Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of Lymfit: A Theory-Guided Exercise Intervention for Young Adults with Lymphoma.

Despite the rapidly emerging evidence on the contributions of physical activity to improving cancer-related health outcomes, adherence to physical activity among young adults with lymphoma remains suboptimal. Guided by self-determination theory (SDT), the Lymfit intervention (a 12-week individualized exercise program with bi-weekly kinesiologist support and an activity tracker) aimed to foster autonomous motivation toward physical activity. This pilot randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effects of Lymfit. Young adults (N = 26; mean age of 32.1 years) with lymphoma who were newly diagnosed and those up to six months after completing treatment were recruited and randomly assigned one-to-one to either the intervention group (n = 13) or a wait-list control group (n = 13). All a priori feasibility benchmarks were met, confirming the feasibility of the study in terms of recruitment uptake, retention, questionnaire completion, intervention fidelity, missing data, Fitbit wear adherence, and control group design. The intervention acceptability assessment showed high ratings, with eight out of ten items receiving >80% high ratings. At post-intervention, an analysis of covariance models showed a clinically significant increase in self-reported physical activity levels, psychological need satisfaction, and exercise motivation in the intervention group compared to controls. Lymfit also led to meaningful changes in six quality-of-life domains in the intervention group, including anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, social roles and activities, and pain interference. The findings support Lymfit as a promising means to meet psychological needs and increase the autonomous motivation for physical activity in this group. A fully powered efficacy trial is warranted to assess the validity of these findings.

Measuring Team Functioning During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Perspectives of Cancer Care Team Members.

Background: In a public health crisis such as COVID-19, cancer teams face significant challenges including acute work disruptions, rapid shifts in clinical practice, and burnout. Within this context, it is crucial to explore team functioning from the perspectives of multiple stakeholders. Objective: This quantitative pilot study aimed to 1) measure perceptions of multi-stakeholders on key indicators of team functioning (Team Effectiveness, TE, and Team Relational Coordination, TRC) during COVID-19 and its transition, and 2) document whether patient perceptions of TE/TRC are significantly associated with their cancer care experiences. Methods: A descriptive design with repeated measures was used. Through convenience sampling, participants were recruited from two outpatient cancer clinics at a large university-affiliated hospital, in Montréal, Qc, Canada. Sixty-six participants (ie, 13 healthcare professionals, 40 patients, 6 informal caregivers, and 7 volunteers) completed e-measures at T1 (years 2021-2022) and n = 44 at T2 (year 2023). Results: At T1, participants reported high perceptions of Team Effectiveness (scale 1 to 6) M = 4.47; SD = 0.7 (Mdn = 4.54; IQR: 4.06-5) and Relational Coordination (scale 1 to 5) M = 3.77; SD = 0.77 (Mdn = 3.81; IQR: 3.12-4.38) with no significant differences in perceptions across the four groups. At T2, no significant changes in TE/TRC perceptions were found. At both time points, patient perceptions of TE/TRC were significantly correlated with positive cancer care experiences (Spearman rank correlation rs ranging from 0.69 and 0.83; p < 0.01). Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first study documenting perceptions of cancer team functioning amidst the pandemic as reported by multiple stakeholders. Significant relationships between patient perceptions of TE/TRC and their cancer care experiences underscore the importance of including patients' views in team functioning processes. Future work should rely on larger sample sizes to further explore key elements of optimal team functioning.

