Psychosocial outcomes of an electronic self-report assessment and self-care intervention for patients with cancer: a randomized controlled trial

Feasibility and User Experience of Digital Patient Monitoring for Real-World Patients With Lung or Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Digital patient monitoring (DPM) tools can facilitate early symptom management for patients with cancer through systematic symptom reporting; however, low adherence can be a challenge. We assessed patient/healthcare professional (HCP) use of DPM in routine clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with locally advanced/metastatic lung cancer or HER2-positive breast cancer received locally approved/reimbursed drugs alongside DPM, with elements tailored by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, on the Kaiku Health DPM platform. Patient access to the DPM tool was through their own devices (eg, laptops, PCs, smartphones, or tablets), via either a browser or an app on Apple iOS or Android devices. Coprimary endpoints were patient DPM tool adoption (positive threshold: 60%) and week 1-6 adherence to weekly symptom reporting (positive threshold: 70%). Secondary endpoints included experience and clinical impact.

RESULTS

At data cutoff (June 9, 2022), adoption was 85% and adherence was 76%. Customer satisfaction and effort scores for patients were 76% and 82%, respectively, and 83% and 79% for HCPs. Patients spent approximately 10 minutes using the DPM tool and completed approximately 1.0 symptom questionnaires per week (completion time 1-4 minutes). HCPs spent approximately 1-3 minutes a week using the tool per patient. Median time to HCP review for alerted versus non-alerted symptom questionnaires was 19.6 versus 21.5 hours. Most patients and HCPs felt that the DPM tool covered/mostly covered symptoms experienced (71% and 75%), was educational (65% and 92%), and improved patient-HCP conversations (70% and 83%) and cancer care (51% and 71%).

CONCLUSION

The DPM tool demonstrated positive adoption, adherence, and user experience for patients with lung/breast cancer, suggesting that DPM tools may benefit clinical cancer care.

Effects of digital self-management symptom interventions on symptom outcomes in adult cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Digital self-management (SM) interventions targeting symptom relief have demonstrated positive as well as null outcomes, whereas no study has synthesized the effect of the interventions. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of digital SM symptom interventions on symptom outcomes in adult cancer patients.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis based on the previous scoping review was conducted. Six databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, the Cochrane Library, RISS [Korean], and KoreaMed [Korean]) were searched. Population was adult cancer patients. Intervention was SM interventions applying digital health tool targeting symptom management. Comparison was usual care, waitlist controls or active controls. The primary outcome was symptom burden, and the secondary outcomes were individual symptoms.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis of 32 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 7888 patients demonstrated that digital SM symptom interventions had a significant effect on reducing symptom burden (effect size [ES] = -0.230) and relieving pain (ES = -0.292), fatigue (ES = -0.417), anxiety (ES = -0.320), and depression (ES = -0.261).

CONCLUSIONS

Digital SM interventions can improve symptom outcomes in adult cancer patients. Oncology nurses should be aware that digital SM interventions have demonstrated promising outcomes in cancer patient care.

Effectiveness of routine provision of feedback from patient-reported outcome measurements for cancer care improvement: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Research shows that feeding back patient-reported outcome information to clinicians and/or patients could be associated with improved care processes and patient outcomes. Quantitative syntheses of intervention effects on oncology patient outcomes are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effects of patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) feedback intervention on oncology patient outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

We identified relevant studies from 116 references included in our previous Cochrane review assessing the intervention for the general population. In May 2022, we conducted a systematic search in five bibliography databases using predefined keywords for additional studies published after the Cochrane review.

STUDY SELECTION

We included randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of PROM feedback intervention on processes and outcomes of care for oncology patients.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

We used the meta-analytic approach to synthesize across studies measuring the same outcomes. We estimated pooled effects of the intervention on outcomes using Cohen's d for continuous data and risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval for dichotomous data. We used a descriptive approach to summarize studies which reported insufficient data for a meta-analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURES(S)

Health-related quality of life (HRQL), symptoms, patient-healthcare provider communication, number of visits and hospitalizations, number of adverse events, and overall survival.

