Never too old to learn new tricks: surveying Canadian health care professionals about learning needs in caring for older adults with cancer

Oncology care providers' perceptions and anticipated barriers regarding the use of geriatric assessment in routine clinic practice: A mixed-methods study

INTRODUCTION

Geriatric assessment (GA) is currently not a standard of cancer care across Canada. In the Canadian province of Saskatchewan, there are no known formal geriatric teams in outpatient oncology settings. Therefore, it is not known whether, how, and to what extent GA is performed in oncology clinics, or what supports are needed to carry out a GA. The objective of this study was to explore Saskatchewan oncology care providers' knowledge, perceptions, and practices regarding GA, and their perceived barriers to implementing formal GA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this mixed-methods study, oncology physicians and nurses within the Saskatchewan Cancer Agency (SCA) were invited to participate in an anonymous survey and individual open-ended interview. Quantitative survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics; free-text responses provided in the survey were summarized. Data from interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 19 physicians and 30 clinic nurses participated in the survey (response rate: 24% [physicians] and 38.0% [nurses]). In terms of cancer treatment and management, the majority (74% of physicians and 62% of nurses) stated considerations for older adults are different than younger patients. More than half (53% of physicians and 58% of nurses) reported making treatment and management decisions primarily based on judgement versus validated tools. For physicians whose practices involve prescribing chemotherapy (16/19), 75% rarely or never use validated tools (e.g., CARG, CRASH) to assess risk of chemotoxicity for older patients. Lack of time and supporting staff and feeling unsure as to where to refer older patients for help or follow-up were the most commonly voiced anticipated barriers to implementing GA. Two physicians and six nurses (n = 8) participated in the open-ended interviews. Main themes included: (1) tension between knowing the importance of GA versus capacity and (2) buy-in.

DISCUSSION

Our findings review barriers and opportunities for implementing GA in oncology care in Saskatchewan and provides foundational knowledge to inform efforts to promote personalized medicine and to optimize cancer care for older adults with cancer in this region.

Cancer survivors 75 years and older: physical, emotional and practical needs

OBJECTIVES

To describe physical, emotional and practical concerns and access to help of Canadian cancer survivors aged 75+ years following treatment.

METHODS

A survey was designed to identify concerns and access to help across three supportive care domains for cancer survivors 1-3 years post-treatment. Random samples were drawn from 10 provincial cancer registries. Survey packages were mailed to 40 790 survivors with option to reply by mail or online in French or English. Descriptive analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

In total, 3274 (25%) survivors aged 75+ years responded to the survey. Fifty-five per cent were men, 72% had not experienced metastatic spread and 75% reported comorbid conditions. Eighty-one per cent reported experiencing at least one physical concern, 63% experienced at least one emotional concern and 30% experienced at least one practical concern. The most commonly reported concerns were for two physical changes (fatigue 62% and bladder/urinary problems 39%) and one emotional change (anxiety/fear of recurrence 53%). More than 50% did not receive assistance for 15 concerns across the three domains. The most frequently cited reason for not seeking help for a concern was that they were told it was normal and they did not think anything could be done. Unmet needs existed for all physical, emotional and practical changes ranging from 41% to 88% of respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

Many older adults are at risk for experiencing physical, emotional and practical concerns following cancer treatment yet are not obtaining help. Action is needed for early identification of these individuals to mitigate the impact of unmet needs for older cancer survivors.

What do hematology residents know about caring for older adults with cancer? A National Survey of Canadian hematology residents' knowledge and interests

INTRODUCTION

As the Canadian population ages, older adults comprise an increasing proportion of those diagnosed and treated for hematologic malignancies. A geriatric oncology curriculum has been recognized as a top priority in the care of older patients with cancer. It is not clear, however, whether hematology trainees receive training in geriatric oncology. We sought to understand residents' views and needs for a geriatric oncology curriculum during hematology residency in Canada.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional needs assessment of hematology trainees enrolled in a Canadian residency or advanced fellowship training program within hematology. The survey, which was piloted with three non-hematology residents to ensure user-friendliness, used a combination of Likert scale, multiple-choice, and open-ended questions. The survey comprised three sections: (1) demographic data, (2) current state of geriatric oncology training (amount, content) and (3) attitudes towards learning about geriatric oncology and preferred curriculum components and identified needs. The survey was administered by the study team and distributed electronically to program directors in June 2020. The program directors were asked to forward the survey to trainees registered within their Division of Hematology. Data were analyzed descriptively.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine hematology residents participated (41.4% estimated response rate). Most respondents had not received geriatric oncology teaching (58.6%, n = 17) and have never been taught about geriatric oncology assessment tools (72.4%, n = 21) during hematology residency. Most respondents felt that their program should deliver a geriatric oncology curriculum (96.6%, n = 28). Respondents were most interested in learning about use of geriatric assessment tools for pre-treatment chemotherapy decision-making (86.2%, n = 25), prediction of chemotherapy toxicity (82.8%, n = 24), and to facilitate conversations regarding treatment initiation, continuation, or termination (79.3%, n = 23).