Finding a needle in a haystack: The identification of clinical practice guidelines for psychosocial oncology through an environmental scan of the academic and gray literature.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are evidence-based tools well-suited to translate the latest research evidence into recommendations for routine clinical care. Given the rapid expansion of psychosocial oncology research, they represent a key opportunity for informing the treatment decisions of overburdened clinicians, standardizing service delivery, and improving patient-reported outcomes. Yet, there is little consensus on how clinicians can most effectively access these tools and little to no information on the current availability and scope of CPGs for the range of psychosocial symptoms and concerns experienced by patients with cancer. METHOD: Our environmental scan consisted of an academic and gray literature designed to identify currently available CPGs addressing a range of cancer-related psychosocial symptoms. RESULTS: Findings revealed a total of 23 existing psychosocial oncology CPGs that met full eligibility criteria. The gray literature search was found to be more effective at identifying CPGs (n = 22) compared to the academic search (n = 9). CONCLUSION: Several concerns arose from the systematic search. The limited publication of CPGs in peer-reviewed journals may make clinicians and stakeholders more hesitant to implement CPGs due to uncertainties about the methodological rigor of the development process. Further, many existing CPGs are outdated or failed to be updated according to guideline recommendations, meaning that the recommendations may fall short of their purpose to translate up-to-date research findings. FUTURE DIRECTIONS: Future research should seek to systematically assess the quality of existing psychosocial oncology CPGs and shed light on the current state of implementation and adherence in clinical practice in order to better inform guideline developers on the current needs of the psychosocial oncology community.

CAPO and CANO joining forces to advance a national psychosocial oncology advocacy agenda.

Patient advocacy remains a key priority within the Canadian Association of Psychosocial Oncology (CAPO) and the Canadian Association of Nurses in Oncology (CANO). Optimizing collaboration across advocacy organizations, institutions, and other stakeholders is timely as we enter an era where patients and their caregivers' voices are front and centre. In this paper, we report on ongoing efforts to advance patient advocacy - broadly defined as processes and behaviours related to proactively supporting a cause - herein specific to cancer care. Through active partnering, both organizations are well positioned to push for a representative and inclusive national psychosocial oncology advocacy agenda.

Cancer Care Team Functioning during COVID-19: A Narrative Literature Review and Synthesis.

Amid pandemics, health care teams face unprecedented challenges, requiring significant efforts to sustain optimal functioning and navigate rapid practice changes. It is therefore crucial to identify factors affecting team functioning in these contexts. The present narrative review more specifically summarizes the literature on key elements of cancer teams' functioning during COVID-19. The search strategy involved four main databases (i.e., Medline OVID, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL), as well as Google Scholar, from January 2000 to September 2022. Twenty-three publications were found to be relevant. Each was read thoroughly, and its content summarized. Across publications, three key themes emerged: (1) swiftly adopting virtual technology for communication and interprofessional collaboration, (2) promoting team resilience, and (3) encouraging self-care and optimizing team support. Our findings underscore key team functioning elements to address in future pandemics. More research is needed to document the perspectives of broader-based team members (such as patients and lay carers) to inform more comprehensive evidence-based team functioning guidelines.

Patient Adherence to Oral Anticancer Agents: A Mapping Review of Supportive Interventions.

The development and use of oral anticancer agents (OAAs) continue to grow, and supporting individuals on OAAs is now a priority as they find themselves taking these drugs at home with little professional guidance. This mapping review provides an overview of the current evidence concerning OAA-supportive adherence interventions, identifying potential gaps, and making recommendations to guide future work. Four large databases and the grey literature were searched for publications from 2010 to 2022. Quantitative, qualitative, mixed-method, theses/dissertations, reports, and abstracts were included, whereas protocols and reviews were excluded. Duplicates were removed, and the remaining publications were screened by title and abstract. Full-text publications were assessed and those meeting the inclusion criteria were retained. Data extracted included the year of publication, theoretical underpinnings, study design, targeted patients, sample size, intervention type, and primary outcome(s). 3175 publications were screened, with 435 fully read. Of these, 314 were excluded with 120 retained. Of the 120 publications, 39.2% (n = 47) were observational studies, 38.3% (n = 46) were quasi-experimental, and 16.7% (n = 20) were experimental. Only 17.5% (n = 21) were theory-based. Despite the known efficacy of multi-modal interventions, 63.7% (n = 76) contained one or two modalities, 33.3% (n = 40) included 3, and 3.3% (n = 4) contained four types of modalities. Medication adherence was measured primarily through self-report (n = 31) or chart review/pharmacy refills (n = 28). Given the importance of patient tailored interventions, future work should test whether having four intervention modalities (behavioral, educational, medical, and technological) guided by theory can optimize OAA-related outcomes.

Abstract Proceedings of the 38th Annual Canadian Association of Psychosocial Oncology (CAPO) Conference, June 2023.

