Development, implementation, and initial results of the UC San Diego Health Moores Cancer Center Wellbeing Screening Tool.

OBJECTIVE: All accredited cancer institutions are required to screen patients for psychosocial distress. This paper describes the development, implementation, and preliminary outcomes of the University of California San Diego Health Moores Cancer Center Wellbeing Screening Program. METHOD: Essential steps learned in a formal National Cancer Institute-funded training workshop entitled "Implementing Comprehensive Biopsychosocial Screening" were followed to ensure successful program implementation. These steps included identification of stakeholders; formation of a working committee; establishment of a vision, process, and implementation timeline; creation of a screening tool; development of patient educational material; tool integration into an electronic medical record system; staff training and pilot testing of tool administration; and education about tool results and appropriate follow-up actions. Screening data were collected and analyzed retrospectively for preliminary results and rapid cycle improvement of the wellbeing screening process. RESULTS: Over an 8-month implementation and assessment period, the screening tool was administered 5,610 times of 7,664 expected administrations (73.2%.) to 2,394 unique patients. Visits in which the questionnaire was administered averaged 39.6 ± 14.8 minutes, compared with 40.3 ± 15.2 minutes for visits in which the questionnaire was not administered (t = -1.76, df = 7,662, p = 0.079). SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: This program provides a process and a tool for successful implementation of distress screening in cancer centers, in a meaningful way for patients and providers, while meeting accreditation standards. Further, meaningful data about patient distress and tool performance were able to be collected and utilized.

Use of psychosocial services increases after a social worker-mediated intervention in gynecology oncology patients.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the introduction of psychosocial services to gynecologic oncology outpatients by a social worker increases service use. During the initial six weeks (phase I), patients were referred for psychosocial services by clinic staff. During the second six weeks (phase II), a nurse introduced available services to each patient with a brochure. During the final 12 weeks (phase III), a social worker introduced services to each patient. The authors then compared psychosocial service referral rates. The sample included 196 patients. During phase III, the probability of a patient-initiated referral increased 3.4-fold (95 percent confidence interval [CI] [1.1, 10.4], p = .04) compared with baseline; the probability of any referral rose 2.7-fold (95 percent CI [1.1, 6.3], p = .03). The mean time to referral decreased from 79.4 days at baseline to 3.9 days during phase III (p < .001). The phase III intervention was accomplished only in 34 patients (39 percent) because of scheduling conflicts. Of these, eight requested referral, resulting in a 24 percent patient-initiated referral rate after meeting with a social worker. The introduction of psychosocial services by a social worker to gynecologic oncology outpatients increases referral rates and expedites evaluation.