RESULTS

We included 29 studies involving 7071 cancer participants. A small number of studies was available for each metanalysis (median = 3 studies, ranging from 2 to 9 studies) due to heterogeneity in the evaluation of the trials. We found that the intervention improved HRQL (Cohen's d = 0.23, 95% CI 0.11-0.34), mental functioning (Cohen's d = 0.14, 95% CI 0.02-0.26), patient-healthcare provider communication (Cohen's d = 0.41, 95% CI 0.20-0.62), and 1-year overall survival (OR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.48-0.86). The risk of bias across studies was considerable in the domains of allocation concealment, blinding, and intervention contamination.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Although we found evidence to support the intervention for highly relevant outcomes, our conclusions are tempered by the high risk of bias relating mainly to intervention design. PROM feedback for oncology patients may improve processes and outcomes for cancer patients but more high-quality evidence is required.

Assessing Depressive Symptoms in Patients With Cancer Treated With Interleukin-2: A Comparison of 2 Measures

BACKGROUND

High-dose interleukin-2 is a therapy available for individuals with renal cell carcinoma; however, it can produce adverse effects, specifically depressive symptoms. There is limited information regarding the trajectory of depressive symptoms and measurement-based care assessment of depressive symptoms.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose was to describe the trajectory of depressive symptoms and compare 2 depression measures.

METHODS

A descriptive, mixed-method case study approach was used to describe the longitudinal trajectory of depressive symptoms The qualitative assessment included a journal entry and an interview. The quantitative depression symptom severity measures included the 8-item self-report Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Depression and the 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician Rated (IDS-C).

RESULTS

Ten cases were enrolled. The maximum number of interleukin-2 doses that any patient received within a single hospitalization ranged from 4 to 12. Mean scores on the 8-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Depression showed no changes in depressive symptoms from pretreatment to posttreatment, nor across hospitalizations. Mean total scores on the IDS-C increased from "normal" to "mild severity" depressive symptom range across all treatment cycles, suggesting transient depressive symptoms within hospitalizations. Qualitative data from the case supported the IDS-C increase, suggesting that the patient developed depressive symptoms pretreatment to posttreatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the trajectory of depressive symptoms allows for the identification of critical time points when depressive symptoms present and change across treatment. It is critical to use measurement-based care using validated measures to assess for the presence and changes in depressive symptoms.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Validated self-report or clinician-rated depression symptom measures should be used to document the presence or absence of depressive symptoms in this population.

Assessing the impact of digital patient monitoring on health outcomes and healthcare resource usage in addition to the feasibility of its combination with at-home treatment, in participants receiving systemic anticancer treatment in clinical practice: protocol for an interventional, open-label, multicountry platform study (ORIGAMA)

INTRODUCTION

Digital patient monitoring (DPM) tools can enable more effective clinical care and improved patient outcomes in cancer. However, their broad adoption requires ease of use and demonstration of real-world clinical utility/impact. ORIGAMA (MO42720) is an interventional, open-label, multicountry platform study investigating the clinical utility of DPM tools and specific treatments. ORIGAMA will begin with two cohorts that aim to assess the impact of the atezolizumab-specific Roche DPM Module (hosted on the Kaiku Health DPM platform (Helsinki, Finland)) on health outcomes and healthcare resource usage, and its feasibility to support at-home treatment administration, in participants receiving systemic anticancer treatment. Other digital health solutions may be added to future cohorts.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In Cohort A, participants with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), extensive-stage SCLC or Child Pugh A unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma will be randomised to a locally approved anticancer regimen containing intravenous atezolizumab (TECENTRIQ, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd/Genentech) and local standard-of-care support, with/without the Roche DPM Module. Cohort B will assess the feasibility of the Roche DPM Module in supporting administration of three cycles of subcutaneous atezolizumab (1875 mg; Day 1 of each 21-day cycle) in the hospital, followed by 13 cycles at home by a healthcare professional (ie, flexible care), in participants with programmed cell-death ligand 1-positive, early-stage NSCLC. The primary endpoints are the mean difference in change of the participant-reported Total Symptom Interference Score at Week 12 from baseline (Cohort A) and flexible care adoption rate at Cycle 6 (Cohort B).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study will be conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki, and/or the applicable laws and regulations of the country in which the research is conducted, whichever affords the greater protection to the individual. The study received its first Ethics Committee approval in Spain in October 2022. Participants will provide written informed consent in a face-to-face setting. The results of this study will be presented at national and/or international congresses and disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05694013.

