Information interventions for orienting patients and their carers to cancer care facilities (Protocol)

To assess the effects of information interventions which orient patients and their carers/family to a cancer care facility and the services available in the facility.

Facilitating needs based cancer care for people with a chronic disease : evaluation of an intervention using a multi-centre interrupted time series design

Background: Palliative care should be provided according to the individual needs of the patient, caregiver and family, so that the type and level of care provided, as well as the setting in which it is delivered, are dependent on the complexity and severity of individual needs, rather than prognosis or diagnosis. This paper presents a study designed to assess the feasibility and efficacy of an intervention to assist in the allocation of palliative care resources according to need, within the context of a population of people with advanced cancer. ---------- Methods/design: People with advanced cancer and their caregivers completed bi-monthly telephone interviews over a period of up to 18 months to assess unmet needs, anxiety and depression, quality of life, satisfaction with care and service utilisation. The intervention, introduced after at least two baseline phone interviews, involved a) training medical, nursing and allied health professionals at each recruitment site on the use of the Palliative Care Needs Assessment Guidelines and the Needs Assessment Tool: Progressive Disease - Cancer (NAT: PD-C); b) health professionals completing the NAT: PD-C with participating patients approximately monthly for the rest of the study period. Changes in outcomes will be compared pre-and post-intervention.---------- Discussion: The study will determine whether the routine, systematic and regular use of the Guidelines and NAT: PD-C in a range of clinical settings is a feasible and effective strategy for facilitating the timely provision of needs based care.

Utility of routine data sources for feedback on the quality of cancer care: an assessment based on clinical practice guidelines

Background Not all cancer patients receive state-of-the-art care and providing regular feedback to clinicians might reduce this problem. The purpose of this study was to assess the utility of various data sources in providing feedback on the quality of cancer care. Methods Published clinical practice guidelines were used to obtain a list of processes-of-care of interest to clinicians. These were assigned to one of four data categories according to their availability and the marginal cost of using them for feedback. Results Only 8 (3%) of 243 processes-of-care could be measured using population-based registry or administrative inpatient data (lowest cost). A further 119 (49%) could be measured using a core clinical registry, which contains information on important prognostic factors (e.g., clinical stage, physiological reserve, hormone-receptor status). Another 88 (36%) required an expanded clinical registry or medical record review; mainly because they concerned long-term management of disease progression (recurrences and metastases) and 28 (11.5%) required patient interview or audio-taping of consultations because they involved information sharing between clinician and patient. Conclusion The advantages of population-based cancer registries and administrative inpatient data are wide coverage and low cost. The disadvantage is that they currently contain information on only a few processes-of-care. In most jurisdictions, clinical cancer registries, which can be used to report on many more processes-of-care, do not cover smaller hospitals. If we are to provide feedback about all patients, not just those in larger academic hospitals with the most developed data systems, then we need to develop sustainable population-based data systems that capture information on prognostic factors at the time of initial diagnosis and information on management of disease progression.

Information interventions for orienting patients and their carers to cancer care facilities

