHTB-CB, along with potentially new computerised assessments suited for busy clinical settings.

Facilitating High Quality Cancer Care: A Qualitative Study of Australian Chairpersons' Perspectives on Multidisciplinary Team Meetings

Aim

Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDMs) are a critical element of quality care for people diagnosed with cancer. The MDM Chairperson plays a significant role in facilitating these meetings, which are often time-poor environments for clinical decision making. This study examines the perceptions of MDM Chairpersons including their role and the factors that determine the quality of a Chair, as well as the Chairperson's perception of the value of personally attending meetings.

Methods

This qualitative study used telephone interviews to explore the experiences of MDM Chairpersons from metropolitan and regional New South Wales, Australia. Using a state-wide register, 43 clinicians who chaired lung, genitourinary, gastrointestinal, and breast cancer meetings were approached to participate. Thematic data analysis was used to develop and organise themes.

Results

Themes from the 16 interviews identified the perceived need for an expert and efficient MDM Chairperson with emphasis on personal rather than technical skills. The remaining themes related to the benefits of meetings to ensure quality and consistency of care; improve inter-professional relationships; and provide communication with and reassurance for patients.

Conclusion

The role of the MDM Chairperson requires expert management and leadership skills to ensure meetings support quality patient-centred care. MDMs are perceived to provide multiple benefits to both clinicians and patients. Efforts to train Chairs and to maximise clinician and patient benefits may be warranted given the costly and time-consuming nature of MDMs.

The dynamic relationship between cancer and employment-related financial toxicity: an in-depth qualitative study of 21 Australian cancer survivor experiences and preferences for support

BACKGROUND

People with a cancer diagnosis experience physical and emotional impacts that may affect employment. Alongside cancer care costs, reduced ability to generate an income is a key contributor to financial toxicity which is associated with poor emotional wellbeing, quality of life, treatment adherence and survival. This study aimed to explore people's experiences of changes to employment and their suggestions for how cancer survivors can be better supported.

METHODS

Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 21 cancer survivors identified as part of a larger study of emotional distress. Purposive sampling was used to include a diverse group of people across age, gender, tumour type, self-reported financial difficulties and employment status. Interviews were inductively and iteratively coded by two independent coders and analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

There is a dynamic relationship between a person's cancer treatment and their employment. For some, employment was disrupted due to physical or emotional impacts of cancer, or workplace stigma and discrimination. Others continued to work at the detriment of their health. Participants wished they had been made aware earlier how cancer might impact their capacity to work, their finances and their health. There was a lack of knowledge on the financial supports that may be available to them.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare professionals may have a role in minimising the financial impact of a cancer diagnosis through early assessment, communication of patients' potential work capacity and appropriate referrals to occupational therapy to aid return to work or financial planning. A robust government social support system specifically for households experiencing cancer is urgently required.

A qualitative study investigating Australian cancer service outpatients' experience of distress screening and management: what is the personal relevance, acceptability and improvement opportunities from patient perspectives?

Purpose

People diagnosed with cancer experience high distress levels throughout diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship. Untreated distress is associated with poor outcomes, including worsened quality of life and higher mortality rates. Distress screening facilitates need-based access to supportive care which can optimize patient outcomes. This qualitative interview study explored outpatients’ perceptions of a distress screening process implemented in an Australian cancer center.

Methods

Adult, English-speaking cancer outpatients were approached to participate in face-to-face or phone interviews after being screened by a clinic nurse using the distress thermometer (DT). The piloted semi-structured interview guide explored perceptions of the distress screening and management process, overall well-being, psychosocial support networks, and improvement opportunities for distress processes. Thematic analysis was used.

Results

Four key themes were identified in the 19 interviews conducted. Distress screening was found to be generally acceptable to participants and could be conducted by a variety of health professionals at varied time points. However, some participants found “distress” to be an ambiguous term. Despite many participants experiencing clinical distress (i.e., DT ≥ 4), few actioned referrals; some noted a preference to manage and prevent distress through informal support and well-being activities. Participants’ diverse coping styles, such as positivity, acceptance, and distancing, also factored into the perceived value of screening and referrals.

