Improving Communication in Adolescent Cancer Care: A Multiperspective Study.

BACKGROUND Professionals treating adolescents with cancer must communicate well with them and their parents. Evidence suggests that the communication needs of this population are rarely met. Skills training can improve professional communication, but has been criticized for not being based on the experience of the participants in the clinical encounter. We took a multiperspective approach, drawing on perspectives of former adolescents with cancer, patients' parents, physicians, and nurses with the aim to provide suggestions for improvement in communication in adolescent cancer care. METHODS Adolescent cancer survivors (n = 16), parents (n = 8), pediatric oncologists (n = 12), and pediatric oncology nurses (n = 18) participated in 11 focus groups. They discussed their experiences communicating with each other. Transcripts were analyzed by thematic analysis. RESULTS We identified themes within the following sections: (1) The framework in which professionals communicate with adolescents with cancer (regression in a time of detachment, adolescents' perception and knowledge of illness, cognitive versus legal maturity, "lost in transition" between pediatric and adult oncology); (2) communication difficulties between professionals and patients and parents (professionals and patients/parents identified the other party as the source of difficulties), and (3) effective professional communication (there was some overlap on how doctors and nurses should communicate, along with substantially different expectations for the two professions). CONCLUSIONS The framework within which professionals communicate, the different perspectives on the factors that make communication difficult, and the different expectations regarding good communication by doctors and nurses should be considered when communication skills training courses are developed for professionals who work in adolescent oncology.

Determinants of quality of advanced cancer care in Latin America. A look at five countries: Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, Mexico and Peru

The World Health Organization reports that nearly half a million people died of cancer in Latin America in 2001. As a growing public health problem, cancer is now either the first or second leading cause of death among adults in most Latin American nations. Despite these trends, information on the quality of care people with advanced cancer in Latin America receive has been limited. This study assessed the quality of advanced cancer care in diverse Latin American countries and institutions by surveying cancer care providers from: Argentina; Brazil; Cuba; Mexico; and Peru. This study also identified the most salient factors that influence the quality of this care at the national and institutional levels and compared these factors across countries. This study was based on the secondary analyses of data collected by the University of Texas M. D. Anderson's WHO/PAHO Collaborating Center in Supportive Cancer Care from March 2000 to November 2002. The sample for this survey was a convenience sample of physicians and nurses who treat cancer patients in these regions. Strategies for the dissemination of this survey included: mass mailings; distribution at professional meetings/conferences; collaboration with regional institutions, professional organizations and PAHO; and the posting of online surveys. The strongest predictor of providers' assessments of the quality of advanced cancer care was their ratings of access to care. This major finding reflects a shared equitable notion of quality care among providers from diverse countries and medical institutions that is highly interrelated with providing accessible care to those with advanced cancer. Higher ratings of the affordability of care, an increased reported availability of end-of-life services and opioid analgesics, practicing in either a private hospital or specialized cancer center, and practicing in Cuba were also associated with higher provider ratings of the quality of advanced cancer care. The findings of this study contribute towards the much needed body of knowledge that may guide the formulation of policies and interventions aimed at improving the care for people with advanced cancer in Latin America. ^

Universal Screening for Familial Colorectal Cancer Syndromes at Seattle Cancer Care Alliance: Qualitative Study of Providers involved in Implementation and Patients Experience with First Wave of Testing

Thesis (Master's)--University of Washington, 2016-06

The professional role of breast cancer nurses in multi-disciplinary breast cancer care teams

Since the 1970s breast cancer services have witnessed considerable changes in the management of patients. One significant change was the introduction of specialist core personnel, including the breast care nurse (BCN). The role of the BCN has been gaining credence rapidly in the British NHS and this service is perhaps the paradigm of care for other services. With the lack of specific evidence of the role of specialist nurses in the breast care team, the current study aims to explore this area by in-depth interviews with core team members, and observations of 16 multi-disciplinary teams in England. The study explores the following themes: Nurses' unique informal management leadership role in ensuring the co-ordination, communication and planning of the team work; nurses' innovatory role in making the bureaucracy respond to patients and their relatives needs; nurses supportive role in the provision of expert advice and guidance to other members of the team; nurses confidence and humour in well-performing teams; and the limitations of the professional role of the breast cancer nurse. This study indicates that there is evidence that the BCN is practicing at an advanced level of practice. However, there is a severe lack of evidence-based description of that advanced practice. Cancer nurses including the BCNs should develop and participate in programmes of research in line with cancer legislation in order to build an evidence base that ultimately supports their unique role. © 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Shooting for the Moon or Flying Too Near the Sun? Crossing the Value Rubicon in Precision Cancer Care