On behalf of the Canadian Association of Psychosocial Oncology, we are pleased to present the Abstracts from the 2023 Annual Conference, titled "Co-designing Psychosocial Oncology: Optimizing Outcomes for All". The conference was held in Montreal from 20 June 2023 to 22 June 2023. This conference brought together key stakeholders including multidisciplinary professionals from nursing, psychology, psychiatry, social work, spiritual care, nutrition, medicine, rehabilitation medicine, occupational health and radiation therapy for both adult and pediatric populations. Participants included clinicians, researchers, educators in cancer care, community-based organizations and patient representatives. Patients, caregivers and family members presented abstracts that spoke to their role in managing cancer experiences and care. Over one hundred (100) abstracts were selected for presentation as symposia, 20-min oral presentations, 10-min oral presentations, 90-min workshops and poster presentations. We congratulate all the presenters on their research work and contribution.

Perceptions and Usability of PREVENTION: A Breast Cancer Risk Assessment e-Platform.

BACKGROUND: The PREVENTION e-platform was developed to provide accessible and evidence-based health information tailored to different Breast Cancer (BC) risk levels. The demonstration study objectives were to (1) assess the usability and perceived impact of PREVENTION on women with assigned hypothetical BC risk levels (i.e., near population, intermediate or high) and (2) explore perceptions and recommendations for e-platform improvement. METHODS: Thirty women with no history of cancer were recruited through social media, commercial centers, health clinics, and community settings in Montreal, Qc, Canada. Participants accessed e-platform content tailored to their assigned hypothetical BC risk level, and then completed study e-questionnaires including the user Mobile Application Rating Scale (uMARS), an e-platform quality scale (i.e., in terms of engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and information). A subsample (n = 18) was randomly selected for an individual follow-up semi-structured interview. RESULTS: The e-platform overall quality was high, with mean M = 4.01 (out of 5) and SD = 0.50. A total of 87% (n = 26) agreed or strongly agreed that PREVENTION increased their knowledge and awareness of BC risk, and 80% would recommend it to others while reporting likelihood of following lifestyle recommendations to decrease their BC risk. Follow up interviews indicated that participants perceived the e-platform as a trusted source of BC information and a promising means to connect with peers. They also reported that while the e-platform was easy to navigate, improvements were needed for connectivity, visuals, and the organization of scientific resources. CONCLUSION: Preliminary findings support PREVENTION as a promising means to provide personalized BC information and support. Efforts are underway to further refine the platform, assess its impact in larger samples and gather feedback from BC specialists.

Comparison of the accuracy of the 7-item HADS Depression subscale and 14-item total HADS for screening for major depression: A systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.

The seven-item Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale Depression subscale (HADS-D) and the total score of the 14-item HADS (HADS-T) are both used for major depression screening. Compared to the HADS-D, the HADS-T includes anxiety items and requires more time to complete. We compared the screening accuracy of the HADS-D and HADS-T for major depression detection. We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis and fit bivariate random effects models to assess diagnostic accuracy among participants with both HADS-D and HADS-T scores. We identified optimal cutoffs, estimated sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals, and compared screening accuracy across paired cutoffs via two-stage and individual-level models. We used a 0.05 equivalence margin to assess equivalency in sensitivity and specificity. 20,700 participants (2,285 major depression cases) from 98 studies were included. Cutoffs of ≥7 for the HADS-D (sensitivity 0.79 [0.75, 0.83], specificity 0.78 [0.75, 0.80]) and ≥15 for the HADS-T (sensitivity 0.79 [0.76, 0.82], specificity 0.81 [0.78, 0.83]) minimized the distance to the top-left corner of the receiver operating characteristic curve. Across all sets of paired cutoffs evaluated, differences of sensitivity between HADS-T and HADS-D ranged from -0.05 to 0.01 (0.00 at paired optimal cutoffs), and differences of specificity were within 0.03 for all cutoffs (0.02-0.03). The pattern was similar among outpatients, although the HADS-T was slightly (not nonequivalently) more specific among inpatients. The accuracy of HADS-T was equivalent to the HADS-D for detecting major depression. In most settings, the shorter HADS-D would be preferred. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Cancer information-seeking profiles: A self-report measure of patients' distinct preferences for information about their cancer.

