11587 Background: The Commission on Cancer (CoC) Standard 3.2 requires distress screening and indicated action for cancer patients. NCCN and ASCO supportive care and age-related guidelines include patient reported concerns beyond distress. This study compares PHQ4 scores to other patient reported concerns. Methods: The Coleman Supportive Oncology Collaborative aggregated “best of” screening tools to assess patient reported needs and concerns aligned with CoC, NCCN and ASCO guidance. This supportive care screening tool was implemented at 8 sites from July 2015 thru July 2018. Analysis used chi squared test. Results: Most patients, 86% (10,635/12,295), reported one plus concerns and/or above threshold scores on PHQ4, PROMIS Pain, Fatigue or Physical Function. A chi squared comparison of patients with at least mild distress on PHQ4 to patients with no distress resulted in p values < .0001 for every screening category. Conclusions: Patients with a PHQ4 distress score of mild, moderate or severe also reported statistically significant levels of practical, family, physical, nutrition and treatment concerns. These patients also scored threshold levels for PROMIS Pain, Fatigue, and Physical Function. Screening only for distress without screening for other patient concerns may direct patients to services that do not address or focus on the underlying cause of the distress. [Table: see text]
47 Background: The IOM 2013 Report recommends that supportive oncology care start at cancer diagnosis; the Commission on Cancer (CoC) Standard 3.2 requires distress screening and indicated action. Screening tools are not standardized across institutions and often address only a portion of patients’ supportive oncology needs. Methods: A collaborative of 100+ clinicians, funded by The Coleman Foundation, developed a patient-centric consolidated screening tool based on validated instruments (NCCN Distress, PHQ-4, PROMIS) and IOM and CoC. The screening tool was piloted at 6 practice-improvement cancer centers in the Chicago area (3 academic, 2 safety-net, 1 public). Patients, providers assessing patients’ screening results (assessors), and providers receiving referrals (providers) were surveyed after use of the screening tool. Descriptive statistics were used to assess effectiveness of the tool. Results: Responders included 175 patients, 81 assessors, and 26 referral providers (social workers, chaplains, subspecialists). The majority of patients (160/175, 91%) completed the screening in <10 minutes, across all patients the screening tool averaged 4 ½ minutes. Most assessors (59/77, 76%) spent <5 minutes reviewing screening results. Most patients, assessors, and providers reported the screening tool asked the “right questions”. Assessors reporting partial relevance of some screening questions for 34% (26/77) of patients, uncovered ≥ 1 relevant needs for 96% (25/26) of those patients (p = 0.002). Conclusions: Use of a consolidated supportive oncology screening tool across multiple institutions is feasible, identified unmet patient needs, and was beneficial for assessors and providers. As the tool is adopted by collaborating institutions, variability in supportive oncology screening practices may decline, thus improving patient care. The tool has implications for quality improvements and national dissemination. [Table: see text]
61 Background: The Institute of Medicine (IOM) 2013 Report recommends that supportive oncology care start at cancer diagnosis; the Commission on Cancer (CoC) Standard 3.2 requires distress screening and indicated action. Screening tools are not standardized and often address only a portion of patients’ supportive oncology needs. Methods: A collaborative of 100+ clinicians, funded by The Coleman Foundation, developed a patient-centric screening tool adapted from NCCN Distress Problem List, IOM report and CoC standards, with validated sub-tools: PHQ-4 for anxiety and depression and PROMIS short forms for pain, fatigue and physical function. Novel treatment/care and other concerns were included. The screening tool was implemented at 4 cancer centers (2 academic, 1 public & 1 safety-net). End points included correlation of PHQ-4 score with other supportive oncology needs. Descriptive statistics, Fisher’s exact test were used. Results: 2805 patients were screened. Average scores were: PHQ4 – Anxiety and Depression 1.8 (mild > 3), Pain 4.5 (mild > 4), Fatigue 8.8 (mild > 6), Physical Function 20.2 (mild < 20), see table for additional items. Higher scores on the PHQ-4 were significantly associated with each of the following: greater pain, fatigue, , nutritional and specific treatment/care concerns, and lower physical function (p<.0001). (See Table). Conclusions: Patients with higher anxiety and depression also have many other supportive oncology concerns. Our results support the use of a comprehensive tool capturing a spectrum of each patient’s unique concerns. This may enable earlier interventions and personalized delivery of supportive care. [Table: see text]
146 Background: In 2013, the Institute of Medicine report recommended that supportive oncology services be initiated at time of diagnosis. Providers of pediatric cancer care in the Chicagoland community, supported by The Coleman Foundation, sought to define areas for quality improvement of supportive oncology delivery to children. Methods: Focus groups and surveys with clinicians providing pediatric cancer care and supportive services at 14 sites were used to prioritize areas needing improvement. Results: 100% (14/14) of sites participated. Of the eligible sites, 6 were pediatric cancer treatment sites and 8 cancer care community organizations. Sites demonstrated consistent agreement for 8 of the 12 areas of focus for improvement. Over 50% of sites reported areas of focus (table) as important or very important. Conclusions: Sites identified the need for quality improvement in delivery of psychosocial, survivorship and palliative care for pediatric cancer patients. Survey results demonstrate a need for collaboration and efforts to guide care delivery improvement across sites. [Table: see text]
