Mechanism underlying a brief cognitive behavioral treatment for head and neck cancer survivors with body image distress.

PURPOSE: Body image distress (BID) among head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors is a debilitating toxicity associated with depression, anxiety, stigma, and poor quality of life. BRIGHT (Building a Renewed ImaGe after Head & neck cancer Treatment) is a brief cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) that reduces BID for these patients. This study examines the mechanism underlying BRIGHT. METHODS: In this randomized clinical trial, HNC survivors with clinically significant BID were randomized to receive five weekly psychologist-led video tele-CBT sessions (BRIGHT) or dose-and delivery matched survivorship education (attention control [AC]). Body image coping strategies, the hypothesized mediators, were assessed using the Body Image Coping Skills Inventory (BICSI). HNC-related BID was measured with the Inventory to Measure and Assess imaGe disturbancE-Head and Neck (IMAGE-HN). Causal mediation analyses were used to estimate the mediated effects of changes in BICSI scores on changes in IMAGE-HN scores. RESULTS: Among 44 HNC survivors with BID allocated to BRIGHT (n = 20) or AC (n = 24), mediation analyses showed that BRIGHT decreased avoidant body image coping (mean change in BICSI-Avoidance scale score) from baseline to 1-month post-intervention relative to AC (p = 0.039). Decreases in BICSI-Avoidance scores from baseline to 1-month resulted in decreases in IMAGE-HN scores from baseline to 3 months (p = 0.009). The effect of BRIGHT on IMAGE-HN scores at 3 months was partially mediated by a decrease in BICSI-Avoidance scores (p = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: This randomized trial provides preliminary evidence that BRIGHT reduces BID among HNC survivors by decreasing avoidant body image coping. Further research is necessary to confirm these results and enhance the development of interventions targeting relevant pathways to reduce BID among HNC survivors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03831100 .

Mechanism Underlying a Brief Cognitive Behavioral Treatment for Head and Neck Cancer Survivors with Body Image Distress.

Purpose: Body image distress (BID) among head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors is a debilitating toxicity associated with depression, anxiety, stigma, and poor quality of life. BRIGHT (Building a Renewed ImaGe after Head & neck cancer Treatment) is a brief cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) that reduces BID for these patients. This study examines the mechanism underlying BRIGHT. Methods: In this randomized clinical trial, HNC survivors with clinically significant BID were randomized to receive 5 weekly psychologist-led video tele-CBT sessions (BRIGHT) or dose-and delivery matched survivorship education (attention control [AC]). Body image coping strategies, the hypothesized mediators, were assessed using the Body Image Coping Skills Inventory (BICSI). HNC-related BID was measured with the IMAGE-HN. Causal mediation analyses were used to estimate the mediated effects of changes in BICSI scores on changes in IMAGE-HN scores. Results: Among 44 HNC survivors with BID, mediation analyses showed that BRIGHT decreased avoidant body image coping (mean change in BICSI-Avoidance scale score) from baseline to 1-month post-intervention relative to AC (p = 0.039). Decreases in BICSI-Avoidance scores from baseline to 1-month decreased IMAGE-HN scores from baseline to 3-months (p = 0.009). The effect of BRIGHT on IMAGE-HN scores at 3-months was partially mediated by a decrease in BICSI-Avoidance scores (p = 0.039). Conclusions: This randomized trial provides preliminary evidence that BRIGHT reduces BID among HNC survivors by decreasing avoidant body image coping. Further research is necessary to confirm these results and enhance the development of interventions targeting relevant pathways to reduce BID among HNC survivors. Trial Registration: This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03831100 on February 5, 2019.