Objective: Contemporary cancer care approaches, such as value- and strengths-based health care, involve integrating patients' needs and preferences, as the cancer experience unfolds. Distinct cancer information-seeking behaviours among patients are increasingly found to influence patient-provider communication, treatment-related decision-making, health processes and outcomes, as well as patient satisfaction with cancer care services. My program of research has already documented diverse cancer information-seeking profiles (CISP) among patients. These profiles can easily be captured by a theory-driven and empirically sound self-report single-item measure presented herein. Methods: Guided by Self-Evaluation Theory (SET) - which posits that individuals vary in their motivation to seek information about the self - quantitative work established that SET motives could be reproduced in health-related contexts (N = 600). Qualitative inquiry subsequently explored information-seeking among individuals with various cancer diagnoses. Based on this series of studies, a CIPS measure (containing a general question which prompts individuals to choose the most representative statement based on five descriptions of distinct informational profiles) was tested in a large sample of individuals with diverse cancers. Results: In this latter sample (N = 2,142), patients were administered the CISP and the Ambulatory Oncology Patient Satisfaction Survey (AOPSS). The most frequently reported CISP was complementary (50.2%, i.e., search for cancer information that added to what patients already knew), followed by minimal (25.2%, i.e., no search for cancer information), then guarded (14.4%, i.e., avoiding negative and only seeking hopeful cancer information), peer-focused (6.4%, i.e., search for cancer information from similar others), and last, intense (3.8%, i.e., seeking as much cancer information as possible). These profiles were also differentially related to care satisfaction with intense profiles being the least satisfied across all cancer care domains. Conclusions and Practice Implications: The CISP measure can readily assess patients' profiles in the search for (or avoidance of) information about their cancer so that more personalized interventions can be provided. Future research exploring how CISP evolves, as the cancer experience unfolds, is also worthy of further study.

Cancer Survivors' Evolving Perceptions of a New Supportive Virtual Program.

This qualitative study begins to explore cancer survivors' evolving perceptions of "Focus on the Future," a 6-week supportive virtual program led by trained volunteers and health care professionals. Through purposive sampling, participants (n = 10) enrolled in the program were individually interviewed shortly before attending, mid-way through, and at program completion. Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was used to develop key elements of program expectations and users' perceptions over time. Three themes transpired from the data: (1) Trustworthiness and timeliness of survivorship information and expert guidance, (2) Normalization of survivors' experiences, and (3) Virtual program delivery issues. Some participants' perceptions remained unchanged from pre-program expectations to post-program completion such as appreciating the efficiency of virtual delivery and "health safe" exchanges given the COVID-19 pandemic. In contrast, other perceptions became more polarized including drawbacks related to "more superficial" virtual connections and uneven topic relevance as the program evolved. Program participants appreciated timely information and support from volunteers and experts through virtual means and consecutive weekly sessions. Gauging participants' perceptions across time also offer opportunities to adjust program content and delivery features. Future research should explore key program development strategies to ensure that cancer supportive programs are optimally person-centered, co-designed, and situation-responsive.

Lessons Learned from the Implementation of a Person-Centred Digital Health Platform in Cancer Care.

The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has accelerated the development and use of digital health platforms to support individuals with health-related challenges. This is even more frequent in the field of cancer care as the global burden of the disease continues to increase every year. However, optimal implementation of these platforms into the clinical setting requires careful planning and collaboration. An implementation project was launched between the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux (CIUSSS) du Centre-Ouest-de-I'Île-de-Montreal and BELONG-Beating Cancer Together-a person-centred cancer navigation and support digital health platform. The goal of the project was to implement content and features specific to the CIUSSS, to be made available exclusively for individuals with cancer (and their caregivers) treated at the institution. Guided by Structural Model of Interprofessional Collaboration, we report on implementation processes involving diverse stakeholders including clinicians, hospital administrators, researchers and local community/patient representatives. Lessons learned include earlier identification of shared goals and clear expectations, more consistent reliance on virtual means to communicate among all involved, and patient/caregiver involvement in each step to ensure informed and shared decision making.

