Addressing a critical need for caregiver support in neuro-oncology: development of a caregiver navigation intervention using eSNAP social resource visualization

Recreational Travel of Patients with Brain Tumor and Their Caregivers: Context, Preparation, and Impact

Background: Caregivers are engaging in recreational travel with the neuro-oncology patients they care for, yet there is little scientific research on this phenomenon. Aim: The purpose of this study is to examine the experiences of recreational travel among caregiver-patient with brain cancer dyads from the perspective of the caregivers. Specifically, we examined (1) context (i.e., why and when) of recreational travel, (2) the caregiver's travel preparations, and (3) the impact of the travel on caregivers. Design: Descriptive thematic analysis was conducted on transcripts of unprompted caregiver discussion of recreational travel, defined as any trip or vacation taken by caregiver and patient with the purpose of recreation lasting at least overnight. Setting/Participants: Caregivers of patients with brain cancer enrolled in an eight-week support intervention at an NCI-designated Cancer Center (NCT04268979). Incidental discussion of recreational travel during weekly phone intervention sessions was identified from structured interventionist notes. Results: Fifteen caregivers discussed recreational travel. The context of travel was often to focus on quality of life upon treatment cycle completion. Preparation often included accommodating patients' needs. Care teams' practical support and validation for the trip were identified as useful resources. Caregivers most often described the emotional impact of travel, which was often complex and bittersweet. Conclusions: Travel with a patient with brain cancer may be an important goal for caregivers and could help create meaning and memories, but can also present challenges. Early and clear communication from the care team can play a role in supporting meaningful trips.

Building on and tailoring to: Adapting a cancer caregiver psychoeducational intervention for rural settings

INTRODUCTION

Rural cancer caregivers experience obstacles in accessing services, obtaining respite, and ensuring their care recipients receive quality care. These challenges warrant opportunities to participate in evidence-based behavioral intervention trials to fill support gaps. Adaptation to rural settings can facilitate appropriate fit, given higher caregiver service needs and unique challenges. We present findings from the adaptation process of a psychoeducational intervention designed to support cancer caregivers in rural settings.

METHODS

We adapted Reblin's CARING intervention, designed for neuro-oncology, to target caregivers of rural cancer patients across cancer sites. First, we conducted formative work to determine the unmet social and supportive care needs rural cancer caregivers faced. We used the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies (FRAME-IS) to guide the modifications. To conduct the adaptation, we elicited feedback through qualitative interviews of seven caregivers and three cancer hospital staff and thematic analysis to inform intervention modifications. Our qualitative study was guided by the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ).

RESULTS

Interviews revealed that service access was a pressing need, along with financial (e.g., treatment costs, employment challenges) and geographic barriers (e.g., distance to treatment, road conditions). We modified content, training, and context using the FRAME-IS steps. Changes enhanced fit through the following adaptations: changes to social support domains, session content, interventionist training, resource offerings, screening and recruitment processes, and virtual delivery.

DISCUSSION

Challenges to establishing successful psychosocial oncology interventions may be improved through participant-centered approaches and implementation science. Additional systemic challenges, including lack of systematic documentation of caregivers, persist and may especially disadvantage under-represented and underserved groups, such as rural dwellers. The enCompass intervention is undergoing ongoing single-arm pilot of rural cancer patient/caregiver dyads targeting caregiver coping self-efficacy and patient/caregiver distress (Clinical Trials #NCT05828927).

Family Caregiver Experiences in the Inpatient and Outpatient Reduced-Intensity Conditioning Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Settings: A Qualitative Study

Caregivers (ie, family and friends) are essential in providing care and support for patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) and throughout their recovery. Traditionally delivered in the hospital, HCT is being increasingly provided in the outpatient setting, potentially heightening the burden on caregivers. Extensive work has examined the inpatient HCT caregiving experience, yet little is known about how caregiver experiences may differ based on whether the HCT was delivered on an inpatient or outpatient basis, particularly during the acute recovery period post-HCT. This study explored the similarities and differences in caregiver experiences in the inpatient and outpatient settings during the early recovery from reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allogeneic HCT. We conducted semistructured interviews (n = 15) with caregivers of adults undergoing RIC allogeneic HCT as either an inpatient (n = 7) or an outpatient (n = 8). We recruited caregivers using purposeful criterion sampling, based on the HCT setting, until thematic saturation occurred. Interview recordings were transcribed and coded through thematic analysis using Dedoose v.9.0. The study analysis was guided by the transactional model of stress and coping and the model of adaptation of family caregivers during the acute phase of BMT. Three themes emerged to describe similar experiences for HCT caregivers regardless of setting: (1) caregivers reported feeling like they were a necessary yet invisible part of the care team; (2) caregivers described learning to adapt to changing situations and varying patient needs; and (3) caregivers recounted how the uncertainty following HCT felt like existing between life and death while also maintaining a sense of gratitude and hope for the future. Caregivers also reported distinct experiences based on the transplantation setting and 4 themes emerged: (1) disrupted routines: inpatient caregivers reported disrupted routines when caring for the HCT recipient while simultaneously trying to manage non-caregiving responsibilities at home and work, and outpatient caregivers reported having to establish new routines that included frequent clinic visits with the patient while altering or pausing home and work responsibilities; (2) timing of caregiver involvement: inpatient caregivers felt more involved in care after the patient was discharged from the HCT hospitalization, whereas outpatient caregivers were already providing the majority of care earlier in the post-transplantation period; (3) fear of missing vital information: inpatient caregivers worried about missing vital information about the patient's care and progress if not physically present in the hospital, whereas outpatient caregivers feared overlooking vital information that may warrant contacting the care team as they monitored the patient at home; and (4) perceived adequacy of resources to meet psychosocial and practical needs: inpatient caregivers reported having adequate access to resources (ie, hospital-based services), whereas outpatient caregivers felt they had more limited access and needed to be resourceful in seeking out assistance. Inpatient and outpatient HCT caregivers described both similar and distinct experiences during the acute recovery period post-HCT. Specific interventions should address caregiver psychosocial needs (ie, distress, illness uncertainty, communication, and coping) and practical needs (ie, community resource referral, preparedness for home-based caregiving, and transplantation education) of HCT caregivers based on setting.