Conclusion and implications

Screening models only measuring severity of distress may not be sufficient to direct care referrals, as they do not consider patients’ varying coping strategies, external support networks, understanding of distress terminology, and motivations for accessing supportive care services.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-021-06671-2.

Psychometric properties of leadership scales for health professionals: a systematic review

Background

The important role of leaders in the translation of health research is acknowledged in the implementation science literature. However, the accurate measurement of leadership traits and behaviours in health professionals has not been directly addressed. This review aimed to identify whether scales which measure leadership traits and behaviours have been found to be reliable and valid for use with health professionals.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane, CINAHL, Scopus, ABI/INFORMIT and Business Source Ultimate were searched to identify publications which reported original research testing the reliability, validity or acceptability of a leadership-related scale with health professionals.

Results

Of 2814 records, a total of 39 studies met the inclusion criteria, from which 33 scales were identified as having undergone some form of psychometric testing with health professionals. The most commonly used was the Implementation Leadership Scale (n = 5) and the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (n = 3). Of the 33 scales, the majority of scales were validated in English speaking countries including the USA (n = 15) and Canada (n = 4), but also with some translations and use in Europe and Asia, predominantly with samples of nurses (n = 27) or allied health professionals (n = 10). Only two validation studies included physicians. Content validity and internal consistency were evident for most scales (n = 30 and 29, respectively). Only 20 of the 33 scales were found to satisfy the acceptable thresholds for good construct validity. Very limited testing occurred in relation to test-re-test reliability, responsiveness, acceptability, cross-cultural revalidation, convergent validity, discriminant validity and criterion validity.

Conclusions

Seven scales may be sufficiently sound to be used with professionals, primarily with nurses. There is an absence of validation of leadership scales with regard to physicians. Given that physicians, along with nurses and allied health professionals have a leadership role in driving the implementation of evidence-based healthcare, this constitutes a clear gap in the psychometric testing of leadership scales for use in healthcare implementation research and practice.

Trial registration

This review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) (see Additional File 1) (PLoS Medicine. 6:e1000097, 2009) and the associated protocol has been registered with the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (Registration Number CRD42019121544).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-021-01141-z.

Referral and uptake of services by distressed callers to the Cancer Council Information and Support telephone service

BACKGROUND

Patient-centered cancer care includes emotional, informational, and practical support that is personalised to the needs of patients and inclusive of family and friends. However, when supportive care referrals are offered in hospital settings, distressed patients and carers do not consistently act on those referrals, which can prolong patient suffering. The degree to which sub-optimal referral uptake also occurs in Australian telephone support services is unknown.

AIMS

To report, among a sample of distressed patients and caregivers who called a cancer information and support service: 1) the types of services used; 2) proportion who received and actioned a referral (uptake); 3) associations between referral to a service and callers' characteristics); and, 4) associations between uptake of a referred service and callers' characteristics.

METHODS

This study used cross-sectional data collected at 3-month post-baseline from control participants (usual care group) enrolled in the Structured Triage and Referral by Telephone (START) trial. The START trial recruited distressed adult cancer patients and caregivers from the Cancer Council Information and Support Service (CIS). A research assistant conducted a 30-45 min telephone interview with participants, which included recall of referrals provided by CIS staff and reported uptake of referral(s) to the offered service types.

RESULTS

Most patients (98%) and caregivers (97%) reported receiving a referral to a service. For patients and caregivers respectively, information materials (71%, 77%), CIS call-back (51%, 43%), practical services (52%, 45%), and group peer support (49%, 51%) were the services most frequently offered. For callers receiving a referral, uptake was highest for information materials (91%) and CIS call-backs (89%) and lowest for specialist psychological services (30%). Significant association was found between older age and reduced uptake of services (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

The high uptake rate of CIS call-backs suggests it is a potentially more acceptable form of support compared to specialist psychological services. Efforts to reduce the barriers to telephone-based psychological services are required. Specifically, older age peoples' and caregivers' preferences for support and priorities who may benefit from a referral coordinator.