Management of Anxiety and Depression in Adult Survivors of Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To update the American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on the management of anxiety and depression in adult cancer survivors.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary expert panel convened to update the guideline. A systematic review of evidence published from 2013-2021 was conducted.

RESULTS

The evidence base consisted of 17 systematic reviews ± meta analyses (nine for psychosocial interventions, four for physical exercise, three for mindfulness-based stress reduction [MBSR], and one for pharmacologic interventions), and an additional 44 randomized controlled trials. Psychological, educational, and psychosocial interventions led to improvements in depression and anxiety. Evidence for pharmacologic management of depression and anxiety in cancer survivors was inconsistent. The lack of inclusion of survivors from minoritized groups was noted and identified as an important consideration to provide high-quality care for ethnic minority populations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended to use a stepped-care model, that is, provide the most effective and least resource-intensive intervention based on symptom severity. All oncology patients should be offered education regarding depression and anxiety. For patients with moderate symptoms of depression, clinicians should offer cognitive behavior therapy (CBT), behavioral activation (BA), MBSR, structured physical activity, or empirically supported psychosocial interventions. For patients with moderate symptoms of anxiety, clinicians should offer CBT, BA, structured physical activity, acceptance and commitment therapy, or psychosocial interventions. For patients with severe symptoms of depression or anxiety, clinicians should offer cognitive therapy, BA, CBT, MBSR, or interpersonal therapy. Treating clinicians may offer a pharmacologic regimen for depression or anxiety for patients who do not have access to first-line treatment, prefer pharmacotherapy, have previously responded well to pharmacotherapy, or have not improved following first-line psychological or behavioral management.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/survivorship-guidelines.

Digital Health Interventions for Adult Patients With Cancer Evaluated in Randomized Controlled Trials: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Digital care has become an essential component of health care. Interventions for patients with cancer need to be effective and safe, and digital health interventions must adhere to the same requirements.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify currently available digital health interventions developed and evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) targeting adult patients with cancer.

METHODS

A scoping review using the JBI methodology was conducted. The participants were adult patients with cancer, and the concept was digital health interventions. The context was open, and sources were limited to RCT effectiveness studies. The PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library, Research Information Sharing Service, and KoreaMed databases were searched. Data were extracted and analyzed to achieve summarized results about the participants, types, functions, and outcomes of digital health interventions.

RESULTS

A total of 231 studies were reviewed. Digital health interventions were used mostly at home (187/231, 81%), and the web-based intervention was the most frequently used intervention modality (116/231, 50.2%). Interventions consisting of multiple functional components were most frequently identified (69/231, 29.9%), followed by those with the self-manage function (67/231, 29%). Web-based interventions targeting symptoms with the self-manage and multiple functions and web-based interventions to treat cognitive function and fear of cancer recurrence consistently achieved positive outcomes. More studies supported the positive effects of web-based interventions to inform decision-making and knowledge. The effectiveness of digital health interventions targeting anxiety, depression, distress, fatigue, health-related quality of life or quality of life, pain, physical activity, and sleep was subject to their type and function. A relatively small number of digital health interventions specifically targeted older adults (6/231, 2.6%) or patients with advanced or metastatic cancer (22/231, 9.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review summarized digital health interventions developed and evaluated in RCTs involving adult patients with cancer. Systematic reviews of the identified digital interventions are strongly recommended to integrate digital health interventions into clinical practice. The identified gaps in digital health interventions for cancer care need to be reflected in future digital health research.

Usability and acceptability of the electronic self-assessment and care (eSAC) program in advanced ovarian cancer: A mixed methods study

OBJECTIVE

To determine usability and acceptability of the electronic self-assessment and care (eSAC) web-based, patient reported outcome (PRO) program for people with advanced ovarian cancer.