Background: Cancer patients experience distress and anxiety related to their diagnosis, treatment and the unfamiliar cancer centre. Strategies with the aim of orienting patients to a cancer care facility may improve patient outcomes. Although meeting patients' information needs at different stages is important, there is little agreement about the type of information and the timing for information to be given. Orientation interventions aim to address information needs at the start of a person's experience with a cancer care facility. The extent of any benefit of these interventions is unknown. Objectives: To assess the effects of information interventions which orient patients and their carers/family to a cancer care facility, and to the services available in the facility. Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2); MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1966 to Jun 2011), EMBASE (Ovid SP) (1966 to Jun 2011), CINAHL (EBSCO) (1982 to Jun 2011), PsycINFO (OvidSP) (1966 to Jun 2011), review articles and reference lists of relevant articles. We contacted principal investigators and experts in the field. Selection Criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs and quasi-RCTs evaluating the effects of information interventions that orient patients and their carers/family to a cancer care facility. Data collection and analysis: Results of searches were reviewed against the pre-determined criteria for inclusion by two review authors. The primary outcomes were knowledge and understanding; health status and wellbeing, evaluation of care, and harms. Secondary outcomes were communication, skills acquisition, behavioural outcomes, service delivery, and health professional outcomes. We pooled results of RCTs using mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Main results: We included four RCTs involving 610 participants. All four trials aimed to investigate the effects of orientation programs for cancer patients to a cancer facility. There was high risk of bias across studies. Findings from two of the RCTs demonstrated significant benefits of the orientation intervention in relation to levels of distress (mean difference (MD) -8.96 (95% confidence interval (CI) -11.79 to -6.13), but non-significant benefits in relation to state anxiety levels (MD -9.77 (95% CI -24.96 to 5.41). Other outcomes for participants were generally positive (e.g. more knowledgeable about the cancer centre and cancer therapy, better coping abilities). No harms or adverse effects were measured or reported by any of the included studies. There were insufficient data on the other outcomes of interest. Authors conclusion: This review has demonstrated the feasibility and some potential benefits of orientation interventions. There was a low level of evidence suggesting that orientation interventions can reduce distress in patients. However, most of the other outcomes remain inconclusive (patient knowledge recall/ satisfaction). The majority of studies were subject to high risk of bias, and were likely to be insufficiently powered. Further well conducted and powered RCTs are required to provide evidence for determining the most appropriate intensity, nature, mode and resources for such interventions. Patient and carer-focused outcomes should be included.

Can we deliver both population-based and personalized approaches to cancer care?

Responding to the individual needs of the person affected by cancer is a fundamental tenet of nursing care. The evidence base to enable highly personalized approaches to the way we provide care has grown enormously in recent years. Today, we have a much better understanding of the mechanisms underpinning health needs of people with cancer, as well as the wide range of environmental, sociocultural, psychological, and biological influences on these needs. This growing evidence base enables us to better target and tailor interventions in increasingly sophisticated ways.

Cancer-related psychosocial research : what are the perspectives of cancer care centre users on participation?

Purpose To explore the perspectives of cancer care centre users on participation in psychosocial research to inform research design and ethics. Methods The study is based on a qualitative research design. Fourteen semistructured interviews were carried in people diagnosed with cancer and carers. The interview included four main questions about practical barriers to participation, types of research design, motivating factors and the conduct of research in a cancer care support setting. The data were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Results Interviewees demonstrated a willingness to participate in psychosocial research within certain circumstances. There were no practical barriers identified, although they considered payment for research-related travel important. The most acceptable research design was the face-to-face interview and the least preferred was the randomised control trial. The factors that motivated participation were altruism, valuing research, and making a contribution to the centre. Interviewees supported the conduct of research in cancer care support centres conditional upon delaying recruitment during the initial months of users’ visits and its need to be discreet to avoid deterring visitors from accessing the centre. Conclusions The study concludes that the personal interaction between participants and researchers is the most important feature of decision-making by patients/carers to join studies. Taking into account the perspectives of people affected by cancer during the early stages of research design may enhance recruitment and retention and can contribute to the development of research protocols and ethics.

Racial differences in physical activity among breast cancer survivors : implications for breast cancer care

Background: Physical activity after breast cancer diagnosis is associated with improved survival. This study examines levels of and changes in physical activity following breast cancer diagnosis, overall and by race. Methods: The Carolina Breast Cancer Study, Phase III, assessed pre- and post-diagnosis physical activity levels in a cohort of 1,735 women, aged 20-74, diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between 2008 and 2011 in 44 counties of North Carolina. Logistic regression and analysis of variance were used to examine whether demographic, behavioral and clinical characteristics were associated with activity levels. Results: Only 35% of breast cancer survivors met current physical activity guidelines post-diagnosis. A decrease in activity following diagnosis was reported by 59% of patients, with the average study participant reducing their activity by 230 minutes (95% CI: 190, 270). Following adjustment for potential confounders, when compared to white women, African-American women were less likely to meet national physical activity guidelines post-diagnosis (odds ratio: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.88), reported less weekly post-diagnosis physical activity (182 vs. 215 minutes; p=0.13), and reported higher average reductions in pre- versus post-diagnosis weekly activity (262 vs. 230 minutes; p-value = 0.13). Conclusion: Despite compelling evidence demonstrating the benefits of physical activity post-breast cancer, it is clear that more work needs to be done to promote physical activity in breast cancer patients, especially among African-American women.