Implementation of lung cancer multidisciplinary teams: a review of evidence-practice gaps

Multidisciplinary care (MDC) is considered best practice in lung cancer care. Health care services have made significant investments in MDC through the establishment of multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings. This investment is likely to be sustained in future. It is imperative that MDT meetings are efficient, effective, and sufficiently nimble to introduce new innovations to enable best practice. In this article, we consider the ‘evidence-practice gaps’ in the implementation of lung cancer MDC. These gaps were derived from the recurrent limitations outlined in existing studies and reviews. We address the contributions that implementation science and quality improvement can make to bridge these gaps by increasing translation and improving the uptake of innovations by teams.

Distress screening and supportive care referrals used by telephone-based health services: a systematic review

PURPOSE

People affected by chronic diseases such as cancer report high levels of distress and a need for psychosocial support. It is unclear whether telephone-based services for people affected by chronic disease are a practical setting for implementing distress screening, referral protocols and rescreening to direct supportive care where it is needed. This systematic review aimed to describe the published literature regarding distress screening and supportive care referral practices in telephone-based services for people affected by chronic diseases such as cancer.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Cochrane and Scopus was conducted in February 2018. Included quantitative studies involved: patients or caregivers affected by chronic diseases including cancer and describe a health service assessing psychosocial needs or distress via telephone. Extracted data included the type of cancer or other chronic disease, sample size, screening tool, referral or rescreening protocols, and type of health service.

RESULTS

The search identified 3989 potential articles with additional searches returning 30 studies (n = 4019); fourteen were eligible for full-text review. Of the 14 studies, 13 included cancer patients. Studies were across multiple settings and identified nine distress screening tools in use.

CONCLUSION

The reviewed studies indicate that validated distress-screening tools are being used via telephone to identify distress, particularly in relation to cancer. Screening-driven supportive care referrals are also taking place in telephone-based services. However, not all services use an established referral protocol. Ongoing rescreening of callers' distress is also limited despite it being an important recommendation from psycho-oncology guidelines.

Implementing Systematic Screening and Structured Care for Distressed Callers Using Cancer Council's Telephone Services: Protocol for a Randomized Stepped-Wedge Trial

Background

Structured distress management, comprised a 2-stage screening and referral model, can direct supportive care resources toward individuals who are most likely to benefit. This structured approach has yet to be trialed in Australian community-based services such as Cancer Council New South Wales (NSW) and Victoria Cancer Information and Support (CIS) 13 11 20 lines who care for a large community of cancer patients and caregivers.

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of structured screening and referral in (1) increasing the proportion of distressed CIS callers who accept supportive care referrals and (2) reducing distress levels at 6-month follow-up.

Methods

In this stepped-wedge trial, Cancer Council NSW and Victoria CIS consultants are randomized to deliver structured care during inbound 13 11 20 calls in accordance with 3 intervention periods. Eligible callers are patients or caregivers who score 4 or more on the Distress Thermometer; NSW or Victorian residents; aged 18 years or older; and English proficient. Study data are collected via computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATIs) at 3- and 6-month follow-up and CIS record audit. CATIs include demographic and service use items and the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28) to assess distress. An economic analysis of the structured care model will be completed.

