William F Pirl1,2, Joseph A Greer2,3, Sharla Wells-Di Gregorio4, Teresa Deshields5, Scott Irwin6, Karen Fasciano1,2, Lori Wiener7, Tiffany Courtnage8, Lynne S Padgett9, Jesse R Fann8,10. 1. Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 2. Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 3. Center for Psychiatric Oncology and Behavioral Sciences, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 4. Psychosocial Oncology, James Cancer Hospital, Columbus, Ohio, USA. 5. Supportive Oncology, Rush University Cancer Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA. 6. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurosciences, Cedars-Sinai Health System, Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Los Angeles, California, USA. 7. Pediatric Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 8. Psychosocial Oncology, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, Washington, USA. 9. Department of Psychology, Washington DC Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia, USA. 10. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: While screening for psychosocial distress is now the standard of care in oncology, little guidance is available on how best to deliver services in response to identified needs. The American Psychosocial Oncology Society (APOS) convened a task force with the goal of creating a framework that could aid in planning services and justifying requests for resources. METHODS: Ten experts from multiple disciplines within psychosocial oncology served on the task force, first meeting together as a larger group over 2 days to set an agenda and then subsequently working in smaller teams to execute the goals. The task force used consensus methods for developing recommendations. RESULTS: Three principles were identified for the framework. First, psychosocial oncology is a key component of population health, and population-based approaches to care delivery are required. Second, several key parameters shape psychosocial oncology services: resources, aims, and scope. To guide resource allocation, example priorities were identified for the aims and scope of services. Finally, cancer care centers should strive to ensure the delivery of high-quality psychosocial oncology care across all components of care. A range of practices was ranked by their potential contributions to achieving that goal. CONCLUSIONS: This framework may aid in planning, evaluating, and refining the delivery of responsive psychosocial oncology services.
OBJECTIVE: While screening for psychosocial distress is now the standard of care in oncology, little guidance is available on how best to deliver services in response to identified needs. The American Psychosocial Oncology Society (APOS) convened a task force with the goal of creating a framework that could aid in planning services and justifying requests for resources. METHODS: Ten experts from multiple disciplines within psychosocial oncology served on the task force, first meeting together as a larger group over 2 days to set an agenda and then subsequently working in smaller teams to execute the goals. The task force used consensus methods for developing recommendations. RESULTS: Three principles were identified for the framework. First, psychosocial oncology is a key component of population health, and population-based approaches to care delivery are required. Second, several key parameters shape psychosocial oncology services: resources, aims, and scope. To guide resource allocation, example priorities were identified for the aims and scope of services. Finally, cancer care centers should strive to ensure the delivery of high-quality psychosocial oncology care across all components of care. A range of practices was ranked by their potential contributions to achieving that goal. CONCLUSIONS: This framework may aid in planning, evaluating, and refining the delivery of responsive psychosocial oncology services.
Authors: Corinne van Scheppingen; Maya J Schroevers; Ans Smink; Yvette M van der Linden; Véronique E Mul; Johannes A Langendijk; James C Coyne; Robbert Sanderman Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2011-03-06 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Betty M Steenkamer; Hanneke W Drewes; Richard Heijink; Caroline A Baan; Jeroen N Struijs Journal: Popul Health Manag Date: 2016-04-28 Impact factor: 2.459
Authors: Madeline Li; Erin B Kennedy; Nelson Byrne; Caroline Gérin-Lajoie; Mark R Katz; Homa Keshavarz; Scott Sellick; Esther Green Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2016-10-24 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Kelli Jane K Harding; A John Rush; Melissa Arbuckle; Madhukar H Trivedi; Harold Alan Pincus Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2011-01-11 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Jennifer L Steel; David A Geller; Kevin H Kim; Lisa H Butterfield; Michael Spring; Jonathan Grady; Weiing Sun; Wallis Marsh; Michael Antoni; Mary Amanda Dew; Vicki Helgeson; Richard Schulz; Allan Tsung Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-03-11 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Barbara L Andersen; Robert J DeRubeis; Barry S Berman; Jessie Gruman; Victoria L Champion; Mary Jane Massie; Jimmie C Holland; Ann H Partridge; Kate Bak; Mark R Somerfield; Julia H Rowland Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-04-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Brad Zebrack; Karen Kayser; Lynne Padgett; Laura Sundstrom; Chad Jobin; Krista Nelson; Iris C Fineberg Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-04-12 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Michael Kusch; Hildegard Labouvie; Vera Schiewer; Natalie Talalaev; Jan C Cwik; Sonja Bussmann; Lusine Vaganian; Alexander L Gerlach; Antje Dresen; Natalia Cecon; Sandra Salm; Theresia Krieger; Holger Pfaff; Clarissa Lemmen; Lisa Derendorf; Stephanie Stock; Christina Samel; Anna Hagemeier; Martin Hellmich; Bernd Leicher; Gregor Hültenschmidt; Jessica Swoboda; Peter Haas; Anna Arning; Andrea Göttel; Kathrin Schwickerath; Ullrich Graeven; Stefanie Houwaart; Hedy Kerek-Bodden; Steffen Krebs; Christiana Muth; Christina Hecker; Marcel Reiser; Cornelia Mauch; Jennifer Benner; Gerdamarie Schmidt; Christiane Karlowsky; Gisela Vimalanandan; Lukas Matyschik; Lars Galonska; Annette Francke; Karin Osborne; Ursula Nestle; Markus Bäumer; Kordula Schmitz; Jürgen Wolf; Michael Hallek Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-04-22 Impact factor: 2.908
Authors: David Macias; Brittany N Hand; Patrik Pipkorn; Amy M Williams; Steven S Chang; Joseph Zenga; Marci L Nilsen; Bethany A Rhoten; Andrew T Huang; Nosayaba Osazuwa-Peters; Stacey Maurer; Wendy Balliet; Hong Li; Kenneth J Ruggiero; Katherine R Sterba; Evan M Graboyes Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2021-12-10