METHODS

Patient participants recruited from a single ambulatory site were prompted by email to answer symptom/quality of life items prior to each clinic visit. Patient participant acceptability was measured with the Acceptability E-Scale Score (AES). Usability was measured among a subset of patient participants using semi-structured interviews. Clinician participant acceptability and usability were measured via survey and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic content analysis. A mixed methods analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Of 163 eligible patients approached, 143 (87.7%) provided written consent. Patient participants (n = 71) who created an eSAC report prior to at least 3 clinic visits, rated eSAC as acceptable with a mean AES score of 26.19 ± 3.36 (out of 30). Interview data from patient participants (n = 33) revealed that eSAC was easy to use and important to the clinic visit conversation. Data from clinician surveys (n = 8) and focus groups (n = 3) revealed that the eSAC program was acceptable and useful for clinicians. Qualitative analysis suggested process improvements from patients and clinicians for effectiveness in the advanced ovarian cancer setting. Mixed methods analysis demonstrated no major discrepancies between quantitative and qualitative findings, with the qualitative data broadening understanding of quantitative ratings.

CONCLUSION

eSAC was useful and acceptable in this setting. This PRO is a promising strategy for enhancing patient-centered care for people with advanced ovarian cancer.

Web-based self-management intervention for patients with cancer: A meta-analysis and systematic review

AIM

This study is conducted to synthesize the effects of web-based self-management intervention on patients with cancer.

EVALUATION

We searched Web of Science, PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library databases for related randomized controlled trials from inception through 2021. Reference lists of included studies were also searched for additional qualified studies. For quantitative data synthesis, standardized mean differences were used to eliminate the influence caused by different scales. Narrative synthesis was also performed.

KEY ISSUES

Nine in 1149 studies were included for narrative and quantitative analysis. The pooled data suggested that patients in the intervention group had better quality of life (standardized mean difference = 1.091, 95% confidence interval: 0.155-2.028) and lower depression (standardized mean difference = -1.634, 95% confidence interval: -2.980 to -0.287) than those in the control group. The result of narrative synthesis is that patients receiving intervention had lower cancer or symptom distress and higher self-efficacy than those in the control group.

CONCLUSION

Web-based self-management intervention improved lives of cancer survivors.

The efficacy of web or mobile-based interventions to alleviate emotional symptoms in people with advanced cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This review aims to critically evaluate the efficacy of web or mobile-based (WMB) interventions impacting emotional symptoms in patients with advanced cancer.

METHOD

Articles published from 1991 to 2019 were identified using PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus. Only interventions involving adults with advanced cancer using a WMB intervention to manage emotional symptoms were included. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I and ROB2 tools. Studies that reported mean symptom scores were pooled using a random-effects model, and standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% CIs were calculated.

RESULTS

Twenty-three of the 1177 screened studies met the inclusion criteria, and a total sample of 2558 patients were included. The sample was 57% female, and 33% had advanced cancer with mean age of 57.15 years. Thirteen studies evaluated anxiety, nineteen evaluated depression, and eleven evaluated distress. Intervention components included general information, tracking, communication, multimedia choice, interactive online activities, tailoring/feedback, symptom management support content, and self-monitoring. Overall pooled results showed that WMB interventions' effects on decreasing anxiety (SMD - 0.20, - 0.45 to 0.05, I² = 72%), depression (SMD - 0.10, - 0.30 to 0.11, I² = 73%), and distress (SMD - 0.20, - 0.47 to 0.06, I² = 60%) were not significant for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In contrast, WMB interventions significantly decreased symptoms of anxiety (p = .002) in a sub-group analysis of non-RCTs.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated that WMB interventions were not efficacious in alleviating emotional symptoms in adults with advanced cancer. Considering the diversity of interventions, the efficacy of WMB interventions and its impacts on emotional symptoms should be further explored.

