BackgroundEnsuring high quality care for persons with diabetes remains a challenge for healthcare systems globally with consistent evidence of suboptimal care and outcomes. There is increasing interest in quality improvement strategies to improve diabetes management as reflected by a growing number of systematic reviews. These reviews are of varying quality and dispersed across many sources. In this paper, we present an overview of systematic reviews evaluating the impact of interventions to improve the quality of diabetes care.MethodsWe searched for systematic reviews evaluating the effectiveness of any intervention intended to improve intermediate patient outcomes and process of care measures for patients with any type of diabetes. Two reviewers independently screened search results, appraised each systematic review using AMSTAR and extracted data from high quality reviews (AMSTAR score ≥ 5). Within reviews, we used vote counting by direction of effect to report the number of studies favouring an intervention for each outcome. We produced summaries of results for each intervention category.ResultsWe identified 125 reviews of varying methodological quality and summarised key findings from 50 high quality reviews. We categorised reviews by quality improvement intervention. Eight reviews were broad based (involving a variety of strategies). Other reviews considered: patient education and support (n = 21), telemedicine (n = 10), provider role changes (n = 7), and organisational changes (n = 4). Reviews reported intermediate patient outcomes (e.g. glycaemic control) (n = 49) and process of care outcomes (n = 9). There was evidence of considerable overlap of included studies between reviews.ConclusionsThere is consistent evidence from high quality systematic reviews that patient education and support, provider role changes, and telemedicine are associated with improvements in glycaemic and vascular risk factor control in patients. There is less evidence about the impact of quality improvement interventions on other key process measures such as screening patients for diabetic complications. This paper provides decision makers with a comprehensive overview of evidence from high quality systematic reviews about the effects of quality improvement interventions on improving diabetes care.

Burnout incurs significant costs to health care organizations and professionals. Mattering, moral distress, and secondary traumatic stress are personal experiences linked to burnout and are byproducts of the organizations in which we work. This article conceptualizes health care organizations as moral communities—groups of people united by a common moral purpose to promote the well-being of others. We argue that health care organizations have a fundamental obligation to mitigate and prevent the costs of caring (eg, moral distress, secondary traumatic stress) and to foster a sense of mattering. Well-functioning moral communities have strong support systems, inclusivity, fairness, open communication, and collaboration and are able to protect their members. In this article, we address mattering, moral distress, and secondary traumatic stress as they relate to burnout. We conclude that leaders of moral communities are responsible for implementing systemic changes that foster mattering among its members and attend to the problems that cause moral distress and burnout.

No abstract

Background Inadequately managed pain is a serious problem for patients with cancer and those who care for them. Smart health systems can help with remote symptom monitoring and management, but they must be designed with meaningful end-user input. Objective This study aims to understand the experience of managing cancer pain at home from the perspective of both patients and family caregivers to inform design of the Behavioral and Environmental Sensing and Intervention for Cancer (BESI-C) smart health system. Methods This was a descriptive pilot study using a multimethod approach. Dyads of patients with cancer and difficult pain and their primary family caregivers were recruited from an outpatient oncology clinic. The participant interviews consisted of (1) open-ended questions to explore the overall experience of cancer pain at home, (2) ranking of variables on a Likert-type scale (0, no impact; 5, most impact) that may influence cancer pain at home, and (3) feedback regarding BESI-C system prototypes. Qualitative data were analyzed using a descriptive approach to identity patterns and key themes. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS; basic descriptive statistics and independent sample t tests were run. Results Our sample (n=22; 10 patient-caregiver dyads and 2 patients) uniformly described the experience of managing cancer pain at home as stressful and difficult. Key themes included (1) unpredictability of pain episodes; (2) impact of pain on daily life, especially the negative impact on sleep, activity, and social interactions; and (3) concerns regarding medications. Overall, taking pain medication was rated as the category with the highest impact on a patient’s pain (=4.79), followed by the categories of wellness (=3.60; sleep quality and quantity, physical activity, mood and oral intake) and interaction (=2.69; busyness of home, social or interpersonal interactions, physical closeness or proximity to others, and emotional closeness and connection to others). The category related to environmental factors (temperature, humidity, noise, and light) was rated with the lowest overall impact (=2.51). Patients and family caregivers expressed receptivity to the concept of BESI-C and reported a preference for using a wearable sensor (smart watch) to capture data related to the abrupt onset of difficult cancer pain. Conclusions Smart health systems to support cancer pain management should (1) account for the experience of both the patient and the caregiver, (2) prioritize passive monitoring of physiological and environmental variables to reduce burden, and (3) include functionality that can monitor and track medication intake and efficacy; wellness variables, such as sleep quality and quantity, physical activity, mood, and oral intake; and levels of social interaction and engagement. Systems must consider privacy and data sharing concerns and incorporate feasible strategies to capture and characterize rapid-onset symptoms.