DISCUSSION

Our study highlights the paucity of geriatric oncology training in hematology residency training programs. Our results highlight both the need and interest for a future dedicated geriatric oncology curriculum integrated into hematology training and provide guidance about which topics are most valued by trainees.

Challenges of Survivorship for Older Adults Diagnosed with Cancer

Purpose of Review

The purpose of this brief review is to highlight significant recent developments in survivorship research and care of older adults following cancer treatment. The aim is to provide insight into care and support needs of older adults during cancer survivorship as well as directions for future research.

Recent Findings

The numbers of older adult cancer survivors are increasing globally. Increased attention to the interaction between age-related and cancer-related concerns before, during, and after cancer treatment is needed to optimize outcomes and quality of life among older adult survivors. Issues of concern to older survivors, and ones associated with quality of life, include physical and cognitive functioning and emotional well-being. Maintaining activities of daily living, given limitations imposed by cancer treatment and other comorbidities, is of primary importance to older survivors. Evidence concerning the influence of income and rurality, experiences in care coordination and accessing services, and effectiveness of interventions remains scant for older adults during survivorship.

Summary

There is a clear need for further research relating to tailored intervention and health care provider knowledge and education. Emerging issues, such as the use of medical assistance in dying, must be considered in this population.

Personalised treatment for older adults with cancer: The role of frailty assessment

It is widely accepted in clinical practice that chronological age is a poor predictor of treatment tolerance and outcomes in older adults with cancer. Intrinsic vulnerability is more a function of underlying frailty, rather than chronological age. Frailty is a state of increased vulnerability to stressors, such as cancer and its treatment, which can lead to adverse health outcomes for patients. Capturing this heterogeneity in reserve capacity is the cornerstone of management in geriatricmedicine, but remains poorly understood or adopted in radiation oncology. A two-step approach, using a shorter screening tool, followed by full assessment for those who need it, is the mostresourceful way of implementing frailty assessment in radiotherapy departments. It is important for radiation oncology professionals to identify frailty and to use this information in multidisciplinary decision making in order to develop a personalised radiotherapy approach for the older person. There are many ways we can effectively use this information, such as considering treatment fractionation schedules that would limit the burden of travel for those with social frailty, or reviewing the range of modalities at our disposal, which might limit toxicity in the older person at high risk of deterioration during treatment. Frailty assessment is not carried out in many radiotherapy departments presently, but there are many international models to use as exemplars as to how it may be implemented in clinical practice. There are many opportunities for further research and role development in this field at the current time.

Never too old to learn new tricks: Surveying Canadian healthcare professionals about learning needs in caring for older adults with cancer

INTRODUCTION

The number of older adults with cancer is growing but little is known about healthcare professionals' (HCPs) perceptions of their readiness to care for older adults with cancer. The Canadian Network on Aging and Cancer together with the Canadian Association of Nurses in Oncology, Oncology and Aging Special Interest Group, conducted a survey to assess geriatric oncology learning needs of Canadian HCPs and explore any differences in needs between nurses and physicians.

METHODS

An online survey was distributed to Canadian HCP, which assessed respondent confidence and desire to learn about domains related to geriatric oncology, current clinical practice and sociodemographic information. Descriptive statistics and chi-square tests were used to characterize participant characteristics, learning needs and compare learning needs of physicians vs. nurses.

RESULTS

Respondents (n = 154) were mostly physicians (n = 78, 51%) or nurses (n = 56, 36%). Respondents reported not being confident addressing mental health issues (75%), polypharmacy (71%), geriatric oncology care models (69%), and return to baseline function post-treatment (67%). Physicians reported more confidence than nurses in managing comorbidities (72% vs. 49%, p < 0.05), having difficult conversations (90% vs. 68%, p < 0.001), and addressing ageism (76% vs. 58%, p < 0.05), while nurses reported more confidence with managing mobility limitations (64% vs 42%, p < 0.05), fall prevention (72% vs. 26%, p < 0.01) and supporting caregivers (74% vs 52%, p < 0.05). Nurses wanted to learn more about geriatric oncology than physicians for 10 domains (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

There is a need for interprofessional educational initiatives that address differences between nurses and physicians in clinical areas of confidence and learning needs.