Routine provision of feedback from patient-reported outcome measurements to healthcare providers and patients in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) assess a patient's subjective appraisal of health outcomes from their own perspective. Despite hypothesised benefits that feedback  on PROMs can support decision-making in clinical practice and improve outcomes, there is uncertainty surrounding the effectiveness of PROMs feedback.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of PROMs feedback to patients, or healthcare workers, or both on patient-reported health outcomes and processes of care.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, two other databases and two clinical trial registries on 5 October 2020. We searched grey literature and consulted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two review authors independently screened and selected studies for inclusion. We included randomised trials directly comparing the effects on outcomes and processes of care of PROMs feedback to healthcare professionals and patients, or both with the impact of not providing such information.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two groups of two authors independently extracted data from the included studies and evaluated study quality. We followed standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and EPOC. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. We conducted meta-analyses of the results where possible.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 116 randomised trials which assessed the effectiveness of PROMs feedback in improving processes or outcomes of care, or both in a broad range of disciplines including psychiatry, primary care, and oncology. Studies were conducted across diverse ambulatory primary and secondary care settings in North America, Europe and Australasia. A total of 49,785 patients were included across all the studies. The certainty of the evidence varied between very low and moderate. Many of the studies included in the review were at risk of performance and detection bias. The evidence suggests moderate certainty that PROMs feedback probably improves quality of life (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 0.26; 11 studies; 2687 participants), and leads to an increase in patient-physician communication (SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.52; 5 studies; 658 participants), diagnosis and notation (risk ratio (RR) 1.73, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.08; 21 studies; 7223 participants), and disease control (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.41; 14 studies; 2806 participants). The intervention probably makes little or no difference for general health perceptions (SMD 0.04, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.24; 2 studies, 552 participants; low-certainty evidence), social functioning (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.09; 15 studies; 2632 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and pain (SMD 0.00, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.08; 9 studies; 2386 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of PROMs feedback on physical functioning (14 studies; 2788 participants) and mental functioning (34 studies; 7782 participants), as well as fatigue (4 studies; 741 participants), as the certainty of the evidence was very low. We did not find studies reporting on adverse effects defined as distress following or related to PROM completion.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PROM feedback probably produces moderate improvements in communication between healthcare professionals and patients as well as in diagnosis and notation, and disease control, and small improvements to quality of life. Our confidence in the effects is limited by the risk of bias, heterogeneity and small number of trials conducted to assess outcomes of interest. It is unclear whether   many of these improvements are clinically meaningful or sustainable in the long term. There is a need for more high-quality studies in this area, particularly studies which employ cluster designs and utilise techniques to maintain allocation concealment.

Barriers and facilitators to the availability of efficacious self-directed digital health tools for adults living with cancer and their caregivers: A systematic literature review and author survey study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine barriers and facilitators to the dissemination of efficacious self-directed digital health tools for adults affected by cancer, and quantify funding used to develop and evaluate these digital health tools.

METHODS

We conducted: (1) a systematic literature review to identify efficacious self-directed digital health tools for adults affected by cancer, published between 2009 and 2019 and (2) an author survey to identify barriers and facilitators to dissemination of those tools, grant funding and the user centredness of their design (UCD) process.

RESULTS

Of 1314 screened articles, 29 articles describing 26 tools met the inclusion criteria. From 26 surveys sent, 12 were completed, 6 of which described disseminated tools. Whilst researchers' motivation and infrastructure support facilitate tool dissemination, limited funds, lack of infrastructure and limited research timelines are the most common barriers. A median of AUD$250,000 was spent on tools not disseminated to end-users.

CONCLUSION

Although incorporating UCD processes in the development of digital health tools is important, it is imperative to integrate implementation processes into the planning stages of tool development to ensure dissemination.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Researchers, academic institutions, funding agencies and government and non-government organisations all have roles to play to support long-term implementation.

Post-9/11 Veteran Satisfaction With the VA eScreening Program

INTRODUCTION

eScreening is a mobile health technology resource for veterans and staff to support Veterans Health Administration initiatives such as early identification of health problems, shared decision-making, and measurement-based care.

METHODS

We conducted an exploratory mixed methods retrospective study with newly enrolling post-9/11 veterans to (1) understand eScreening user experience and obtain practical feedback on the technology to guide improvements, (2) assess veteran satisfaction with eScreening following improvements to the technology, and (3) examine veteran characteristics associated with eScreening satisfaction. Focus group data were collected on user experience with eScreening from a sample of veterans who participated in an eScreening pilot. Guided by a user-centered design approach, findings informed improvements to the technology. Survey data were subsequently collected from a large cohort of veterans to assess satisfaction with the improved program. Questionnaire data were also collected to examine variables associated with eScreening satisfaction. Qualitative focus group data were analyzed using content analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize sociodemographic variables, questionnaires, and satisfaction ratings. Correlations were run to examine the relationship between certain veteran characteristics (eg, age, resiliency, anxiety, insomnia, post-traumatic stress disorder, somatic symptoms, depression, pain) and satisfaction with eScreening. All research activities were conducted at VA San Diego Healthcare System and approved by the Institutional Review Board.