Efficacy of a Brief Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer Survivors with Body Image Distress: Secondary Outcomes from the BRIGHT Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

Purpose: Body image distress (BID) among head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors leads to depression, social isolation, stigma, and poor quality of life. BRIGHT ( B uilding a R enewed I ma G e after H ead & neck cancer T reatment) is a brief, tailored cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) that reduces HNC-related BID. This trial examines the effect of BRIGHT on psychosocial outcomes among HNC survivors with BID. Methods: In this pilot randomized trial, HNC survivors with clinically significant BID were randomized to 5 weekly psychologist-led tele-CBT sessions (BRIGHT) or dose-and delivery matched survivorship education (attention control [AC]). Secondary psychosocial outcomes were assessed using validated patient-reported outcomes at baseline and 1- and 3-months post-intervention. Results: Among 44 HNC survivors with BID, BRIGHT resulted in a greater reduction in depression relative to AC (mean model-based 1-month difference in Δ PROMIS SF v1.0-Depression 8a score, -3.4; 90% CI, -6.4 to -0.4; 3-month difference, -4.3; 90% CI, -7.8 to -0.8). BRIGHT also decreased shame and stigma relative to AC (mean model-based 3-month difference in Δ Shame and Stigma Scale score, -9.7; 90% CI, -15.2 to -4.2) and social isolation (mean model-based 3-month difference in Δ PROMIS SF v2.0 Social Isolation 8a score, -2.9; 90% CI, -5.8 to -0.1). Conclusions: In this planned secondary analysis of a pilot RCT, BRIGHT improved a broad array of psychosocial outcomes among HNC survivors with BID. Implications for Cancer Survivors: These promising preliminary data suggest the need for a large efficacy trial evaluating the effect of BRIGHT on psychosocial outcomes among HNC survivors with BID. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03831100.

Reporting Rigor of Cancer Rehabilitation Interventions: Application of the CReDECI-2 Guidelines.

ABSTRACT: Clear reporting of cancer rehabilitation interventions is critical for interpreting and translating research into clinical practice. This study sought to examine the completeness of intervention reporting of cancer rehabilitation interventions addressing disability and to identify which elements are most frequently missing. This was a secondary analysis of randomized controlled trials included in two systematic reviews examining effectiveness of cancer rehabilitation interventions that address cancer-related disability, including functional outcomes. Eligible trials were reviewed for intervention reporting rigor using the Criteria for Reporting the Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions in Healthcare 2 checklist. Intervention descriptions for cancer rehabilitation interventions were generally incomplete. Approximately 85% ( n = 157) of trials described ≤50% of Criteria for Reporting the Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions in Healthcare 2 checklist items. Commonly underreported items included description of the intervention's underlying theoretical basis, fidelity, description of process evaluation or external conditions influencing intervention delivery, and costs or required resources for intervention delivery. The findings reveal that cancer rehabilitation intervention descriptions lacked necessary detail in this body of literature. Poor descriptions limit the translation of research to clinical practice. To ensure higher-quality study design and reporting, future intervention research should incorporate an intervention reporting checklist to ensure more complete descriptions for research and practice.

Efficacy of a brief cognitive behavioral therapy for head and neck cancer survivors with body image distress: secondary outcomes from the BRIGHT pilot randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Body image distress (BID) among head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors leads to depression, social isolation, stigma, and poor quality of life. BRIGHT (Building a Renewed ImaGe after Head and neck cancer Treatment) is a brief, tailored cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) that reduces HNC-related BID. This trial examines the effect of BRIGHT on psychosocial outcomes among HNC survivors with BID. METHODS: In this pilot randomized trial, HNC survivors with clinically significant BID were randomized to 5 weekly psychologist-led tele-CBT sessions (BRIGHT) or dose and delivery-matched survivorship education (attention control [AC]). Secondary psychosocial outcomes were assessed using validated patient-reported outcomes at baseline and 1 and 3-month post-intervention. RESULTS: Among 44 HNC survivors with BID, BRIGHT resulted in a greater reduction in depression relative to AC (mean model-based 1-month difference in Δ PROMIS SF v1.0-Depression 8a score, -3.4; 90% CI, -6.4 to -0.4; 3-month difference, -4.3; 90% CI, -7.8 to -0.8). BRIGHT also decreased shame and stigma relative to AC (mean model-based 3-month difference in Δ Shame and Stigma Scale score, -9.7; 90% CI, -15.2 to -4.2) and social isolation (mean model-based 3-month difference in Δ PROMIS SF v2.0 Social Isolation 8a score, -2.9; 90% CI, -5.8 to -0.1). CONCLUSIONS: In this planned secondary analysis of a pilot RCT, BRIGHT improved a broad array of psychosocial outcomes among HNC survivors with BID. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03831100 . IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: These promising preliminary data suggest the need for a large efficacy trial evaluating the effect of BRIGHT on psychosocial outcomes among HNC survivors with BID.