Results

The structured care model was developed by guideline review and identification of service characteristics to guide mapping decisions; place-card methodology; and clinical vignettes with think-aloud methodology to confirm referral appropriateness. The model includes an additional screening tool (Patient Health Questionnaire-4) and a referral model with 16-20 CIS services. Descriptive statistics will be used to assess referral uptake rates. Differences between GHQ-28 scores for structured and usual care callers will be tested using a generalized linear mixed model with fixed effects for intervention and each time period. The trial will recruit 1512 callers. The sample size will provide the study with approximately 80% power to detect a difference of 0.3 SD in the mean score of the GHQ-28 at an alpha level of .05 and assuming an intra-cluster correlation of .04. A random sample of recorded calls will be reviewed to assess intervention fidelity and contamination. To date, 1835 distressed callers have been invited to participate with 60.71% (1114/1835) enrolled in the study. A total of 692 participants have completed 6-month CATIs. Recruitment is anticipated to end in late 2019.

Conclusions

This trial is among the first to rigorously test the outcomes of a community-based structured approach to distress management. The model is evidence-informed, practice-ready, and trialed in a real-world setting. The study outcomes will advance the understanding of distress management internationally for both patients and caregivers.

Trial Registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12617000352303; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=372105&isReview=true (Archived by WebCite on http://www.webcitation.org/78AW0Ba09)

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/12473

Taking the pulse of the health services research community: a cross-sectional survey of research impact, barriers and support

Objective This study reports on the characteristics of individuals conducting health service research (HSR) in Australia and New Zealand, the perceived accessibility of resources for HSR, the self-reported impact of HSR projects and perceived barriers to conducting HSR. Methods A sampling frame was compiled from funding announcements, trial registers and HSR organisation membership. Listed researchers were invited to complete online surveys. Close-ended survey items were analysed using basic descriptive statistics. Goodness of fit tests determined potential associations between researcher affiliation and access to resources for HSR. Open-ended survey items were analysed using thematic analysis. Results In all, 424 researchers participated in the study (22% response rate). Respondents held roles as health service researchers (76%), educators (34%) and health professionals (19%). Most were employed by a university (64%), and 57% held a permanent contract. Although 63% reported network support for HSR, smaller proportions reported executive (48%) or financial (26%) support. The least accessible resources were economists (52%), consumers (49%) and practice change experts (34%); researchers affiliated with health services were less likely to report access to statisticians (P<0.001), economists (P<0.001), librarians (P=0.02) and practice change experts (P=0.02) than university-affiliated researchers. Common impacts included conference presentations (94%), publication of peer-reviewed articles (87%) and health professional benefits (77%). Qualitative data emphasised barriers such as embedding research culture within services and engaging with policy makers. Conclusions The data highlight opportunities to sustain the HSR community through dedicated funding, improved access to methodological expertise and greater engagement with end-users. What is known about the topic? HSR faces several challenges, such as inequitable funding allocation and difficulties in quantifying the effects of HSR on changing health policy or practice. What does this paper add? Despite a vibrant and experienced HSR community, this study highlights some key barriers to realising a greater effect on the health and well-being of Australian and New Zealand communities through HSR. These barriers include limited financial resources, methodological expertise, organisational support and opportunities to engage with potential collaborators. What are the implications for practitioners? Funding is required to develop HSR infrastructure, support collaboration between health services and universities and combine knowledge of the system with research experience and expertise. Formal training programs for health service staff and researchers, from short courses to PhD programs, will support broader interest and involvement in HSR.

Patients' experiences and preferences for opt-in models and health professional involvement in biobanking consent: A cross-sectional survey of Australian cancer outpatients

BACKGROUND

Many biobanks rely upon patients' willingness to donate biospecimens and healthcare professionals to initiate opt-in consent processes. This study explored if: (1) patients accept opt-in or opt-out consent models with varying levels of professional involvement; (2) professionals discuss participation with specific patient groups; and (3) this discussion is associated with patient knowledge of biobanking processes.

METHODS

Outpatients completed surveys at a tertiary cancer center in New South Wales, Australia. Eligible participants were English-speaking adults who recently had cancer-related surgery. Participants completed 27 questions exploring acceptable consent models, biobanking experiences, knowledge, and willingness. Logistic regression and chi-square tests examined differences in the characteristics and knowledge of participants who were offered the opportunity to participate versus those who were not.

