Key factors in the success of DART implementation were the adoption of a programmatic approach, strong institutional commitment, and a primary focus on clinic-based response. We have demonstrated that large-scale routine screening for distress in a cancer center is achievable and has the potential to enhance the cancer care experience for both patients and staff.

Malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) is a major complication in women with advanced gynecologic cancers which imposes a significant burden on patients, caregivers, and healthcare systems. Symptoms of MBO are challenging to palliate and result in progressive decompensation of already vulnerable patients with limited therapeutic options and a short prognosis. However, there is a paucity of guidelines or innovative approaches to improve the care of women who develop MBO. MBO is a complex clinical situation that requires a multidisciplinary approach to ensure the appropriate treatment modality and interprofessional care to optimally manage these patients. This review summarizes the current literature on the different approaches targeting MBO management including surgical intervention, chemotherapy, total parenteral nutrition, and pharmacological treatment. In addition, the impact of MBO management on patients' quality of life (QOL) is examined. This article focuses on the challenges in developing evidence-based treatment guidelines for MBO and barriers in clinical trial design for MBO and proposes strategies to advance the MBO management. Collaboration is essential to design studies that may improve the overall care and quality of life for these patients. Prospective data are needed to inform clinical practice, establish a new benchmark for evidence-based MBO management, and better understand the biology of MBO.

PURPOSE: Malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) is a common and distressing complication in women with advanced gynecologic cancer. A pilot, interprofessional MBO program was launched in 2016 at a large Canadian tertiary cancer center to integrate these patients’ complex care needs across multiple disciplines and support women with MBO. METHOD: Retrospective analysis to evaluate the outcomes of women with advanced gynecologic cancer who were admitted to hospital because of MBO, before (2014 to 2016: baseline group) and after (2016 to 2018) implementation of the MBO program. RESULTS: Of the 169 women evaluated, 106 and 63 were in the baseline group and MBO program group, respectively. Most had ovarian cancer (n = 124; 73%) and had small-bowel obstruction (n = 131; 78%). There was a significantly shorter cumulative hospital length of stay (LOSsum) within the first 60 days of MBO diagnosis in the MBO program group compared with the baseline group (13 v 22 days, respectively; adjusted P = .006). The median overall survival for women treated in the MBO program was also significantly longer compared with the baseline group (243 v 99 days, respectively; adjusted P = .002). Using the interprofessional MBO care platform, a greater proportion of patients received palliative chemotherapy (83% v 56%) and less surgery (11% v 21%) in the MBO program group than in the baseline group, respectively. A subgroup of women (n = 11) received total parenteral nutrition for longer than 6 months. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a comprehensive, interprofessional MBO program significantly affects patient care and may improve outcomes. Unique to this MBO program is an integrated outpatient model of care and education that empowers patients to recognize MBO symptoms for early intervention.

The COVID-19 pandemic has strained healthcare resources the world over, requiring healthcare providers to make resource allocation decisions under extraordinary pressures. A year later, our understanding of COVID-19 has advanced, but our process for making ethical decisions surrounding resource allocation has not. During the first wave of the pandemic, our institution uniformly ramped-down clinical activity to accommodate the anticipated demands of COVID-19, resulting in resource waste and inefficiency. In preparation for the second wave, we sought to make such ramp down decisions more prudently and ethically. We report the development of a tool that can be used to make fair and ethical decisions in times of resource scarcity. We formed an interprofessional team to develop and use this tool to ensure that a diverse range of stakeholder perspectives were represented in this development process. This team, called the clinical activity recovery team, established institutional objectives that were combined with well-established procedural values, substantive ethical principles and decision-making criteria by using a variation on the well-known accountability for reasonableness ethical framework. The result of this is a stepwise, semiquantitative, ethical decision tool that can be applied to resource allocation challenges in order to reach fair and ethically defensible decisions. This ethical decision tool can be applied in various contexts and may prove useful at both the institutional and the departmental level; indeed this is how it is applied at our centre. As the second wave of COVID-19 strains healthcare resources, this tool can help clinical leaders to make fair decisions.

Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer aged 15-39 years have unique psychosocial, informational, and medical concerns compared to their older adult and pediatric counterparts. Recognizing the gaps in young adult cancer care, an AYA program was launched at a large tertiary cancer center to optimize the AYA cancer care experience. This article describes the contributions of a clinical nurse specialist in AYA program development.

No abstract

ObjectivesDiagnostic assessment programmes (DAPs) can reduce wait times for cancer diagnosis, but optimal DAP design is unknown. This study explored how organisational characteristics influenced multidisciplinary teamwork and diagnostic service delivery in lung cancer DAPs.DesignA mixed-methods approach integrated data from descriptive qualitative interviews and medical record abstraction at 4 lung cancer DAPs. Findings were analysed with the Integrated Team Effectiveness Model.Setting4 DAPs at 2 teaching and 2 community hospitals in Canada.Participants22 staff were interviewed about organisational characteristics, target service benchmarks, and teamwork processes, determinants and outcomes; 314 medical records were reviewed for actual service benchmarks.ResultsFormal, informal and asynchronous team processes enabled service delivery and yielded many perceived benefits at the patient, staff and service levels. However, several DAP characteristics challenged teamwork and service delivery: referral volume/workload, time since launch, days per week of operation, rural–remote population, number and type of full-time/part-time human resources, staff colocation, information systems. As a result, all sites failed to meet target benchmarks (from referral to consultation median 4.0 visits, median wait time 35.0 days). Recommendations included improved information systems, more staff in all specialties, staff colocation and expanded roles for patient navigators. Findings were captured in a conceptual framework of lung cancer DAP teamwork determinants and outcomes.ConclusionsThis study identified several DAP characteristics that could be improved to facilitate teamwork and enhance service delivery, thereby contributing to knowledge of organisational determinants of teamwork and associated outcomes. Findings can be used to update existing DAP guidelines, and by managers to plan or evaluate lung cancer DAPs. Ongoing research is needed to identify ideal roles for navigators, and staffing models tailored to case volumes.

Diagnostic assessment programmes (DAPs) coordinate multidisciplinary teamwork (MDT), and improve wait times and patient satisfaction. No research has established optimal DAP design. This study explored how DAP characteristics influence service delivery. A mixed methods case study of four breast cancer DAPs was conducted including qualitative interviews with health‐care providers and retrospective chart review. Data were integrated using multiple approaches. Twenty‐three providers were interviewed; 411 medical records were reviewed. The number of visits and wait times from referral to diagnosis and consultation were lowest at a one‐stop model. DAP characteristics (rural–remote region, human resources, referral volume, organisation of services, adherence to service delivery targets and one‐stop model) may influence service delivery (number of visits, wait times). MDT, influenced by other DAP characteristics (co‐location of staff, patient navigators, team functioning), may also influence service delivery. While the one‐stop model may be ideal, all sites experienced similar and unique challenges. Further research is needed to understand how to optimise the organisation and delivery of DAP services. Measures reflecting individual, team and patient‐reported outcomes should be used to assess the effectiveness and impact of DAPs in addition to more traditional measures such as wait times.