Efficacy of a Brief Tele-Cognitive Behavioral Treatment vs Attention Control for Head and Neck Cancer Survivors With Body Image Distress: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Although 1 in 4 head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors experience clinically significant body image distress (BID), a psychosocial morbidity that adversely affects quality of life, effective interventions for these patients are lacking. Objective: To evaluate the acceptability and preliminary efficacy of BRIGHT (Building a Renewed ImaGe after Head and neck cancer Treatment), a brief tele-cognitive behavioral therapy, at reducing BID among HNC survivors. Design, Setting, and Participants: This parallel-group pilot randomized clinical trial recruited adult HNC survivors with BID between August 13, 2020, and December 9, 2021, from the Medical University of South Carolina HNC clinic during a routine survivorship encounter. Data were analyzed from May 3 to June 16, 2022. Interventions: BRIGHT consisted of 5 weekly psychologist-led video tele-cognitive behavioral therapy sessions. Attention control (AC) consisted of dose- and delivery-matched survivorship education. Main Outcomes and Measures: Change in HNC-related BID was assessed using IMAGE-HN (Inventory to Measure and Assess imaGe disturbancE-Head and Neck), a validated patient-reported outcome (score range, 0-84, with higher scores indicating greater HNC-related BID). Clinical response rate was measured as the proportion of patients with a clinically meaningful change in IMAGE-HN scores. Results: Of the 44 HNC survivors with BID allocated to BRIGHT (n = 20) or AC (n = 24), the median (range) age was 63 (41-80) years, and 27 patients (61%) were female. Patients rated BRIGHT's acceptability highly (all metrics had a mean rating of ≥4.5/5), and 19 of 20 patients (95%) receiving BRIGHT were likely or highly likely to recommend it to other HNC survivors with BID. BRIGHT decreased HNC-related BID from baseline to 1 month postintervention relative to AC (mean model-based difference in change in IMAGE-HN score, -7.9 points; 90% CI, -15.9 to 0.0 points) and from baseline to 3 months postintervention relative to AC (mean model-based difference in change in IMAGE-HN score, -17.1 points; 90% CI, -25.6 to -8.6 points). At 3 months postintervention, the clinical response rate of BRIGHT was 6.6-fold higher than AC (model-based odds ratio, 6.6; 90% CI, 2.0-21.8). The improvement in HNC-related BID for BRIGHT vs AC at 3 months was clinically significant, and the effect size was large (Cohen d, -0.9; 90% CI, -1.4 to -0.4). Conclusions and Relevance: In this pilot randomized clinical trial, BRIGHT was acceptable, may result in a clinically meaningful improvement in HNC-related BID, and showed a high clinical response rate. These promising preliminary data support conducting a large efficacy trial to establish BRIGHT as the first evidence-based treatment for HNC survivors with BID. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03831100.

The influence of telehealth-based cancer rehabilitation interventions on disability: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To characterize delivery features and explore effectiveness of telehealth-based cancer rehabilitation interventions that address disability in adult cancer survivors. METHODS: A systematic review of electronic databases (CINAHL Plus, Cochrane Library: Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, National Health Service's Health Technology Assessment, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) was conducted in December 2019 and updated in April 2021. RESULTS: Searches identified 3,499 unique studies. Sixty-eight studies met inclusion criteria. There were 81 unique interventions across included studies. Interventions were primarily delivered post-treatment and lasted an average of 16.5 weeks (SD = 13.1). They were most frequently delivered using telephone calls (59%), administered delivered by nursing professionals (35%), and delivered in a one-on-one format (88%). Risk of bias of included studies was primarily moderate to high. Included studies captured 55 measures of disability. Only 54% of reported outcomes had data that allowed calculation of effect sizes ranging -3.58 to 15.66. CONCLUSIONS: The analyses suggest small effects of telehealth-based cancer interventions on disability, though the heterogeneity seen in the measurement of disability makes it hard to draw firm conclusions. Further research using more diverse samples, common measures of disability, and pragmatic study designs is needed to advance telehealth in cancer rehabilitation. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Telehealth-based cancer rehabilitation interventions have the potential to increase access to care designed to reduce disability across the cancer care continuum.

