Literature DB >> 26850486

Evaluating the Impact of Provincial Implementation of Screening for Distress on Quality of Life, Symptom Reports, and Psychosocial Well-Being in Patients With Cancer.

Linda Watson1, Shannon Groff1, Rie Tamagawa1, Jennifer Looyis1, Sydney Farkas1, Brent Schaitel1, Andrea DeIure1, Peter Faris1, Barry D Bultz2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although a number of accreditation agencies and professional societies recommend routine screening for distress (SFD) for patients with cancer, it has been integrated very slowly into clinical practice.
OBJECTIVES: This evaluation investigated the impact of a large-scale SFD intervention on patients' quality of life, symptom reports, and psychosocial well-being. The SFD intervention involved (1) completion of the SFD tool by patients, (2) discussion between patient and provider about the concerns indicated, and (3) provision of appropriate assessments/interventions based on priority concerns. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This quality improvement work included a pre-evaluation and postevaluation of the impact of implementation on patients' well-being. Patients in cohort 1 (N=740) were surveyed before implementation, whereas patients in cohort 2 (N=534) were surveyed 10 months after the implementation at 17 clinics province-wide. As part of the implementation, providers received training on assessing and responding to patient priority concerns with the standardized tool.
RESULTS: No differences were seen in total score of quality of life between the cohorts. Fewer patients in cohort 2 than in cohort 1 reported health problems, including tiredness, drowsiness, poor appetite, nausea, anxiety, and poor well-being. Similarly, significantly fewer patients in cohort 2 endorsed problems relating to emotional, practical, informational, spiritual, social, and physical aspects of well-being.
CONCLUSIONS: Results showed significantly improved psychological and physical symptoms and psychosocial well-being after routine SFD was implemented, suggesting that a large-scale SFD intervention is beneficial for patients when it is integrated into existing clinical practice and community resources.
Copyright © 2016 by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26850486     DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2016.0019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw        ISSN: 1540-1405            Impact factor:   11.908


  8 in total

Review 1.  Psychosocial distress and its effects on the health-related quality of life of primary brain tumor patients.

Authors:  Dina Randazzo; Katherine B Peters
Journal:  CNS Oncol       Date:  2016-07-11

2.  A cross sectional analysis from a single institution's experience of psychosocial distress and health-related quality of life in the primary brain tumor population.

Authors:  Dina M Randazzo; Frances McSherry; James E Herndon; Mary Lou Affronti; Eric S Lipp; Charlene Flahiff; Elizabeth Miller; Sarah Woodring; Maria Freeman; Patrick Healy; Janet Minchew; Susan Boulton; Annick Desjardins; Gordana Vlahovic; Henry S Friedman; Stephen Keir; Katherine B Peters
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 4.130

3.  Patient-reported outcomes in Alberta: rationale, scope, and design of a database initiative.

Authors:  C A Cuthbert; L Watson; Y Xu; D J Boyne; B R Hemmelgarn; W Y Cheung
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 3.677

4.  Assessing the utility of a distress screening tool at capturing sexual concerns in a gyne-oncology follow-up clinic.

Authors:  Lauren M Walker; Majken P Villiger; John W Robinson
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2017-10-06       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Age differences in cancer-related stress, spontaneous emotion regulation, and emotional distress.

Authors:  Bruna Martins-Klein; Patricia M Bamonti; Montgomery Owsiany; Aanand Naik; Jennifer Moye
Journal:  Aging Ment Health       Date:  2019-12-18       Impact factor: 3.658

6.  Missing in Action: Reports of Interdisciplinary Integration in Canadian Palliative Care.

Authors:  Maggie C Robinson; Maryam Qureshi; Aynharan Sinnarajah; Srini Chary; Janet M de Groot; Andrea Feldstain
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2021-07-16       Impact factor: 3.677

7.  Cancer patients' experiences with and opinions on the process 'Screening of Distress and Referral Need' (SDRN) in clinical practice: A quantitative observational clinical study.

Authors:  Floor M van Nuenen; Stacey M Donofrio; Harry B M van de Wiel; Josette E H M Hoekstra-Weebers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-06-14       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Effects on patient-reported outcomes of "Screening of Distress and Referral Need" implemented in Dutch oncology practice.

Authors:  Floor M van Nuenen; Stacey M Donofrio; Marrit A Tuinman; Harry B M van de Wiel; Josette E H M Hoekstra-Weebers
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2019-11-28       Impact factor: 3.603

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.