Exploring healthcare professionals' experiences with informal family cancer caregiving.

Caring for a family member with cancer is often associated with significant cognitive, emotional, and physical demands. Although considerable research has explored informal cancer caregiver role burden, research has seldom focused on the experiences of individuals who hold the dual role of informal caregiver and healthcare professional. This qualitative study begins to explore this dual role experience. Participants (N = 12) who had at least 1 year of prior professional experience and cared for a family member with cancer were recruited conveniently from a large university-affiliated hospital in Montreal, Quebec. Individual face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted. Using thematic analysis, key themes were developed from verbatim transcripts: (1) salient dual role advantages, (2) significant challenges related to this role, (3) changes in professional practice as a consequence of informal caregiving, and (4) important palliative and end-of-life care access issues. Whereas professional knowledge helped advocate on behalf of patients, the dual role often came with over-solicitation from others, enhanced sense of responsibility, increased burden, and significant distress. Further study of critical ramifications linked to jointly enacting informal and professional caregiving across various health contexts should continue to inform supportive care strategies for this understudied yet increasingly prevalent segment of the caregiver population.

Patients' cancer care perceptions conceptualized through the Cancer Experience Measurement Framework.

BACKGROUND: Research on patients' perceptions of cancer care often documents sub-optimal experiences. Cancer care quality issues include restricted service access, lack of care coordination, gaps in follow-up and "generic" rather than person-centered care. Recent reports underscore that proactively and periodically seeking user feedback is crucial for timely care quality improvement. The present study aimed to analyze and thematically organize a large amount of feedback from patients who had been treated for cancer within the last 6 months. METHODS: Randomly selected participants (N = 3,278) from 3 University-affiliated cancer centres in Montreal, Quebec, Canada completed the Ambulatory Oncology Patient Satisfaction Survey (AOPSS) and an open-ended question on their perceptions of the care they received. 692 participants responded to the latter. Guided by the Cancer Experience Measurement Framework (CEMF), their feedback was analyzed using a qualitative thematic approach. RESULTS: Cancer care perceptions included sub-themes of care access and coordination, continuity/transition, and perceived appropriateness/personalisation of care. The most salient theme was captured by care access and coordination with 284 comments (44%) directly addressing these issues. The ways in which health care services were structured including setting, schedule, and location were often raised as cause for concerns. Issues surrounding cancer information/education, emotional support, and physical comfort were frequently reported as unmet needs. In addition, limited access to cancer services led patients to seek alternatives such as going to emergency departments and/or private care. CONCLUSIONS: These findings are timely as they show that most patients are well aware of quality issues in cancer care and are willing to report candidly on these. Patient feedback also underscore the importance for cancer care institutions to periodically gather patient-reported data so that systems can re-calibrate their service offerings according to these data. Ultimately, patient reports will translate into enhanced quality, personalization, and safer cancer care provision.

Investigating a Participatory Intervention in Multidisciplinary Cancer Care Teams Using an Integrative Organizational Model: A Study Protocol.