Addressing distress management challenges: Recommendations from the consensus panel of the American Psychosocial Oncology Society and the Association of Oncology Social Work.

Distress management (DM) (screening and response) is an essential component of cancer care across the treatment trajectory. Effective DM has many benefits, including improving patients' quality of life; reducing distress, anxiety, and depression; contributing to medical cost offsets; and reducing emergency department visits and hospitalizations. Unfortunately, many distressed patients do not receive needed services. There are several multilevel barriers that represent key challenges to DM and affect its implementation. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used as an organizational structure to outline the barriers and facilitators to implementation of DM, including: 1) individual characteristics (individual patient characteristics with a focus on groups who may face unique barriers to distress screening and linkage to services), 2) intervention (unique aspects of DM intervention, including specific challenges in screening and psychosocial intervention, with recommendations for resolving these challenges), 3) processes for implementation of DM (modality and timing of screening, the challenge of triage for urgent needs, and incorporation of patient-reported outcomes and quality measures), 4) organization-inner setting (the context of the clinic, hospital, or health care system); and 5) organization-outer setting (including reimbursement strategies and health-care policy). Specific recommendations for evidence-based strategies and interventions for each of the domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research are also included to address barriers and challenges.

Framework for planning the delivery of psychosocial oncology services: An American psychosocial oncology society task force report.

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.

Consensus-Building efforts to identify best tools for screening and assessment for supportive services in oncology.

Purpose: To build consensus around an optimal patient-reported outcome measure of cancer symptoms and patient needs to facilitate patient-provider communication and trigger referrals to supportive services.Methods and materials: The Grid-Enabled Measures platform was used to crowdsource and facilitate collaboration to achieve consensus. Respondents were invited to nominate and independently rate the usefulness of measures that: (1) have been actively used at a healthcare institution, (2) have a multiple choice or yes/no type format, (3) are applicable to adults with cancer, (4) are patient-reported, and 5) have psychometric data if possible. Discussion boards within the GEM workspace allowed respondents to identify barriers to implementing patient assessment and referral systems.Results: 166 individuals from various disciplines from 25 organizations participated. Six instruments were nominated, and 553 rating surveys were submitted. The three most highly-rated overall instruments were the Distress Thermometer, the James Supportive Case Screening, and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General. Participants noted that wide-scale implementation of this process requires both identifying problems and providing clinicians with algorithms to facilitate appropriate referrals.Conclusions: Consensus reported three most highly-related measures as optimal for comprehensive screening and identification for referral by assessing multiple domains of functioning and quality of life.Implications for RehabilitationGaining consensus on the best patient reported outcome measures is an important step towards improving access to cancer rehabilitation services.A consensus agreed on several measures to use for cancer rehabilitation screening. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General, National Comprehensive Cancer. Network Distress Thermometer and the James Instrument.The selected measures do not put undue burden on clinicians and patients.

Embracing the complexity: Older adults with cancer-related cognitive decline-A Young International Society of Geriatric Oncology position paper.

Cancer-related cognitive decline (CRCD) may have particularly significant consequences for older adults, impacting their functional and physical abilities, level of independence, ability to make decisions, treatment adherence, overall quality of life, and ultimately survival. In honor of Dr. Hurria's work we explore and examine multiple types of screening, assessment and non-pharmacologic treatments for CRCD. We then suggest future research and clinical practice questions to holistically appreciate the complexity of older adults with cancer's experiences and fully integrate the team-based approach to best serve this population.

Toward a Conceptual Model of Affective Predictions in Palliative Care.