Predictors of initial engagement with an asynchronous cognitive behavioral stress management website among older women with nonmetastatic breast cancer

PURPOSE

Digital interventions, like websites, offer greater access to psychosocial treatments; however, engagement is often suboptimal. Initial use may be a target to "hook" participants. Few studies examine engagement with cognitive behavioral stress management (CBSM). We tested predictors of engagement in the first week of using a CBSM website among women with breast cancer (BC).

METHODS

Older women (≥ 50 years) with nonmetastatic BC enrolled in an on-going trial (8/2016-4/2022, #NCT03955991) and were randomized to receive 10 synchronous, virtual CBSM group sessions immediately (n = 41) or after a 6-month waitlist (n = 34). All received simultaneous access to an asynchronous website, where supplemental videos and resources were released weekly. Engagement was tracked via breadth (features used) and depth (clicks within content). Multilevel modeling tested predictors of engagement (i.e., time, condition, age, daily stress, depression, race, ethnicity, disease stage).

RESULTS

Breadth decreased over the first week of CBSM (b = -0.93, p < .01), and women with more advanced stage disease engaged with more breadth (b = 0.52, p < .01) and depth (b = 14.06, p < .01) than women with earlier stage disease. Non-Hispanic (b = -0.59, p = .03) and White (b = -0.97, p < .01) women engaged with more features. Cancer stage and intervention timing interacted. Women with more advanced cancer stage who received CBSM later engaged with the most depth (b = -11.73, p = .04). All other characteristics did not predict engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

Disease stage, race, ethnicity, and intervention timing predicted engagement with a CBSM website in older BC patients.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Delivering CBSM later in cancer treatment may mitigate competing demands. Fostering greater engagement in racial/ethnic minorities is needed.

Development of an evidence‑based, theory‑driven, and culturally appropriate character strengths-based intervention for breast cancer patients, following the Medical Research Council Framework

PURPOSE

To design and develop a complex, evidence‑based, theory‑driven, and culturally appropriate character strengths-based intervention (CSI) for breast cancer patients, following the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework.

METHODS

From 2018 September to 2020 November, a complex intervention perspective was adopted. The rationale, methods, and processes employed in carrying out the study were reported. The acceptability and feasibility of intervention program were evaluated as a part of subsequent pilot study. Based on piloting, a refined and optimized definitive intervention was obtained. The development of the intervention is an iterative process involving input from three key stakeholders: experts, medical staff, and patient representatives.

RESULTS

The systematic review revealed CSIs were effective and the selected theory served as a guide and indicated theory-inspired modifications. A representative team of breast cancer patients and oncology nurses collaboratively developed and tailored the intervention content and format with attention to the acceptability and feasibility. Five main strategies, including peripheral, evidential, linguistic, constituent-involving, and sociocultural strategies, were used to achieve and strengthen the cultural appropriateness. After the pilot phase, several refinements were made on the CSI program, such as editorial changes in the booklet or alternative suggestions for difficult strengths-based activities (e.g., outdoor activities). All participants not only expressed satisfaction with the program in process evaluation, but also reported perceived benefits such as enjoyable and sociable experience, better well-being, and increased confidence.

CONCLUSION

Consideration of the MRC framework, theory guidance, and suggestions from stakeholders during intervention development can optimize uptake and sustainability in the clinical setting. It is recommended that randomized controlled trial be used in future studies to assess the intervention, the process and the mechanisms of the intervention. Our approach may offer implications for the design and implementation of similar initiatives to support cancer patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Register Identifier: NCT04219267, 07/01/2020, retrospectively registered.