RESULTS

Focus group data revealed that veterans were largely satisfied with eScreening, but they suggested some improvements (eg, to interface functionality), which were integrated into an updated version of eScreening. Following these changes, survey data revealed that veterans were highly satisfied with eScreening, including its usability, information security, and impact on health services. There were statistically significant, though not clinically meaningful relationships between health-related characteristics and satisfaction with eScreening. However, millennials showed significantly higher satisfaction ratings compared with non-millennials.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support the use of patient experiences and feedback to aide product development. In addition, post-9/11 veterans support the use of eScreening to assist health screening. However, evaluating the eScreening program in more diverse veteran groups and Veterans Affairs settings is needed to improve the generalizability of these findings to the larger veteran population.

Essential oncology nursing care along the cancer continuum

Oncology nurses are at the heart of tackling the increasing global burden of cancer. Their contribution is unique because of the scale and the diversity of care roles and responsibilities in cancer care. In this Series paper, to celebrate the International Year of the Nurse and Midwife, we highlight the contribution and impact of oncology nurses along the cancer care continuum. Delivering people-centred integrated care and optimal communication are essential components of oncology nursing care, which are often played down. More oncology nurses using, doing, and leading research will further show the key nursing impact on care as part of a team. The oncology nurse influence in saving lives through prevention and early detection of cancer is noteworthy. Supportive care, the central pillar of oncology nursing, enables and empowers people to self-manage where possible. Globally, oncology nurses make a great positive difference to cancer care worldwide; their crucial contribution throughout the continuum of care warrants the inclusion and promotion of nursing in every country's cancer strategy. 2020 is the year of the nurse: let us take this learning to the future.

Parallel Journeys of Patients with Cancer and Depression: Challenges and Opportunities for Technology-Enabled Collaborative Care

Depression is common but under-treated in patients with cancer, despite being a major modifiable contributor to morbidity and early mortality. Integrating psychosocial care into cancer services through the team-based Collaborative Care Management (CoCM) model has been proven to be effective in improving patient outcomes in cancer centers. However, there is currently a gap in understanding the challenges that patients and their care team encounter in managing co-morbid cancer and depression in integrated psycho-oncology care settings. Our formative study examines the challenges and needs of CoCM in cancer settings with perspectives from patients, care managers, oncologists, psychiatrists, and administrators, with a focus on technology opportunities to support CoCM. We find that: (1) patients with co-morbid cancer and depression struggle to navigate between their cancer and psychosocial care journeys, and (2) conceptualizing co-morbidities as separate and independent care journeys is insufficient for characterizing this complex care context. We then propose the parallel journeys framework as a conceptual design framework for characterizing challenges that patients and their care team encounter when cancer and psychosocial care journeys interact. We use the challenges discovered through the lens of this framework to highlight and prioritize technology design opportunities for supporting whole-person care for patients with co-morbid cancer and depression.

Distress Management, Version 3.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Distress is defined in the NCCN Guidelines for Distress Management as a multifactorial, unpleasant experience of a psychologic (ie, cognitive, behavioral, emotional), social, spiritual, and/or physical nature that may interfere with the ability to cope effectively with cancer, its physical symptoms, and its treatment. Early evaluation and screening for distress leads to early and timely management of psychologic distress, which in turn improves medical management. The panel for the Distress Management Guidelines recently added a new principles section including guidance on implementation of standards of psychosocial care for patients with cancer.

Implementing eScreening technology in four VA clinics: a mixed-method study

Background

Technology-based self-assessment (TB-SA) benefits patients and providers and has shown feasibility, ease of use, efficiency, and cost savings. A promising TB-SA, the VA eScreening program, has shown promise for the efficient and effective collection of mental and physical health information. To assist adoption of eScreening by healthcare providers, we assessed technology-related as well as individual- and system-level factors that might influence the implementation of eScreening in four diverse VA clinics.