Background Distressing cancer pain remains a serious symptom management issue for patients and family caregivers, particularly within home settings. Technology can support home-based cancer symptom management but must consider the experience of patients and family caregivers, as well as the broader environmental context. Objective This study aimed to test the feasibility and acceptability of a smart health sensing system—Behavioral and Environmental Sensing and Intervention for Cancer (BESI-C)—that was designed to support the monitoring and management of cancer pain in the home setting. Methods Dyads of patients with cancer and their primary family caregivers were recruited from an outpatient palliative care clinic at an academic medical center. BESI-C was deployed in each dyad home for approximately 2 weeks. Data were collected via environmental sensors to assess the home context (eg, light and temperature); Bluetooth beacons to help localize dyad positions; and smart watches worn by both patients and caregivers, equipped with heart rate monitors, accelerometers, and a custom app to deliver ecological momentary assessments (EMAs). EMAs enabled dyads to record and characterize pain events from both their own and their partners’ perspectives. Sensor data streams were integrated to describe and explore the context of cancer pain events. Feasibility was assessed both technically and procedurally. Acceptability was assessed using postdeployment surveys and structured interviews with participants. Results Overall, 5 deployments (n=10 participants; 5 patient and family caregiver dyads) were completed, and 283 unique pain events were recorded. Using our “BESI-C Performance Scoring Instrument,” the overall technical feasibility score for deployments was 86.4 out of 100. Procedural feasibility challenges included the rurality of dyads, smart watch battery life and EMA reliability, and the length of time required for deployment installation. Postdeployment acceptability Likert surveys (1=strongly disagree; 5=strongly agree) found that dyads disagreed that BESI-C was a burden (1.7 out of 5) or compromised their privacy (1.9 out of 5) and agreed that the system collected helpful information to better manage cancer pain (4.6 out of 5). Participants also expressed an interest in seeing their own individual data (4.4 out of 5) and strongly agreed that it is important that data collected by BESI-C are shared with their respective partners (4.8 out of 5) and health care providers (4.8 out of 5). Qualitative feedback from participants suggested that BESI-C positively improved patient-caregiver communication regarding pain management. Importantly, we demonstrated proof of concept that seriously ill patients with cancer and their caregivers will mark pain events in real time using a smart watch. Conclusions It is feasible to deploy BESI-C, and dyads find the system acceptable. By leveraging human-centered design and the integration of heterogenous environmental, physiological, and behavioral data, the BESI-C system offers an innovative approach to monitor cancer pain, mitigate the escalation of pain and distress, and improve symptom management self-efficacy. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) RR2-10.2196/16178

Background One way to improve the delivery of oncology palliative care in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) is to leverage mobile technology to support healthcare providers in implementing pain management guidelines (PMG). However, PMG are often developed in higher-resourced settings and may not be appropriate for the resource and cultural context of LMICs. Objectives This research represents a collaboration between the University of Virginia and the Nepalese Association of Palliative Care (NAPCare) to design a mobile health application (‘app’) to scale-up implementation of existing locally developed PMG. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional survey of clinicians within Nepal to inform design of the app. Questions focused on knowledge, beliefs, and confidence in managing cancer pain; barriers to cancer pain management; awareness and use of the NAPCare PMG; barriers to smart phone use and desired features of a mobile app. Findings Surveys were completed by 97 palliative care and/or oncology healthcare providers from four diverse cancer care institutions in Nepal. 49.5% (n = 48) had training in palliative care/cancer pain management and the majority (63.9%, n = 62) reported high confidence levels (scores of 8 or higher/10) in managing cancer pain. Highest ranked barriers to cancer pain management included those at the country/cultural level, such as nursing and medical school curricula lacking adequate content about palliative care and pain management, and patients who live in rural areas experiencing difficulty accessing healthcare services (overall mean = 6.36/10). Most nurses and physicians use an Android Smart Phone (82%, n = 74), had heard of the NAPCare PMG (96%, n = 88), and reported frequent use of apps to provide clinical care (mean = 6.38/10, n = 92). Key barriers to smart phone use differed by discipline, with nurses reporting greater concerns related to cost of data access (70%, n = 45) and being prohibited from using a mobile phone at work (61%; n = 39). Conclusions Smart phone apps can help implement PMG and support healthcare providers in managing cancer pain in Nepal and similar settings. However, such tools must be designed to be culturally and contextually congruent and address perceived barriers to pain management and app use.

