Kristen McCarter1,2,3,4, Elizabeth A Fradgley1,2,3,4, Ben Britton1,2,3,4,5, Jordan Tait1,4, Christine Paul1,2,3,4. 1. University of Newcastle, School of Medicine and Public Health, Newcastle, NSW. 2. University of Newcastle Priority Research Centre for Cancer Research, Innovation and Translation. 3. University of Newcastle Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour. 4. Hunter Cancer Research Alliance. 5. Hunter New England Health.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Clinically significant distress is common in patients with cancer and if untreated can be associated with adverse outcomes. This article offers a review of current approaches to implementing and reporting the minimum components of distress screening and management interventions in cancer services. RECENT FINDINGS: Twenty-two relevant published articles were identified from January 2018 to February 2020. The reporting of recommended minimum components of distress screening and management interventions in these articles was not consistent. The majority of studies used validated tools to conduct initial screening. However, recommendations were either not reported or not followed regarding subsequent pathway components, secondary assessment, referral pathways linked to screening results and rescreening. The majority of studies did not include a description of the implementation of the distress screening program. A small number of studies described a comprehensive set of implementation strategies. SUMMARY: Distress screening and management interventions in cancer are an important component of comprehensive cancer care. To improve patient outcomes and guide researchers and services to identify effective models, studies must include and evaluate minimum recommended components and implementation strategies. Addressing these limitations with high-quality, robust interventions is vital for advancing the implementation of effective distress management.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Clinically significant distress is common in patients with cancer and if untreated can be associated with adverse outcomes. This article offers a review of current approaches to implementing and reporting the minimum components of distress screening and management interventions in cancer services. RECENT FINDINGS: Twenty-two relevant published articles were identified from January 2018 to February 2020. The reporting of recommended minimum components of distress screening and management interventions in these articles was not consistent. The majority of studies used validated tools to conduct initial screening. However, recommendations were either not reported or not followed regarding subsequent pathway components, secondary assessment, referral pathways linked to screening results and rescreening. The majority of studies did not include a description of the implementation of the distress screening program. A small number of studies described a comprehensive set of implementation strategies. SUMMARY: Distress screening and management interventions in cancer are an important component of comprehensive cancer care. To improve patient outcomes and guide researchers and services to identify effective models, studies must include and evaluate minimum recommended components and implementation strategies. Addressing these limitations with high-quality, robust interventions is vital for advancing the implementation of effective distress management.
Authors: Erin E Hahn; Corrine E Munoz-Plaza; Dana Pounds; Lindsay Joe Lyons; Janet S Lee; Ernest Shen; Benjamin D Hong; Shannon La Cava; Farah M Brasfield; Lara N Durna; Karen W Kwan; David B Beard; Alexander Ferreira; Aswini Padmanabhan; Michael K Gould Journal: JAMA Date: 2022-01-04 Impact factor: 157.335
Authors: Magda A Oliveira; Marina P Guerra; Leonor Lencastre; Sónia Castro; Susana Moutinho; Crystal L Park Journal: Int J Clin Health Psychol Date: 2021-07-24
Authors: Kristen McCarter; Melissa A Carlson; Amanda L Baker; Chris L Paul; James Lynam; Lana N Johnston; Elizabeth A Fradgley Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2021-11-25 Impact factor: 3.603