Methods

This was a mixed-method, pre-post, quasi-experimental study originally designed as a quality improvement project. The clinics were selected to represent a range of environments that could potentially benefit from TB-SA and that made use of the variety eScreening functions. Because of limited resources, the implementation strategy consisted of staff education, training, and technical support as needed. Data was collected using pre- and post-implementation interviews or focus groups of leadership and clinical staff, eScreening usage data, and post-implementation surveys. Data was gathered on: 1) usability of eScreening; 2) knowledge about and acceptability and 3) facilitators and barriers to the successful implementation of eScreening.

Results

Overall, staff feedback about eScreening was positive. Knowledge about eScreening ranged widely between the clinics. Nearly all staff felt eScreening would fit well into their clinical setting at pre-implementation; however some felt it was a poor fit with emergent cases and older adults at post-implementation. Lack of adequate personnel support and perceived leadership support were barriers to implementation. Adequate training and technical assistance were cited as important facilitators. One clinic fully implemented eScreening, two partially implemented, and one clinic did not implement eScreening as part of normal practice after 6 months as measured by usage data and self-report. Organizational engagement survey scores were higher among clinics with full or partial implementation and low in the clinic that did not implement.

Conclusions

Despite some added work load for some staff and perceived lack of leadership support, eScreening was at least partially implemented in three clinics. The technology itself posed no barriers in any of the settings. An implementation strategy that accounts for increased work burden and includes accountability may help in future eScreening implementation efforts.

Note. This abstract was previously published (e.g., Annals of Behavioral Medicine 53: S1–S842, 2019).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4436-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Psychosocial and quality of life impact of scars in the surgical, traumatic and burn populations: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Despite the fact that millions of scars affect individuals annually, little is known about their psychosocial impact and overall quality of life (QOL) on individuals. Scars from multiple aetiologies may cause psychiatric and emotional disturbances, can limit physical functioning and increase costs to the healthcare system. The purpose of this protocol is to describe the methodological considerations that will guide the completion of a scoping review that will summarise the extent, range and nature of psychosocial health outcomes and QOL of scars of all aetiologies.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A modified Arksey and O'Malley (2005) framework will be completed, namely having ongoing consultation between experts from the beginning of the process, then (1) identifying the research question/s, (2) identifying the relevant studies from electronic databases and grey literature, with (3) study selection and (4) charting of data by two independent coders, and (5) collating, summarising and reporting data. Experts will include a health information specialist (TAW), scar expert (JSF), scoping review consultant (SCK), as well as at least two independent coders (NZ, AM).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval will not be sought for this scoping review. We plan to disseminate this research through publications, presentations and meetings with relevant stakeholders.

Supportive care needs and quality of life in patients with breast and gynecological cancer attending inpatient rehabilitation. A prospective study

BACKGROUND

Among patients with breast or gynecological cancer, supportive care needs are both highly prevalent and enduring. However, little is known about whether meeting patients' needs is accompanied by increased quality of life (QoL). We aimed to explore patients' supportive care needs reported at the beginning of inpatient rehabilitation and examined whether meeting these needs resulted in improved QoL.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a multicenter, prospective cohort study with 2 measurement occasions (beginning and end of inpatient rehabilitation), 292 patients with breast and gynecological cancer (mean age 55 years; 71% breast cancer) were enrolled. In 73%, time since diagnosis was longer than 6 months. We obtained self-reports of supportive care needs in 12 domains and measured QoL using the EORTC QLQ-C30 functioning subscales.

RESULTS

At the beginning of inpatient rehabilitation, top-ranking severe supportive care needs concerned coordination of care (48%), medical information (45%), alleviation of physical symptoms (42%) and support with improving health behaviors (36%). At the end of inpatient rehabilitation, all needs assessed declined significantly, although many patients still expressed strong needs in some domains. However, meeting patients' needs was accompanied by improvements in all functioning subscales.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to show that meeting breast and gynecological cancer patients' supportive care needs during inpatient rehabilitation resulted in improved QoL. Given the considerable proportions of patients still reporting unmet needs at the end of their stay, stronger and continuing efforts seem warranted to meet these needs and thus further increase QoL.