RESULTS

A total of 113 outpatients participated (97% response). Most participants (92%) found opt-out, patient-initiated consent acceptable; however, high acceptability was reported for all models except for opt-in, patient-initiated consent (58%). University or technical qualifications (P  =  0.001) was associated with increased odds (OR = 4.5) of being offered biobanking. The majority did not know what occurred to samples after surgery (59.3%) or pathology review (81.4%) and ability to answer these questions was associated with discussion of participation (P < 0.001). Of the few outpatients who discussed biobanking with their doctor (29%), all consented.

CONCLUSION

Professional-initiated, opt-in consent resulted in a few educated patients being approached; greater professional initiation of consent would be fruitful as most patients were willing to participate if asked. However, other consent approaches minimizing professional involvement were as acceptable to participants warranting further consideration.

Consumer input into health care: Time for a new active and comprehensive model of consumer involvement

Background

To ensure the provision of patient‐centred health care, it is essential that consumers are actively involved in the process of determining and implementing health‐care quality improvements. However, common strategies used to involve consumers in quality improvements, such as consumer membership on committees and collection of patient feedback via surveys, are ineffective and have a number of limitations, including: limited representativeness; tokenism; a lack of reliable and valid patient feedback data; infrequent assessment of patient feedback; delays in acquiring feedback; and how collected feedback is used to drive health‐care improvements.

Objectives

We propose a new active model of consumer engagement that aims to overcome these limitations. This model involves the following: (i) the development of a new measure of consumer perceptions; (ii) low cost and frequent electronic data collection of patient views of quality improvements; (iii) efficient feedback to the health‐care decision makers; and (iv) active involvement of consumers that fosters power to influence health system changes.

System-Wide and Group-Specific Health Service Improvements: Cross-Sectional Survey of Outpatient Improvement Preferences and Associations with Demographic Characteristics

Efficient patient-centred quality improvement requires an understanding of the system-wide areas of dissatisfaction along with evidence to identify the programs which can be strategically targeted according to specific patient characteristics and preferences. This cross-sectional study reports the proportion of chronic disease outpatients selecting 23 patient-centred improvement initiatives. Using univariate tests and multivariable logistic regressions, this multi-site study also identifies initiatives differentially selected by outpatients according to clinical and demographic characteristics. A total of 475 outpatients participated (49% response). Commonly selected initiatives included: reducing wait-times (22.3%); convenient appointment scheduling (16.0%); and receiving up-to-date treatment information (16.0%). Within univariate tests, preferences for information and service accessibility initiatives were not significantly associated with specific subgroups. However, seven initiatives were preferred according to age, gender, diagnosis status, and chronic disease type within multivariate models. For example, neurology outpatients were more likely to select assistance to manage psychological symptoms when compared to oncology outpatients (OR: 2.89). Study findings suggest that system-wide programs to enhance information provision are strategic approaches to improve experiences across patient characteristics. Furthermore, a few initiatives can be targeted to specific groups and emphasized the importance of detailed scoping analyses and tailored implementation plans when designing patient-centred quality improvement programs.

Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial of Proactive Web-Based Versus Telephone-Based Information and Support: Can Electronic Platforms Deliver Effective Care for Lung Cancer Patients?

Background

Community-based services such as telephone support lines can provide valuable informational, emotional, and practical support for cancer patients via telephone- or Web-based (live chat or email) platforms. However, very little rigorous research has examined the efficacy of such services in improving patient outcomes.

Objective

This study will determine whether: proactive telephone or Web-delivered support produces outcomes superior to printed information; and Web-delivered support produces outcomes comparable to telephone support.