Multidisciplinary teams encounter many challenges that can lead to higher levels of distress and burnout. This trend is acutely prevalent among multidisciplinary cancer care teams who frequently contend with increased task complexity and numbers of patients. Resilience is emerging as a critical resource that may optimize team members' psychological health and wellbeing, work efficiency, and organizational agility, while reducing burnout. Accordingly, the proposed study aims to implement and evaluate a promising participatory interventional approach that fosters team resilience. Specifically, the effects of the intervention on participating team members will be compared to a control group of non-participating team members. This intervention's core components include skills training, patient-centered meetings, talking spaces, and an agile problem-solving approach. The proposed study also seeks to determine whether enhanced resilience improves team mental health status and organizational outcomes. A participatory interventional approach will be implemented and assessed at three-time intervals [i.e., pre-intervention deployment (N = 375), 12 months post-deployment (N = 236), and 24 months post-deployment (N = 146)] across five cancer care teams in three Quebec healthcare institutions. A mixed methods design will be used that includes observations, semi-structured interviews, focus groups, and self-report questionnaires. Direct observation will document team functioning and structural resources (e.g., meetings, conflict management, and leadership). Semi-structured interviews will explore participants' experience with activities related to the participatory interventional approach, its perceived benefits and potential challenges. Focus groups will explore participants' perceptions of their team's resilience and the effectiveness of the intervention. Questionnaires will assess support, recognition, empowerment, organizational justice, individual resilience, psychological safety, work climate, team resilience, workplace burnout, engagement, quality of work life, wellbeing, and organizational citizenship behaviors, and sociodemographic variables. Moreover, objective measures including absenteeism and staff turnover will be obtained via human resource records. Structural equation modeling will be used to test the study's hypotheses. The proposed protocol and related findings will provide stakeholders with quantitative and qualitative data concerning a participatory interventional approach to optimize team effectiveness. It will also identify critical factors implicated in favorable organizational outcomes in connection with multidisciplinary cancer care teams. Expected results and future directions are also presented herein.

Women's perceptions of PERSPECTIVE: a breast cancer risk stratification e-platform.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer risk stratification categorizes a woman's potential risk of developing the disease as near-population, intermediate, or high. In accordance, screening and follow up for breast cancer can readily be tailored following risk assessment. Recent efforts have focussed on developing more accessible means to convey this information to women. This study sought to document the relevance of an informational e-platform developed for these purposes. OBJECTIVE: To begin to assess a newly developed breast cancer risk stratification and decision support e-platform called PERSPECTIVE (PErsonalised Risk Stratification for Prevention and Early deteCTIon of breast cancer) among women who do not know their personal breast cancer risk (Phase 1). Changes (pre- and post- e-platform exposure) in knowledge of breast cancer risk and interest in undergoing genetic testing were assessed in addition to perceptions of platform usability and acceptability. METHODS: Using a pre-post design, women (N = 156) of differing literacy and education levels, aged 30 to 60, with no previous breast cancer diagnosis were recruited from the general population and completed self-report e-questionnaires. RESULTS: Mean e-platform viewing time was 18.67 min (SD 0.65) with the most frequently visited pages being breast cancer-related risk factors and risk assessment. Post-exposure, participants reported  significantly higher breast cancer-related knowledge (p < .001). Increases in knowledge relating to obesity, alcohol, breast density, menstruation, and the risk estimation process remained even when sociodemographic variables age and education were controlled. There were no significant changes in genetic testing interest post-exposure. Mean ratings for e-platform acceptability and usability were high: 26.19 out of 30 (SD 0.157) and 42.85 out of 50 (SD 0.267), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: An informative breast cancer risk stratification e-platform targeting healthy women in the general population can significantly increase knowledge as well as support decisions around breast cancer risk and assessment. Currently underway, Phase 2, called PERSPECTIVE, is seeking further content integration and broader implementation .

Women with breast cancer's perceptions of nurse-led telephone-based motivational interviewing consultations to enhance adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Daily adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) for 5 or 10 years is the standard of care for women diagnosed with non-metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. However, many women experience AET-related issues that may hamper quality of life and adherence. Here, we aimed to describe women's perceptions of motivational interviewing (MI)-guided consultations delivered by a trained nurse navigator over the telephone to enhance AET adherence. METHODS: Eighteen women who were first prescribed AET for non-metastatic breast cancer in the last 5 years, who self-reported AET-related issues, and who participated in at least two MI-guided consultations over a year were interviewed about their perceptions of the intervention, using a semi-structured interview guide. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Three main themes emerged from the data about women's perceptions on MI-guided consultations. These consultations were described as (1) a person-centred experience, (2) providing key information about AET, and (3) supportive of present and future AET experience, by contributing to AET side-effect management, motivation, adherence, calming negative emotions, improving well-being and self-esteem, and making women to feel empowered. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse-led telephone-based MI-guided consultations about AET were found to respond to participants' needs and to enhance participants' perceptions of being informed and being supported in experiencing various facets of AET. Telephone-based consultations for AET are perceived as a promising strategy in an increasing virtual care world.