Screening for distress in community settings.

Purpose: This project was designed to develop, refine and field-test a distress screening approach with survivors accessing community-based cancer support agencies. Methods: The project was conducted in phases including a literature review and focus groups with cancer survivors and community agency staff. Data were gathered to lay the foundation for building a subsequent development and implementation of a new screening approach suitable for community-based cancer support agencies to use in identifying psychosocial distress in their clients. Results: Standardized questionnaires used for distress screening approaches in clinical settings were not seen by cancer survivors as appropriate for community-based cancer support settings. A new screening approach was designed and implemented based on input from cancer survivors and staff in community-based agencies. The tool used in the distress screening approach focused on problems relevant to individuals in the community setting. If problems were identified, staff followed tailored care pathways to resolve them. Both patients and staff found the screening approach useful for quickly pinpointing problems and avenues for dealing with the issues. Conclusions: Screening for distress approaches can be useful in a community-based cancer support setting to identify individuals who are at greater risk for experiencing difficulties. Data from screening can be useful for agencies to report on their service effectiveness.

Comparing Perspectives of Canadian Men Diagnosed With Prostate Cancer and Health Care Professionals About Active Surveillance.

Active surveillance (AS) has gained acceptance as a primary management approach for patients diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer (PC). In this qualitative study, we compared perspectives between patients and health care professionals (HCP) to identify what may contribute to patient-provider discordance, influence patient decision-making, and interfere with the uptake of AS. We performed a systematic comparison of perspectives about AS reported from focus groups with men eligible for AS (7 groups, N = 52) and HCP (5 groups, N = 48) who engaged in conversations about AS with patient. We used conventional content analysis to scrutinize separately focus group transcripts and reached a consensus on similar or divergent viewpoints between them. Patients and clinicians agreed that AS was appropriate for low grade PC and understood the low-risk nature of the disease. They shared the perspective that disease status was a critical factor to pursue or discontinue AS. However, men expressed a greater emphasis on quality of life in their decisions related to AS. Patients and clinicians differed in their perspectives on the clarity, availability, and volume of information needed and offered; clinicians acknowledged variations between HCP when presenting AS, while patients were often compelled to seek additional information beyond what was provided by physicians and experienced difficulty in finding or interpreting information applicable to their situation. A greater understanding of discordant perspectives about AS between patients and HCP can help improve patient engagement and education, inform development of knowledge-based tools or aids for decision-making, and identify areas that require standardization across the clinical practice.

Describing perspectives of health care professionals on active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, active surveillance has proven to be a safe approach for patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Although active surveillance presents several advantages for both patients and the health care system, all eligible patients do not adopt this approach. Our goal was to evaluate the factors that influence physicians to recommend active surveillance and the barriers that impact adherence to this approach. METHODS: Focus groups (n = 5) were held with physicians who provided care for men with low-risk prostate cancer and had engaged in conversations with men and their families about active surveillance. The experience of health care professionals (HCPs) was captured to understand their decisions in proposing active surveillance and to reveal the barriers and facilitators that affect the adherence to this approach. A content analysis was performed on the verbatim transcripts from the sessions. RESULTS: Although physicians agreed that active surveillance is a suitable approach for low-risk prostate cancer patients, they were concerned about the rapidly evolving and non-standardized guidelines for patient follow-up. They pointed out the need for additional tools to appropriately identify proper patients for whom active surveillance is the best option. Urologists and radiation-oncologists were keen to collaborate with each other, but the role of general practitioner remained controversial once patients were referred to a specialist. CONCLUSIONS: Integration of more reliable tools and/or markers in addition to more specific guidelines for patient follow-up would increase the confidence of both patients and physicians in the choice of active surveillance.

Canadian Men's perspectives about active surveillance in prostate cancer: need for guidance and resources.

BACKGROUND: In prostate cancer, men diagnosed with low risk disease may be monitored through an active surveillance. This research explored the perspectives of men with prostate cancer regarding their decision-making process for active surveillance to identify factors that influence their decision and assist health professionals in having conversations about this option. METHODS: Focus group interviews (n = 7) were held in several Canadian cities with men (N = 52) diagnosed with prostate cancer and eligible for active surveillance. The men's viewpoints were captured regarding their understanding of active surveillance, the factors that influenced their decision, and their experience with the approach. A content and theme analysis was performed on the verbatim transcripts from the sessions. RESULTS: Patients described their concerns of living with their disease without intervention, but were reassured by the close monitoring under AS while avoiding harmful side effects associated with treatments. Conversations with their doctor and how AS was described were cited as key influences in their decision, in addition to availability of information on treatment options, distrust in the health system, personality, experiences and opinions of others, and personal perspectives on quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Men require a thorough explanation on AS as a safe and valid option, as well as guidance towards supportive resources in their decision-making.

Identifying patient-reported outcomes of telephone-based breast cancer support services.

Interest in measuring patient-reported outcomes has been growing within cancer care facilities. In particular, community- based agencies want to identify appropriate patient-reported outcomes to use in evaluating their programs. Willow Breast Cancer Support Canada undertook a series of interviews with staff, peer volunteers and clients to identify the most relevant patient-reported outcomes for their telephone peer support service. Both process and outcome variables were identified as relevant for future measurement. The approach utilized and the outcomes identified could serve as a model for similar organizations to implement.

Moving the agenda forward for cancer patient navigation: understanding volunteer and peer navigation approaches.

Across Canada, individuals diagnosed with cancer have identified concerns about access to services before, during, and following treatment, highlighting a very real uncertainty that exists about where to turn for information and assistance. Cancer patient navigation programs are emerging as effective interventions, well-equipped to meet these patients' diverse needs. While many provinces have initiated professionally led navigation services, little is known about the potential for volunteer-led navigation. This article highlights pilot programs in British Columbia, Ontario, and Newfoundland, where volunteers are engaged as lay or peer providers of cancer patient navigation services. By describing the recruitment, training, and role of the navigators within each program, the paper underscores the capacity for unique programs to work within current care frameworks across distinct communities. These programs provide an innovative approach to overcoming barriers and augmenting access to supportive care for cancer patients and their family members.