Methods

A consecutive sample of 501 lung cancer outpatients will be recruited from 50 Australian health services to participate in a patient-randomized controlled trial (RCT). Eligible individuals must: be 18 years or older; have received a lung cancer diagnosis (including mesothelioma) within the previous 4 months; have an approximate life expectancy of at least 6 months; and have Internet access. Participants will be randomly allocated to receive: (1) an information booklet, (2) proactive telephone support, or (3) proactive Web support, chat, and/or email. The primary patient outcomes will be measured by the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) and Health Education and Impact Questionnaire (heiQ) at 3 and 6 months post recruitment. The acceptability of proactive recruitment strategies will also be assessed.

Results

It is hypothesized that participants receiving telephone or Web support will report reduced distress (GHQ-12 scores that are 0.3 standard deviations (SD) lower) and greater self-efficacy (heiQ scores that are 0.3 SDs higher) than participants receiving booklets. Individuals receiving Web support will report heiQ scores within 0.29 SDs of individuals receiving telephone support.

Conclusions

If proven effective, electronic approaches such as live-chat and email have the potential to increase the accessibility and continuity of supportive care delivered by community-based services. This evidence may also inform the redesigning of helpline-style services to be effective and responsive to patient needs.

Collaborative Patient-Centered Quality Improvement

Identification of patients’ and health professionals’ quality improvement preferences is an essential first step in collaborative improvement models. This includes experience-based codesign (EBCD), where service change is strategically introduced following stakeholder consultation. This study compared the number and types of improvement initiatives selected by outpatients and health professionals. Using electronic surveys designed to inform EBCD studies, 541 outpatients (71.1% consent) and 124 professionals (47.1% response) selected up to 23 general initiatives. On average, outpatients selected 2.4 (median = 1, interquartile range = 1–3) initiatives and professionals selected 10.7 (median = 10; interquartile range = 6–15) initiatives. Outpatients demonstrated a strong preference for improvements to clinic organization, such as appointment scheduling and clinic contact. Outpatients selected relatively fewer initiatives potentially reducing the complexity of service change and resources required to address preferences. Comparatively, professionals indicated a greater degree of change is needed and selected initiatives related to communication with patients and other professionals, including coordinating multidisciplinary care. Improvements to information provision were commonly selected by both groups and offered a strategic opportunity to address patients’ and professionals’ preferences. By quantifying the ways in which preferences differed, this study emphasizes the need for collaborative approaches to health service change and may be used to initiate an informed discussion on patients’ and professionals’ quality improvement preferences in tertiary care.

Getting right to the point: identifying Australian outpatients' priorities and preferences for patient-centred quality improvement in chronic disease care

OBJECTIVES

To identify specific actions for patient-centred quality improvement in chronic disease outpatient settings, this study identified patients' general and specific preferences among a comprehensive suite of initiatives for change.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A cross-sectional survey was conducted in three hospital-based clinics specializing in oncology, neurology and cardiology care located in New South Wales, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS AND MEASURES

Adult English-speaking outpatients completed the touch-screen Consumer Preferences Survey in waiting rooms or treatment areas. Participants selected up to 23 general initiatives that would improve their experience. Using adaptive branching, participants could select an additional 110 detailed initiatives and complete a relative prioritization exercise.

RESULTS

A total of 541 individuals completed the survey (71.1% consent, 73.1% completion). Commonly selected general initiatives, presented in order of decreasing priority (along with sample proportion), included: improved parking (60.3%), up-to-date information provision (15.0%), ease of clinic contact (12.9%), access to information at home (12.8%), convenient appointment scheduling (14.2%), reduced wait-times (19.8%) and information on medical emergencies (11.1%). To address these general initiatives, 40 detailed initiatives were selected by respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

Initiatives targeting service accessibility and information provision, such as parking and up-to-date information on patient prognoses and progress, were commonly selected and perceived to be of relatively greater priority. Specific preferences included the need for clinics to provide patient-designated parking in close proximity to the clinic, information on treatment progress and test results (potentially in the form of designated brief appointments or via telehealth) and comprehensive and trustworthy lists of information sources to access at home.