163 Background: In 2012, a congressional symposium identified the need for services to address psychosocial issues of children with cancer. In 2013, the Institute of Medicine recommended supportive oncology services be initiated at cancer diagnosis. Chicago providers of pediatric cancer are collaborating to improve care for children with cancer and their families focusing on psychosocial stressors and quality of life. Methods: The collaborative conducted a structured review of tools: Psychosocial Assessment Tool (PAT), Social Work Assessment Tool (SWAT), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Problem List, and √IN; with input from providers on stressors throughout the care continuum. The resulting screening tool was created and piloted in English and Spanish at 7 pediatric cancer hospitals. Social workers (SW) informally reported assessment of its usefulness. Results: Parents (n = 85) completed “Getting to Know You and Your Child” screening tool which inquired about caregivers, siblings, child’s interests, school, SSI/SNAP, challenges, and cultural/religious preferences. Providers reported families found the tool useful “to think about support needs.” The tool assessed 12 psychosocial stressors; the mean per patient/family was 2.4 (range 0-11). Most frequent stressors included: lack of support from friends, family, community (29%), paying for food (26%), job flexibility (26%), paying for utilities (25%), medical costs (23%), emotional support for family (22%), school concerns (21%). All who reported temporary residence also reported difficulty paying for housing (p < 0.01). Ten SWs reported this screening tool generated new insight into family structures, identified stressors and informed resolution efforts. Provider recommended adjustments to the screening tool: simplify terms for siblings, hobbies and spiritual, add pet question. Conclusions: Pilot testing of a psychosocial screening tool for pediatric and adolescent oncology informed providers of patient/family needs in a standard manner. Six of the seven pilot sites are implementing this tool as a standard practice. Preliminary data suggests patients and providers find the screener easy to use and informative.
150 Background: In 2013 the Institute of Medicine recommended that supportive oncology services be initiated at time of cancer diagnosis. Providers of pediatric cancer care in the Chicago metro area, supported by The Coleman Foundation, created and pilot tested a standard psycho-social stressors screening instrument for children with cancer and their families. Methods: The collaborative conducted structured review of tools: Psychosocial Assessment Tool (PAT), Social Work Assessment Tool (SWAT), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Problem List, and √IN; and collected input from social workers and oncology providers on stressors throughout the care continuum. The resulting tool was piloted in English and Spanish at 7 pediatric cancer hospitals. Providers qualitatively reported assessment of its usefulness. Results: Patients/family (n = 57) completed the “getting to know you and your child” instrument which inquired about caregivers, siblings, child’s likes/hobbies, school situation, SSI/SNAP, challenges, and cultural/religious preferences. Providers reported that almost all families found the tool useful “to think about support needs”; one said it was invasive. The tool assessed 12 psychosocial stressors; the mean per patient/family was 2.49 (range 0-11). The most frequent stressors were support from friends, family, community (30%), paying for food (26%), job flexibility (26%), school concerns (25%), emotional support for family (25%), and medical costs (23%). All who reported temporary housing also reported difficulty paying for a place to live (p < 0.0001). Providers reported that the standard tool generated new insight into family structures, challenges and needs informing resolution efforts. Provider recommended adjustments: simplify terms for siblings, hobbies and spiritual, adding question about pets in the home. Conclusions: Pilot testing of a psycho-social screening tool for pediatric and adolescent oncology informed providers of patient/family needs in a standard manner. Four of the seven sites involved in the pilot are now implementing this tool as a standard practice; the remaining sites are performing analyses on how to incorporate the tool into their care processes.
6569 Background: The Coleman Supportive Oncology Collaborative for Adolescents and Young Adults (CSOC AYA) is a multi-institution Chicago-based quality improvement collaborative consisting of representation from AYA-focused oncology teams at six hospitals and national patient advocacy organizations. Coping with cancer as an AYA is challenging given their complex and unique phases of life and dichotomy between pediatric and adult care. AYAs with cancer are a recognized underserved population within the cancer community and have unique supportive care needs that are often unmet. The CSOC AYA focuses on improving access to resources for supportive care. Methods: We implemented an online survey across six cancer treatment centers (5 academic, 1 community) engaging 50 AYAs. Participants were newly diagnosed (2), currently on treatment (18), or off treatment (30). Participant age range was representative of AYAs ( < 18years: 2%, 18 – 24: 36%, 25 – 34: 55%, and 35-39: 7%). Reported race was 60% Caucasian, 10% Black, 18% Latino, 8% Asian, 2% American Indian, and 2% other. Questions were asked to inform which supportive resources were desired by patients, when the resources would be most useful during the care continuum, and the preferred methods to receive information. Results: Greater than 54% percent of respondents desire social/emotional resources and peer connection at diagnosis. During treatment and after treatment, > 71% and > 56% respectively, desire guidance regarding nutrition/diet and physical activity/exercise, in addition to social/emotional support and peer connection (See table). Preferred methods to receive information were identified: 72% via email or text, 60% in person, and 45% via a patient portal. Conclusions: The CSOC AYA survey identified the type of supportive care resources AYAs need, when they are wanted, and their preferred methods for receiving them. Optimizing accessibility and availability of supportive care resources can enable AYA self-management and has the potential to improve quality of life. These survey results will serve as the basis for a patient-facing online intervention implemented throughout the care continuum with the intent to improve supportive care access for AYAs with cancer. [Table: see text]
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.