Electronic Systems for Patients to Report and Manage Side Effects of Cancer Treatment: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

There has been a dramatic increase in the development of electronic systems to support cancer patients to report and manage side effects of treatment from home. Systems vary in the features they offer to patients, which may affect how patients engage with them and how they improve patient-centered outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to (1) describe the features and functions of existing electronic symptom reporting systems (eg, symptom monitoring, tailored self-management advice), and (2) explore which features may be associated with patient engagement and patient-centered outcomes.

METHODS

The review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) and followed guidelines from the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (University of York, United Kingdom). Primary searches were undertaken of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Health Technology Assessment databases. Secondary searches were undertaken by screening reference lists and citations. Two researchers applied broad inclusion criteria to identify and select relevant records. Data were extracted and summarized using Microsoft Excel. In order to meet the aims, the study selection, data extraction, and data synthesis comprised two stages: (1) identifying and characterizing available systems and (2) summarizing data on patient engagement and patient-centered outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 77 publications relating to 41 distinct systems. In Stage 1, all publications were included (N=77). The features identified that supported clinicians and care were facility for health professionals to remotely access and monitor patient-reported data (24/41, 58%) and function to send alerts to health professionals for severe symptoms (17/41, 41%). Features that supported patients were facility for patients to monitor/review their symptom reports over time (eg, graphs) (19/41, 46%), general patient information about cancer treatment and side effects (17/41, 41%), tailored automated patient advice on symptom management (12/41, 29%), feature for patients to communicate with the health care team (6/41, 15%), and a forum for patients to communicate with one another (4/41, 10%). In Stage 2, only publications that included some data on patient engagement or patient-centered outcomes were included (N=29). A lack of consistency between studies in how engagement was defined, measured, or reported, and a wide range of methods chosen to evaluate systems meant that it was not possible to compare across studies or make conclusions on relationships with system features.

CONCLUSIONS

Electronic systems have the potential to help patients manage side effects of cancer treatment, with some evidence to suggest a positive effect on patient-centered outcomes. However, comparison across studies is difficult due to the wide range of assessment tools used. There is a need to develop guidelines for assessing and reporting engagement with systems, and a set of core outcomes for evaluation. We hope that this review will contribute to the field by introducing a taxonomy for characterizing system features.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42016035915; www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42016035915.

Self-Care Support for Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer: iCancerHealth

BACKGROUND

Patient-centered symptom assessment and management tools allow patients to perform self-assessments and engage in self-symptom management. Efficacious tools exist for reducing symptom distress; however, little is known about feature-specific use.

OBJECTIVES

This article evaluates the feasibility of the iCancerHealth app as an adjunct to usual patient education regarding cancer symptoms and medication management.

METHODS

We conducted a single-arm, pilot study grounded in the health outcomes model. Our evaluation included (1) enrollment rates, (2) 2-month utilization rates, (3) patient acceptability, and (4) clinician satisfaction with the provider-side application. English-speaking, adult patients receiving care in the gastrointestinal oncology service of a comprehensive cancer center were invited to participate. Research coordinators enrolled consenting participants who had a personal, Internet-connected device; participants registered and used the platform to complete the baseline symptom assessment in clinic. Participants were reminded weekly to use the app and to perform a symptom report 4 to 6 weeks later.

RESULTS

A total of 64 patients were approached, of which 57 (89%; 95% exact confidence interval [CI], 79-96%) enrolled. About half were ≥ 60 years old and 40% were women. Fifty-three patients (93%; 95% exact CI, 85-99%) accessed at least one app feature, at least once, from home. The most frequently used (86%) feature was Health Tracker in which participants monitored and reported symptoms; followed by My Inbox (63%) and My Medications features (60%). The mean acceptability score was 24.8 (standard deviation = 4.2), indicating good acceptability. Clinicians reported that the app was most acceptable with regard to facilitating in-person interactions that occurred after app use.

CONCLUSION

In a sample of adults with various stages of gastrointestinal malignancies, the iCancerHealth app was utilized at a high rate. Features that focused on symptoms and medication side effects plus communication with clinicians were used most frequently. This extends our understanding of preferences and specific feature use with patient-centered technologies.