Cross-Sectional Data That Explore the Relationship Between Outpatients' Quality of Life and Preferences for Quality Improvement in Oncology Settings

PURPOSE

This cross-sectional study assessed the association between oncology outpatients' quality improvement preferences and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Implementation of specific initiatives preferred by patients with lower HRQoL may be a strategic approach to enhancing care for potentially vulnerable patients.

METHODS

English-speaking adults were recruited from five outpatient chemotherapy clinics located in New South Wales, Australia. Using touch screen devices, participants selected up to 25 initiatives that would improve their experiences and completed the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) survey. The logistic odds of selecting an initiative according to FACT-G scores were calculated to determine whether preferences were associated with HRQoL after controlling for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Of the 411 eligible outpatients approached to participate, 263 (64%) completed surveys. Commonly selected initiatives were up-to-date information on treatment and condition progress (19.8%), access to or information on financial assistance (18.3%), and reduced clinic wait times (17.5%). For those with relatively lower FACT-G scores, the adjusted odds of selecting five initiatives illustrated an increasing trend: convenient appointment scheduling systems (+23% [P = .002]), reduced wait times (+15% [P = .01]), information on medical emergencies (+14% [P = .04]), access to or information on financial assistance (+15% [P = .009]), help to maintain daily living activities (+18% [P = .007]).

CONCLUSION

Two areas of improvement were commonly selected: easily accessible health services and information and support for self-management. Although the results suggest an association between a few quality improvement preferences and HRQoL, a wider spectrum of patient characteristics must be considered when targeting quality improvement to patient subgroups.

A systematic review of barriers to optimal outpatient specialist services for individuals with prevalent chronic diseases: what are the unique and common barriers experienced by patients in high income countries?

Health utilization and need assessment data suggest there is considerable variation in access to outpatient specialist care. However, it is unclear if the types of barriers experienced are specific to chronic disease groups or experienced universally. This systematic review provides a detailed summary of common and unique barriers experienced by chronic disease groups when accessing and receiving care, and a synthesized list of possible health service initiatives to improve equitable delivery of optimal care in high-income countries. Quantitative articles describing barriers to specialist outpatient services were retrieved from CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, and PyscINFO. To be eligible for review, studies: were published from 2002 to May 2014; included samples with cancer, diabetes mellitus, osteoporosis, arthritis, ischaemic heart disease, stroke, asthma, chronic pulmonary disorder (COPD) or depression; and, were conducted in high-income countries. Using a previously validated model of access (Penchansky and Thomas' model of fit), barriers were grouped according to five overarching domains and defined in more detail using 33 medical subject headings. Results from reviewed articles, including the scope and frequency of reported barriers, are conceptualized using thematic analysis and framed as possible health service initiatives. A total of 3181 unique records were screened for eligibility, of which 74 studies were included in final analysis. The largest proportion of studies reported acceptability barriers (75.7 %), of which demographic disparities (44.6 %) were reported across all diseases. Other frequently reported barriers included inadequate need assessment (25.7 %), information provision (32.4 %), or health communication (20 %). Unique barriers were identified for oncology, mental health, and COPD samples. Based on the scope, frequency and measurement of reported barriers, eight key themes with associated implications for health services are presented. Examples include: common accommodation and accessibility barriers caused on service organization or physical structure, such as parking and appointment scheduling; common barriers created by poor coordination of care within the healthcare team; and unique barriers resulting from inadequate need assessment and referral practices. Consideration of barriers, across and within chronic diseases, suggests a number of specific initiatives are likely to improve the delivery of patient-centered care and increase equity in access to high-quality health services.

Measuring the quality of patient-centered care: why patient-reported measures are critical to reliable assessment

PURPOSE

The Institute of Medicine (IOM) identified patient-centeredness as crucial to quality health care. The IOM endorsed six patient-centeredness dimensions that stipulated that care must be: respectful to patients' values, preferences, and expressed needs; coordinated and integrated; provide information, communication, and education; ensure physical comfort; provide emotional support; and involve family and friends. Patient-reported measures examine the patient's perspective and are essential to the accurate assessment of patient-centered care. This article's objectives are to: 1) use the six IOM-endorsed patient-centeredness dimensions as a framework to outline why patient-reported measures are crucial to the reliable measurement of patient-centered care; and 2) to identify existing patient-reported measures that assess each patient-centered care dimension.