In his last two State of the Union addresses, President Barack Obama has focused on the need to deliver innovative solutions to improve human health, through the Precision Medicine Initiative in 2015 and the recently announced Cancer Moonshot in 2016. Precision cancer care has delivered clear patient benefit, but even for high-impact medicines such as imatinib mesylate (Glivec) in chronic myeloid leukaemia, the excitement at the success of this practice-changing clinical intervention has been somewhat tempered by the escalating price of this 'poster child' for precision cancer medicine (PCM). Recent studies on the costs of cancer drugs have revealed significant price differentials, which are a major causative factor behind disparities in the access to new generations of immunological and molecularly targeted agents. In this perspective, we will discuss the benefits of PCM to modern cancer control, but also emphasise how increasing costs are rendering the current approaches to integrating the paradigm of PCM unsustainable. Despite the ever increasing pressure on cancer and health care budgets, innovation will and must continue. Value-based frameworks offer one of the most rational approaches for policymakers committed to improving cancer outcomes through a public health approach.

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.

What can we do to improve the coordination of care for cancer patients?

The delivery of cancer services has become increasingly complex as we move to more personalized diagnostic and treatment approaches and cancer is recognized as a chronic disease. Cancer patients today typically come into contact with multiple health services over long periods. Healthcare reforms in many countries also mean that the various services involved in cancer care are funded by a confusing mix of personal, private insurer, and government sources. It is not surprising then that many patients today tell us their cancer experience is disjointed. Importantly, this lack of coordination of cancer care results in poor outcomes that can range from minor inconvenience at best to potentially life-threatening safety incidents at worst.

Quality of care for cancer patients on home parenteral nutrition: Development of key interventions and outcome indicators using a two-round Delphi approach

Purpose: Clear recommendations on how to guide patients with cancer on home parenteral nutrition (HPN) are lacking as the use of HPN in this population remains a controversial issue. Therefore, the aims of this study were to rank treatment recommendations and main outcome indicators to ensure high-quality care and to indicate differences in care concerning benign versus malignant patients. Methods: Treatment recommendations, identified from published guidelines, were used as a starting point for a two-round Delphi approach. Comments and additional interventions proposed in the first round were reevaluated in the second round. Ordinal logistic regression with SPSS 2.0 was used to identify differences in care concerning benign versus malignant patients. Results: Twenty-seven experts from five European countries completed two Delphi rounds. After the second Delphi round, the top three most important outcome indicators were (1) quality of life (QoL), (2) incidence of hospital readmission and (3) incidence of catheter-related infections. Forty-two interventions were considered as important for quality of care (28/42 based on published guidelines; 14/42 newly suggested by Delphi panel). The topics 'Liver disease' and 'Metabolic bone disease' were considered less important for cancer patients, together with use of infusion pumps (p = 0.004) and monitoring of vitamins and trace elements (p = 0.000). Monitoring of QoL is considered more important for cancer patients (p = 0.03). Conclusion: Using a two-round Delphi approach, we developed a minimal set of 42 interventions that may be used to determine quality of care in HPN patients with malignancies. This set of interventions differs from a similar set developed for benign patients. © 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.

An exploration of the experience of cancer cachexia: What patients and their families want from health care professionals

The aim of this paper is to investigate the perceptions of patients and family members with regard to care received for cancer cachexia. A qualitative study recruited 27 participants, of which 15 were patients with advanced cancer who had primary cachexia and 12 were family members. Participants were recruited from a regional cancer centre in the UK. All participants took part in a domiciliary interview, which was transcribed verbatim for analysis. A major finding from analysis was ‘lack of response from health care professionals’ in relation to cancer cachexia management. This finding illuminated that patients and their family members wanted three things from healthcare professionals. They wanted their profound weight loss acknowledged, they wanted information about it and why it was happening and they wanted interventions to deal with it. This paper provides powerful messages for healthcare professionals and highlights the needs of patients and their family regarding cancer cachexia management. Patients and their families want this problem addressed by healthcare professionals. This client group requires supportive healthcare interventions, so that they can understand the nature and impact of this syndrome.