A randomised trial of a psychosocial intervention for cancer patients integrated into routine care: The PROMPT study (promoting optimal outcomes in mood through tailored psychosocial therapies)

Background Despite evidence that up to 35% of patients with cancer experience significant distress, access to effective psychosocial care is limited by lack of systematic approaches to assessment, a paucity of psychosocial services, and patient reluctance to accept treatment either because of perceived stigma or difficulties with access to specialist psycho-oncology services due to isolation or disease burden. This paper presents an overview of a randomised study to evaluate the effectiveness of a brief tailored psychosocial Intervention delivered by health professionals in cancer care who undergo focused training and participate in clinical supervision. Methods/design Health professionals from the disciplines of nursing, occupational therapy, speech pathology, dietetics, physiotherapy or radiation therapy will participate in training to deliver the psychosocial Intervention focusing on core concepts of supportive-expressive, cognitive and dignity-conserving care. Health professional training will consist of completion of a self-directed manual and participation in a skills development session. Participating health professionals will be supported through structured clinical supervision whilst delivering the Intervention. In the stepped wedge design each of the 5 participating clinical sites will be allocated in random order from Control condition to Training then delivery of the Intervention. A total of 600 patients will be recruited across all sites. Based on level of distress or risk factors eligible patients will receive up to 4 sessions, each of up to 30 minutes in length, delivered face-to-face or by telephone. Participants will be assessed at baseline and 10-week follow-up. Patient outcome measures include anxiety and depression, quality of life, unmet psychological and supportive care needs. Health professional measures include psychological morbidity, stress and burnout. Process evaluation will be conducted to assess perceptions of participation in the study and the factors that may promote translation of learning into practice. Discussion This study will provide important information about the effectiveness of a brief tailored psychological Intervention for patients with cancer and the potential to prevent development of significant distress in patients considered at risk. It will yield data about the feasibility of this model of care in routine clinical practice and identify enablers and barriers to its systematic implementation in cancer settings.

Development, implementation and evaluation of a cancer survivor self-management care plan

Aim There is a growing population of people with cancer who experience physiological and psychological effects that persist long after treatment is complete. Interventions that enhance survivors’ self-management abilities might help offset these effects. The aim of this pilot study was to develop, implement and evaluate interventions tailored to assist patients to manage post-treatment health issues effectively. Method In this pre-post intervention cohort study, participants were recruited on completion of cancer treatment. Participants recruited preimplementation, who received usual care, comprised the control group. Participants recruited later formed the intervention group. In the intervention group, the Cancer Care Coordinator developed an individualised, structured Cancer Survivor Self-management Care Plan. Participants were interviewed on completion of treatment (baseline) and at three months. Assessments concerned health needs (CaSUN), self-efficacy in adjusting and coping with cancer and health-related quality of life (FACIT-B or FACT-C). The impact of the intervention was determined by independent t-tests of change scores. Results The intervention (n = 32) and control groups (n = 35) were comparable on demographic and clinical characteristics. Sample mean age was 54 + 10 years. Cancer diagnoses were breast (82%) and colorectal (18%). Statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) indicated improvement in the intervention group for: (a) functional well-being, from the FACIT, (Control: M = −0.69, SE = 0.91; Intervention: M = 3.04, SE = 1.13); and (b) self-efficacy in maintaining social relationships, (Control: M = −0.333, SE = 0.33; Intervention: M = 0.621, SE = 0.27). No significant differences were found in health needs, other subscales of quality of life, the extent and number of strategies used in coping and adjusting to cancer and in other domains of self-efficacy. Conclusions While the results should be interpreted with caution, due to the non-randomised nature of the study and the small sample size, they indicate the potential benefits of tailored self-management interventions warrant further investigation in this context.

