Linda E Carlson1, Erin L Zelinski1, Kirsti I Toivonen2, Laura Sundstrom3, Chad T Jobin3, Penny Damaskos4, Brad Zebrack3. 1. a Department of Oncology, Cumming School of Medicine , University of Calgary , Calgary , AB , Canada. 2. b Department of Psychology , University of Calgary , Calgary , AB , Canada. 3. c School of Social Work, University of Michigan , Ann Arbor , MI , USA. 4. d Association of Oncology Social Work , Oakbrook Terrace , IL , USA.
Abstract
Routine distress screening in United States oncology clinics has been mandatory since 2015. OBJECTIVE: This study was the first to assess distress in a geographically diverse sample of cancer patients following mandated distress screening implementation by oncology social workers. METHODS: Sites were self-selected via social workers who applied to participate in the Association of Oncology Social Work's Project to Assure Quality Cancer Care, advertised through their social media outlets and conference. Electronic screening records were collected from 55 cancer treatment centers in the United States and Canada. Cases required cancer diagnoses and Distress Thermometer (DT) scores to be included. Distress rates and rates by age, sex, cancer type, and ethnicity were examined. RESULTS: Of 4664 cases, 46% (2157) experienced significant distress (DT score ≥ 4). Being female, age 40-59, and having diagnoses of pancreatic or lung cancer was associated with increased likelihood of distress. Half of cases experience clinically-significant distress, though this need was not evenly distributed across patient or cancer types. CONCLUSION: Identifying those at risk for distress may help inform optimal resource allocation. Methods to address needs of distressed patients in cases of limited resources are discussed.
Routine distress screening in United States oncology clinics has been mandatory since 2015. OBJECTIVE: This study was the first to assess distress in a geographically diverse sample of cancerpatients following mandated distress screening implementation by oncology social workers. METHODS: Sites were self-selected via social workers who applied to participate in the Association of Oncology Social Work's Project to Assure Quality Cancer Care, advertised through their social media outlets and conference. Electronic screening records were collected from 55 cancer treatment centers in the United States and Canada. Cases required cancer diagnoses and Distress Thermometer (DT) scores to be included. Distress rates and rates by age, sex, cancer type, and ethnicity were examined. RESULTS: Of 4664 cases, 46% (2157) experienced significant distress (DT score ≥ 4). Being female, age 40-59, and having diagnoses of pancreatic or lung cancer was associated with increased likelihood of distress. Half of cases experience clinically-significant distress, though this need was not evenly distributed across patient or cancer types. CONCLUSION: Identifying those at risk for distress may help inform optimal resource allocation. Methods to address needs of distressed patients in cases of limited resources are discussed.
Authors: Mark Lazenby; Elizabeth Ercolano; Hui Tan; Leah Ferrucci; Terry Badger; Marcia Grant; Paul Jacobsen; Ruth McCorkle Journal: Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) Date: 2019-04-10 Impact factor: 2.520
Authors: Heather S L Jim; Aasha I Hoogland; Naomi C Brownstein; Anna Barata; Adam P Dicker; Hans Knoop; Brian D Gonzalez; Randa Perkins; Dana Rollison; Scott M Gilbert; Ronica Nanda; Anders Berglund; Ross Mitchell; Peter A S Johnstone Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2020-04-20 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Cari Davies; Stephen Lloyd Brown; Peter Fisher; Laura Hope-Stone; Debra Fisher; Andrew Morgan; Mary Gemma Cherry Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2022-08-08 Impact factor: 4.456
Authors: Jessica Molinaro; Anjishnu Banerjee; Stanley Lyndon; Sarah Slocum; Carrie Danhieux-Poole; Christine Restivo-Pritzl; Ann Marie Uselmann; Lyndsey Wallace; Jennifer M Knight Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2021-04-08 Impact factor: 3.955
Authors: Mohamad Baydoun; Chelsea Moran; Andrew McLennan; Katherine-Ann L Piedalue; Devesh Oberoi; Linda E Carlson Journal: Patient Prefer Adherence Date: 2021-06-09 Impact factor: 2.711
Authors: Jessica L Burris; Tia N Borger; Brent J Shelton; Audrey K Darville; Jamie L Studts; Joseph Valentino; Courtney Blair; D Bront Davis; Joan Scales Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2021-06-29