Exploring the practicality and acceptability a brief exercise communication and clinician referral pathway in cancer care: a feasibility study

BACKGROUND

The majority of cancer patients and cancer care clinicians-CCCs (e.g., oncologists) believe that exercise is an important adjunct therapy that should be embedded in standard practice. Yet, CCCs do not routinely discuss exercise with their patients, nor do they regularly refer them to exercise professionals (e.g., exercise physiologists-EPs). This study evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of an evidence-based approach to improving exercise communication between CCCs and their patients, including an exercise referral pathway.

METHODS

Implementation and testing of the Exercise Communication and Referral Pathway (ECRP) occurred in Sydney, Australia. The ECRP included a brief oncology-initiated communication exchange with patients, CCC exercise referral to an EP, followed by EP-initiated telephone consultation with patients concerning tailored exercise advice. Participant perceptions concerning the feasibility and applicability of the ECPR were evaluated. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with CCCs (n = 3), cancer patients (n = 21), and an EP (n = 1). Inductive thematic analysis was undertaken.

RESULTS

Analysis generated three themes: (1) Navigating the role of CCCs in the ECRP, suggesting that oncology-initiated communication is a cue to action, however there was a lack of role clarity regarding exercise referral; (2) Implementing Patient-Orientated Care within a Standardised Pathway, highlighting the need for tailored information and advice for patients that reflects individual disease, socio-cultural, and environmental factors, and; (3) Taking Steps Towards Action, revealing the need for structural (e.g., EP initiated contact with patients) and policy changes (i.e., changes to Medicare, direct oncologist referral) to engage patients and better integrate exercise as part of standard care.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings provide important insights into improving oncology-patient exercise communication and developing an exercise referral pathway to increase engagement and patient reach. However, individual (e.g., experience, knowledge) and contextual factors (e.g., time, resources) need consideration when implementing an ECRP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical (#ACTRN12620000358943) on March 13, 2020.

Synergy Between Licensed Rehabilitation Professionals and Clinical Exercise Physiologists: Optimizing Patient Care for Cancer Rehabilitation

OBJECTIVES

To differentiate between rehabilitation and exercise training and propose how rehabilitation professionals and exercise physiologists can collaborate to optimize cancer survivor care.

DATA SOURCE

Professional organizations and peer-reviewed manuscripts.

CONCLUSION

Both professions offer complementary skillsets that, when integrated, optimize the ability of the cancer care team to implement more effective survivorship care plans. Future models of care must incorporate efficient communications between the cancer rehabilitation program and oncology team, include various reimbursement/payment/funding options, and continuously assess program efficacy.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Nurses must be cognizant of physical needs (ie, functional and conditioning status) and cancer-related comorbidities when referring cancer survivors for exercise reconditioning.

Using simulation-based learning to provide interprofessional education in diabetes to nutrition and dietetics and exercise physiology students through telehealth

BACKGROUND

Current workforce demands require new graduates to competently work within health care teams and often in remote settings. To better prepare students for this work, universities have spent much time developing interprofessional education (IPE) activities. The body of literature supporting IPE of allied health students is growing. Simulation-based learning with simulated patients is one platform through which IPE can be implemented in a dedicated, supported environment and potentially at scale. This study describes an interprofessional simulation-based learning experience with nutrition and dietetics and exercise physiology students. The common practice area of interacting with patients who have type 2 diabetes was targeted, and the simulation was delivered in partnership with simulated patients via a telehealth platform to allow interprofessional teams to work collaboratively in remote locations.

METHODS

Ten nutrition and dietetics and 13 exercise physiology students participated in a simulation module in which students observed and collaborated in the development and delivery of an interprofessional treatment plan for patients with diabetes. Learning outcomes were measured according to the first two levels of Kirkpatrick's (1994) model for training evaluation (i.e. reaction and learning), as well as the perceived impact on behaviour.

