Does advocating screening for distress in cancer rest more on ideology than on science?

Screening for distress in survivorship

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The current review provides an overview of recent research and other initiatives aimed at increasing and/or systematizing screening for distress in cancer survivors. It is timely given an increasing drive internationally to implement distress screening as part of routine cancer care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Screening using brief validated tools is recommended and the single-item distress thermometer continues to be the international screening tool of choice. Although debate continues regarding the most appropriate cut-off distress thermometer score to identify clinically distressed patients, review of checked items from the accompanying problem list can pinpoint sources of distress, to inform targeted intervention. An integrated approach should include screening, and if required, assessment/referral and intervention. However, whilst distress screening is associated with some impact on referral, especially its timeliness, delivery of evidence-based treatments to address identified distress may be limited by patients declining help and a lack of support services.

SUMMARY

Although screening for distress in routine care holds promise for reducing costs and enhancing health system efficiency, its implementation across cancer services is variable. Further research is required to evaluate screening implementation and sustainability in routine care, as well as the feasibility of distress screening in long-term cancer survivors who are no longer in regular contact with cancer centres.

How do patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) support clinician-patient communication and patient care? A realist synthesis

BACKGROUND

In this paper, we report the findings of a realist synthesis that aimed to understand how and in what circumstances patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) support patient-clinician communication and subsequent care processes and outcomes in clinical care. We tested two overarching programme theories: (1) PROMs completion prompts a process of self-reflection and supports patients to raise issues with clinicians and (2) PROMs scores raise clinicians' awareness of patients' problems and prompts discussion and action. We examined how the structure of the PROM and care context shaped the ways in which PROMs support clinician-patient communication and subsequent care processes.

RESULTS

PROMs completion prompts patients to reflect on their health and gives them permission to raise issues with clinicians. However, clinicians found standardised PROMs completion during patient assessments sometimes constrained rather than supported communication. In response, clinicians adapted their use of PROMs to render them compatible with the ongoing management of patient relationships. Individualised PROMs supported dialogue by enabling the patient to tell their story. In oncology, PROMs completion outside of the consultation enabled clinicians to identify problematic symptoms when the PROM acted as a substitute rather than addition to the clinical encounter and when the PROM focused on symptoms and side effects, rather than health related quality of life (HRQoL). Patients did not always feel it was appropriate to discuss emotional, functional or HRQoL issues with doctors and doctors did not perceive this was within their remit.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper makes two important contributions to the literature. First, our findings show that PROMs completion is not a neutral act of information retrieval but can change how patients think about their condition. Second, our findings reveal that the ways in which clinicians use PROMs is shaped by their relationships with patients and professional roles and boundaries. Future research should examine how PROMs completion and feedback shapes and is influenced by the process of building relationships with patients, rather than just their impact on information exchange and decision making.

Cancer patients' motives for psychosocial consultation-Oncology social workers' perceptions of 226 patient cases

OBJECTIVE

Although oncology social workers (OSWs) have emerged as a core profession in the provision of psychosocial services, there is a lack of empirical studies that describe their daily clinical work with patients. The overall aim of this study was to explore cancer patients' motives for consulting an OSW.

METHODS

From a nationwide survey, we used data from 226 patient cases that OSWs met face to face. The OSWs were asked to describe how the case was referred to them, the patient's characteristics, and what they perceived as the patient's motives for contacting them as well as additional motives that came up during the consultations.

RESULTS

Patients have different motives for consulting an OSW, and these motives change over the course of consultations; while feelings associated with being diagnosed with cancer were often the initial motive, questions associated with moving on in life and dealing with relationships and the overall life situation were added over time.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that Swedish OSWs' function is multifaceted and that the initial motives among patients rarely predict the content in consultations over time. Based on the diversity of motives, it seems obvious that OSWs (at least in Sweden) need a broad education in the psychology of counselling. It also seems obvious that even if patients initially were referred by health care staff to the OSW due to psychological reactions to being ill, staff should also be attentive to the fact that relational and socio-economic/juridical issues are of great concern for the patients.