Adopting patient-centred tools in cancer care: role of evidence and other factors

Psychosocial interventions that target adult cancer survivors' reintegration into daily life after active cancer treatment: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

This review explored psychosocial interventions targeting adult cancer survivors' reintegration following active cancer treatment. This included the types of interventions tested and the tools used to measure reintegration.

INTRODUCTION

Cancer survivors face lingering health issues following the completion of cancer treatment. Many cancer survivors still experience unmet psychosocial care needs despite receiving follow-up care. Further, many survivorship interventions do not specifically address outcomes important to survivors. A number of primary studies have identified reintegration as an outcome important to cancer survivors. Reintegration is a concept that focuses on returning to normal activities, routines, and social roles after cancer treatment; however, it is emerging and abstract.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies involving adult cancer survivors (18 years or older at diagnosis) of any cancer type or stage were included in this review. Studies with psychosocial interventions targeted at reintegrating the person into daily life after cancer treatment were included. Interventions addressing clinical depression or anxiety, and interventions treating solely physical needs that were largely medically focused were excluded.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), and Embase. Gray literature was searched using ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (ProQuest). Reference lists of included studies were searched. Studies were screened at the title/abstract and full-text levels, and 2 independent reviewers extracted data. Manuscripts in languages other than English were excluded due to feasibility (eg, cost, time of translations). Findings were summarized narratively and reported in tabular and diagrammatic format.

RESULTS

The 3-step search strategy yielded 5617 citations. After duplicates were removed, the remaining 4378 citations were screened at the title and abstract level, then the remaining 306 citations were evaluated at the full-text level by 2 independent reviewers. Forty studies were included that evaluated psychosocial interventions among adult cancer survivors trying to reintegrate after active cancer treatment (qualitative n=23, mixed methods n=8, quantitative n=8, systematic review n=1). Included articles spanned 10 different countries/regions. Over half of all included articles (n=25) focused primarily on breast cancer survivors. Many studies (n=17) were conducted in primary care or community-based settings. The most common types of interventions were peer-support groups (n=14), follow-up education and support (n=14), exercise programs (n=6), and multidisciplinary/multicomponent programs (n=6). While the majority of included studies characterized the outcome qualitatively, 9 quantitative tools were also employed.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identified 6 types of interventions to reintegrate survivors back into their daily lives following cancer treatment. An important thread across intervention types was a focus on personalization in the form of problem/goal identification. Given the number of qualitative studies, future research could include a qualitative systematic review and meta-aggregation. Quantitative tools may not be as effective for evaluating reintegration. More primary studies, including mixed methods studies, utilizing consistent measurement tools are required. Furthermore, this work provides a basis for future research to continue examining the complexity of implementing such interventions to successfully achieve reintegration. To do so, primary studies evaluating interventions from an implementation science and complex systems perspective would be useful.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework https://osf.io/r6bmx.

Psychosocial interventions that facilitate adult cancer survivors' reintegration into daily life after active cancer treatment: a scoping review protocol

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review will map the extent and type of evidence related to psychosocial supports and interventions that facilitate adult cancer survivors' reintegration into daily life and activities after active cancer treatment.

INTRODUCTION

Cancer and its treatment have substantial late and long-term adverse impacts on survivors despite enhanced prospects for survival. Cancer survivors have unmet psychosocial care needs, and recent studies show a lack of focus in survivorship research on outcomes important to survivors. Reintegration is an emerging concept, identified as important to cancer survivors, that focuses on returning to a "new normal" after cancer treatment. This study will explore the available evidence on psychosocial interventions that are targeted toward this outcome.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

The population of interest is adult survivors (18 years and older at diagnosis) of any cancer type. Concepts of interest include psychosocial interventions targeting the outcome and reintegration into daily life after cancer treatment. Interventions addressing clinical depression or anxiety and interventions treating physical needs that are largely medically focused will be excluded.

METHODS

A scoping review of the literature will be conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Embase. Gray literature will be searched using ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. Studies will be screened at the title/abstract and full-text levels, and data will be extracted by 2 independent reviewers. Disagreements that cannot be resolved will be settled by a third reviewer. Findings will be summarized narratively and in tabular format.

SCOPING REVIEW REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/r6bmx).

What Matters in Cancer Survivorship Research? A Suite of Stakeholder-Relevant Outcomes

The outcomes assessed in cancer survivorship research do not always match the outcomes that survivors and health system stakeholders identify as most important in the post-treatment follow-up period. This study sought to identify stakeholder-relevant outcomes pertinent to post-treatment follow-up care interventions. We conducted a descriptive qualitative study using semi-structured telephone interviews with stakeholders (survivors, family/friend caregivers, oncology providers, primary care providers, and cancer system decision-/policy-makers) across Canada. Data analysis involved coding, grouping, detailing, and comparing the data by using the techniques commonly employed in descriptive qualitative research. Forty-four participants took part in this study: 11 survivors, seven family/friend caregivers, 18 health care providers, and eight decision-makers. Thirteen stakeholder-relevant outcomes were identified across participants and categorized into five outcome domains: psychosocial, physical, economic, informational, and patterns and quality of care. In the psychosocial domain, one’s reintegration after cancer treatment was described by all stakeholder groups as one of the most important challenges faced by survivors and identified as a priority outcome to address in future research. The outcomes identified in this study provide a succinct suite of stakeholder-relevant outcomes, common across cancer types and populations, that should be used in future research on cancer survivorship care.

Implementing a patient decision aid, a process evaluation of a large-scale pre- and post-implementation trial

Purpose

Patient decision aids (PtDAs) have been reported to have a positive influence on patients making a health care decision in trials. Nevertheless, post-trial implementation is poor. The aim of this study is to explore patient, clinician, and organizational success factors for implementing a PtDA designed for breast cancer patients, facing a decision on their radiation treatment.

Methods

We performed a process evaluation within a multi-center pre- and post-implementation trial. The PtDA was incorporated as much as possible in the logistics of 13 participating centers. Tracking data were collected on PtDA use. Process characteristics were recorded by both clinicians and patients. A logistic regression method was applied to investigate which process characteristics were significantly related to the probability that patients logged in to the PtDA.

Results

189 patients received the PtDA of whom140 (77%) used the PtDA. If patients received the link via the surgery department they were more likely to use the PtDA (OR 9.77 (1.28–74.51)), compared to patients that received the link via the radiation oncology department. If the report of the multidisciplinary team stated that radiation treatment “had to be discussed with the patient”, patients were more likely to use the PtDA (OR 2.29 (1.12–4.71)). Educational level was not related to the probability of PtDA use.

Conclusions

We accomplished a high level of PtDA use. Patients were more likely to use the PtDA if they received the link via the surgery department and if “to be discussed with the patient” was written in the multidisciplinary team report.