RESULTS

The students' confidence in communication, assessment, management and ability to work with another health professional significantly increased (p < 0.05) post-activity. Students perceived that the simulation-based learning would have a positive impact on their clinical skills and ability to work with other health professionals. Students reported that the most effective aspects of the simulation module were learning from and about each other, the opportunity for experiential learning and the supportive learning environment. However, the telehealth platform audio clarity and delay had negative impact on the learning experiences for students.

CONCLUSION

The overall positive results demonstrate the potential of simulation-based learning activities for preparing allied health students for working in interprofessional teams. Although remote access was possible, the telehealth platform was identified as a limiting factor to this simulation-based learning experience. However, videoconferencing technology has advanced considerably since this study. Hence, there is an opportunity to employ more reliable technology for future simulations.

The type and pain provoking nature of exercise prescribed for low back pain: A survey of Australian health professionals

OBJECTIVES

To explore the type of exercise prescribed by Australian health professionals for LBP, and whether the exercises prescribed are pain-free or into pain.

METHODS

A survey of physiotherapists and exercise physiologists was conducted from all states/territories in Australia. The survey contained two chronic LBP vignettes with different pain mechanisms (dominant nociceptive or central sensitisation pain) and one acute LBP vignette. Respondents were asked if they would prescribe advice to stay active and exercise. If exercise was prescribed, respondents were asked to specify the type and pain provoking nature (exercise with no pain, exercise to the start of pain, exercise with pain at a tolerable level or exercise irrespective of pain).

RESULTS

The response rate was 17%(218/1276). Most respondents prescribed advice to stay active(≥95%) and exercise(≥90%) for all vignettes. Irrespective of the vignette, several exercises were prescribed [aerobic (57-85% of clinicians), motor control (62-84% of clinicians), range of motion (72-75% of clinicians)]. Strengthening exercise was prescribed more for chronic(>60%) than acute LBP(23%). Irrespective of the exercise, between 20 and 25% of respondents prescribed pain-free exercise, between 71 and 79% of respondents prescribed exercise into pain, and ≤4% prescribed exercise irrespective of pain for acute and chronic LBP.

CONCLUSIONS

Several exercises are prescribed for LBP, irrespective of pain mechanism or duration, with more clinicians prescribing strengthening exercise for chronic than acute LBP. Most clinicians prescribed exercise into pain for acute and chronic LBP, irrespective of the exercise. Further research should determine which exercises are beneficial based on pain mechanism and duration, and whether exercise into pain should be prescribed for LBP.

Equity of a government subsidised exercise referral scheme: A population study

BACKGROUND

Health inequities could increase if utilisation of physical activity interventions is lower among socioeconomically disadvantaged groups. We examined associations between area level socioeconomic disadvantage and utilisation of Australian government-subsidised, general practitioner (GP)-referred, accredited exercise physiologist (AEPs) services.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of Australian Medical Benefits Scheme (MBS) data (N = 228,771 AEP services) for the 2015-2016 financial year and aggregated publicly available data from several sources. Spearman's correlations examined associations between utilisation of AEP services and area-level socioeconomic disadvantage, indicated by Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage (IRSD) decile scores. Lower IRSD scores indicate greater levels of socioeconomic disadvantage.

RESULTS

Significant correlations between IRSD score and study variables were as follows: Out-of-pocket expenses/service (rs = 0.52); number of patients/AEP provider (rs = -0.42); number of patients/1000 population (rs = -0.24); AEP services/1000 population (rs = -0.18); average services/patient (rs = 0.24); and AEP provider/1000 population (rs = 0.14).

CONCLUSION

Patients living in areas of greater disadvantage utilised government-subsidised, GP-referred AEP services at a higher rate and paid lower out-of-pocket fees than those living in more affluent areas. Thus, AEP services are equitably distributed, from a utilisation perspective, and acceptable to patients living in areas of disadvantage. However, the higher caseloads and lower fees that characterise AEP services in areas of greater disadvantage may result in shorter consultation times. Further research on exercise referral schemes is warranted, particularly whether socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with adherence to exercise sessions and health outcomes.