BACKGROUND Distressing cancer pain remains a serious symptom management issue for patients and family caregivers, especially in the home setting. Technology can support home-based cancer symptom management but must consider the experience of both patients and family caregivers, as well as the broader environmental context. OBJECTIVE To test feasibility and acceptability of a smart health sensing system, Behavioral and Environmental Sensing and Intervention for Cancer (BESI-C), designed to monitor, and ultimately support management of, cancer pain in the home setting. METHODS Dyads of patients with cancer and their primary family caregivers were recruited from an outpatient palliative care clinic at an academic medical center in the Southeastern U.S. BESI-C was deployed in dyad homes for approximately two weeks each. Data were collected via: 1) environmental sensors that measure ambient noise, humidity, barometric pressure, light, and temperature; 2) Bluetooth beacons to help localize dyad position; and 3) smart watches worn by both patients and caregivers equipped with heartrate monitors, accelerometers, and a custom application to deliver ecological momentary assessments (EMAs). EMAs enabled dyads to record and characterize pain events from both their own and their partner’s perspective. Sensor data streams were integrated to describe and explore the context for cancer pain events. Feasibility was assessed technically (by scoring each deployment regarding fidelity of data capture across system components) and procedurally (e.g., deployment process, participant recruitment). Acceptability was assessed by post-deployment surveys and structured interviews with participants. RESULTS 5 deployments (n=10 participants; 5 dyads of patients and primary family caregivers) were completed, and a total of 283 unique pain events were recorded. Using our ‘BESI-C Performance Scoring Instrument’, the overall feasibility technical score for deployments was 86.4/100. Procedural feasibility challenges included: rural location of dyads; smart watch battery life and EMA reliability; and length of time required for deployment installation. Post-deployment acceptability Likert surveys (1, strongly disagree; 5, strongly agree), found dyads disagreed that BESI-C was a burden (1.7/5) or compromised their privacy (1.9/5) and agreed the system collected helpful information to better manage cancer pain (4.6/5). Participants also expressed interest in seeing their own individual data (4.4/5) and strongly agreed it is important that data collected by BESI-C are shared with their respective partner (4.8/5) and healthcare provider (4.8/5). Qualitative feedback from participants suggests BESI-C positively improved communication regarding pain management. Importantly, we demonstrated proof of concept that seriously ill patients and their caregivers will mark pain events in real time using a smart watch. CONCLUSIONS It is feasible to deploy BESI-C, and dyads find the system acceptable. Leveraging human-centered design and the collection of heterogenous environmental, physiological, and behavioral data, BESI-C offers an innovative approach to monitor cancer pain, mitigate escalation of pain and distress, and improve symptom management self-efficacy. Future work will: (shorter-term) 1) test BESI-C in a larger, more diverse sample; 2) continue to streamline system architecture; 3) deploy a no-contact, self-installation system in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and to enhance scalability; 4) explore how to best share data visualizations of collected data with key stakeholders; and 5) (longer-term) inform design of and deliver just-in-time personalized pain management interventions to patients and caregivers. CLINICALTRIAL n/a INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT RR2-10.2196/16178

Purpose Shared decision making (SDM) among the oncology population is highly important due to complex screening and treatment decisions. SDM among patients with cancer, caregivers, and clinicians has gained more attention and importance, yet few articles have systematically examined SDM, specifically in the adult oncology population. This review aims to explore SDM within the oncology literature and help identify major gaps and concerns, with the goal to provide guidance in the development of clear SDM definitions and interventions. Methods We conducted a scoping review using the Arksey and O’Malley approach along with the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist. A systematic search was conducted in four databases that included publications since 2016. Results Of the 364 initial articles, eleven publications met the inclusion criteria. We included articles that were original research, cancer related, and focused on shared decision making. Most studies were limited in defining SDM and operationalizing a model of SDM. There were several concerns revealed related to SDM: (1) racial inequality, (2) quality and preference of the patient, caregiver, and clinician communication is important, and (3) the use of a decision-making aid or tool provides value to the patient experience. Conclusion Inconsistencies regarding the meaning and operationalization of SDM and inequality of the SDM process among patients from different racial/ethnic backgrounds impact the health and quality of care patients receive. Future studies should clearly and consistently define the meaning of SDM and develop decision aids that incorporate bidirectional, interactive communication between patients, caregivers, and clinicians that account for the diversity of racial, ethnic, and sociocultural backgrounds and preferences. Supplementary information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07556-8.