METHODS

For each IOM-endorsed patient-centeredness dimension, the published literature was searched to highlight the essential role of patients in assessing patient-centered care and informing quality improvement efforts. Existing literature was also searched to identify examples of patient-reported measures that assess each patient-centeredness dimension.

CONCLUSION

Patient-reported measures are arguably the best way to measure patient-centeredness. For instance, patients are best positioned to determine whether care aligns with patient values, preferences, and needs and the Measure of Patient Preferences is an example of a patient-reported measure that does so. Furthermore, only the patient knows whether they received the level of information desired, and if information was understood and can be recalled. Patient-reported measures that examine information provision include the Lung Information Needs Questionnaire and the EORTC QLQ-INFO25. In relation to physical comfort, only patients can report the severity of physical symptoms and whether medications provide adequate relief. Patient-reported measures that investigate physical comfort include the Pain Care Quality Survey and the Brief Pain Inventory. Using patient-reported measures to regularly measure patient-centered care is critical to identifying areas of health care where improvements are needed.

Consumer participation in quality improvements for chronic disease care: development and evaluation of an interactive patient-centered survey to identify preferred service initiatives

Background

With increasing attention given to the quality of chronic disease care, a measurement approach that empowers consumers to participate in improving quality of care and enables health services to systematically introduce patient-centered initiatives is needed. A Web-based survey with complex adaptive questioning and interactive survey items would allow consumers to easily identify and prioritize detailed service initiatives.

Objective

The aim was to develop and test a Web-based survey capable of identifying and prioritizing patient-centered initiatives in chronic disease outpatient services. Testing included (1) test-retest reliability, (2) patient-perceived acceptability of the survey content and delivery mode, and (3) average completion time, completion rates, and Flesch-Kincaid reading score.

Methods

In Phase I, the Web-based Consumer Preferences Survey was developed based on a structured literature review and iterative feedback from expert groups of service providers and consumers. The touchscreen survey contained 23 general initiatives, 110 specific initiatives available through adaptive questioning, and a relative prioritization exercise. In Phase II, a pilot study was conducted within 4 outpatient clinics to evaluate the reliability properties, patient-perceived acceptability, and feasibility of the survey. Eligible participants were approached to complete the survey while waiting for an appointment or receiving intravenous therapy. The age and gender of nonconsenters was estimated to ascertain consent bias. Participants with a subsequent appointment within 14 days were asked to complete the survey for a second time.

Results

A total of 741 of 1042 individuals consented to participate (71.11% consent), 529 of 741 completed all survey content (78.9% completion), and 39 of 68 completed the test-retest component. Substantial or moderate reliability (Cohen’s kappa>0.4) was reported for 16 of 20 general initiatives with observed percentage agreement ranging from 82.1%-100.0%. The majority of participants indicated the Web-based survey was easy to complete (97.9%, 531/543) and comprehensive (93.1%, 505/543). Participants also reported the interactive relative prioritization exercise was easy to complete (97.0%, 189/195) and helped them to decide which initiatives were of most importance (84.6%, 165/195). Average completion time was 8.54 minutes (SD 3.91) and the Flesch-Kincaid reading level was 6.8. Overall, 84.6% (447/529) of participants indicated a willingness to complete a similar survey again.

Conclusions

The Web-based Consumer Preferences Survey is sufficiently reliable and highly acceptable to patients. Based on completion times and reading level, this tool could be integrated in routine clinical practice and allows consumers to easily participate in quality evaluation. Results provide a comprehensive list of patient-prioritized initiatives for patients with major chronic conditions and delivers practice-ready evidence to guide improvements in patient-centered care.