Adverse breast cancer treatment effects: The economic case for making rehabilitative programs standard of care

Purpose: The purpose of this work was to evaluate the patient-borne financial cost of common, adverse breast cancer treatment-associated effects, comparing cost across women with or without these side-effects. Methods: 287 Australian women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer were prospectively followed starting at six months post-surgery for 12 months, with three-monthly assessment of detailed treatment-related side effects and their direct and indirect patient costs attributable to breast cancer. Bootstrapping statistics were used to analyze cost data and adjusted logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between costs and adverse events from breast cancer. Costs were inflated and converted from 2002 Australian to 2014 US dollars. Results: More than 90% of women experienced at least one adverse effect (i.e. post-surgical issue, reaction to radiotherapy, upper-body symptoms or reduced function, lymphedema, fatigue or weight gain). On average, women paid $5,636 (95%CI: $4,694, $6,577) in total costs. Women with any one of the following symptoms (fatigue, reduced upper-body function, upper-body symptoms) or women who report ≥4 adverse treatment-related effects, have 1.5 to nearly 4 times the odds of having higher healthcare costs than women who do not report these complaints (p<0.05). Conclusions: Women face substantial economic burden due to a range of treatment-related health problems, which may persist beyond the treatment period. Improving breast cancer care by incorporating prospective surveillance of treatment-related side effects, and strategies for prevention and treatment of concerns (e.g., exercise) has real potential for reducing patient-borne costs.

Provision of survivorship care for patients with haematological malignancy at completion of treatment: a cancer nursing practice survey study

Purpose Many haematological cancer survivors report long-term physiological and psychosocial effects, which persist far beyond treatment completion. Cancer services have been required to extend care to the post-treatment phase to implement survivorship care strategies into routine practice. As key members of the multidisciplinary team, cancer nurses’ perspectives are essential to inform future developments in survivorship care provision. Methods This is a pilot survey study, involving 119 nurses caring for patients with haematological malignancy in an Australian tertiary cancer care centre. The participants completed an investigator developed survey designed to assess cancer care nurses’ perspectives on their attitudes, confidence levels, and practice in relation to post-treatment survivorship care for patients with a haematological malignancy. Results Overall, the majority of participants agreed that all of the survivorship interventions included in the survey should be within the scope of the nursing role. Nurses reported being least confident in discussing fertility and employment/financial issues with patients and conducting psychosocial distress screening. The interventions performed least often included, discussing fertility, intimacy and sexuality issues and communicating survivorship care with the patient’s primary health care providers. Nurses identified lack of time, limited educational resources, lack of dedicated end-of-treatment consultation and insufficient skills/knowledge as the key barriers to survivorship care provision. Conclusion Cancer centres should implement an appropriate model of survivorship care and provide improved training and educational resources for nurses to enable them to deliver quality survivorship care and meet the needs of haematological cancer survivors.

Psychometric properties of an Australian supportive care needs assessment tool for Indigenous patients with cancer

BACKGROUND There are significant disparities in cancer outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. Identifying the unmet supportive care needs of Indigenous Australians with cancer is imperative to improve their cancer care. The purpose of this study was to test the psychometric properties of a supportive care needs assessment tool for Indigenous Australian (SCNAT-IP) cancer patients. METHODS The SCNAT-IP was administered to 248 Indigenous Australians diagnosed with a range of cancer types and stages, and received treatment in one of four Queensland hospitals. All 39 items were assessed for ceiling and floor effects and analysed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to determine construct validity. Identified factors were assessed for internal consistency and convergent validity to validated psychosocial tools. RESULTS EFA revealed a four-factor structure (physical and psychological, hospital care, information and communication, and practical and cultural needs) explaining 51% of the variance. Internal consistency of four subscales was good, with Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficients ranging from 0.70-0.89. Convergent validity was supported by significant correlations between the SCNAT-IP with the Distress Thermometer (r=0.60, p<0.001), and The Cancer Worry Chart (r=0.58, p<0.001) and a moderately strong negative correlation with Assessment of Quality of Life questionnaire (r=-0.56, p<0.001). CONCLUSION These data provide initial support for the SCNAT-IP a measure of multiple supportive care needs domains specific to Indigenous Australian cancer patients undergoing treatment.