CONTEXT: Being diagnosed with cancer often forces patients and families to make difficult medical decisions. How patients think they and others will feel in the future, termed affective predictions, may influence these decisions. These affective predictions are often biased, which may contribute to suboptimal care outcomes by influencing decisions related to palliative care and advance care planning. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to translate perspectives from the decision sciences to inform future research about when and how affective predictions may influence decisions about palliative care and advance care planning. METHODS: A systematic search of two databases to evaluate the extent to which affective predictions have been examined in the palliative care and advance care planning context yielded 35 relevant articles. Over half utilized qualitative methodologies (n = 21). Most studies were conducted in the U.S. (n = 12), Canada (n = 7), or European countries (n = 10). Study contexts included end of life (n = 10), early treatment decisions (n = 10), pain and symptom management (n = 7), and patient-provider communication (n = 6). The affective processes of patients (n = 20), caregivers (n = 16), and/or providers (n = 12) were examined. RESULTS: Three features of the palliative care and advance care planning context may contribute to biased affective predictions: 1) early treatment decisions are made under heightened emotional states and with insufficient information; 2) palliative care decisions influence life domains beyond physical health; and 3) palliative care decisions involve multiple people. CONCLUSION: Biases in affective predictions may serve as a barrier to optimal palliative care delivery. Predictions are complicated by intense emotions, inadequate prognostic information, involvement of many individuals, and cancer's effect on non-health life domains. Applying decision science frameworks may generate insights about affective predictions that can be harnessed to solve challenges associated with optimal delivery of palliative care.

Follow the trail: Using insights from the growth of palliative care to propose a roadmap for cancer rehabilitation.

Despite research explicating the benefits of cancer rehabilitation interventions to optimize physical, social, emotional, and vocational functioning, many reports document low rates of referral to and uptake of rehabilitation in oncology. Cancer rehabilitation clinicians, researchers, and policy makers could learn from the multidisciplinary specialty of palliative care, which has benefited from a growth strategy and has garnered national recognition as an important and necessary aspect of oncology care. The purpose of this article is to explore the actions that have increased the uptake and integration of palliative care to yield insights and multimodal strategies for the development and growth of cancer rehabilitation. After examining the history of palliative care and its growth, the authors highlight 5 key strategies that may benefit the field of cancer rehabilitation: 1) stimulating the science in specific gap areas; 2) creating clinical practice guidelines; 3) building clinical capacity; 4) ascertaining and responding to public opinion; and 5) advocating for public policy change. Coordinated and simultaneous advances on these 5 strategies may catalyze the growth, utilization, and effectiveness of patient screening, timely referrals, and delivery of appropriate cancer rehabilitation care that reduces disability and improves quality of life for cancer survivors who need these services.

The Intersection of Rehabilitation and Palliative Care: Patients With Advanced Cancer in the Inpatient Rehabilitation Setting.

BACKGROUND: Patients diagnosed with advanced cancer often differ from the traditional patient typically seen in the inpatient rehabilitation setting. PURPOSE: To identify differences in care while highlighting the considerable similarities between the complementary specialties of palliative care and rehabilitation, and to provide rehabilitation clinicians with knowledge and skills to enhance care for palliative care patients and their families. METHODOLOGY: Narrative literature review describing common functional losses in patients diagnosed with advanced cancer, followed by articulation of the intersection of palliative care with traditional rehabilitation approaches and goals. CONCLUSION: The evidence supports implementation of a distinct body of skills and knowledge, referred to as "palliative rehabilitation," among inpatient rehabilitation providers. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Implementing palliative rehabilitation skills can improve the quality of care within the inpatient rehabilitation setting for patients with advanced cancer.

Making Cancer Rehabilitation Services Work for Cancer Patients: Recommendations for Research and Practice to Improve Employment Outcomes.

Cancer and its treatment can result in impairments that limit physical, psychosocial, and cognitive functioning, interfering with patients' ability to perform work-related functions. Because these work limitations can carry significant personal and societal costs, there is a timely need to identify and refer patients to cancer rehabilitation services to manage adverse consequences of treatment and to preserve employment. Coordinated efforts in 3 key areas will better connect patients to rehabilitation interventions that will help optimize employment. These include the following: planning for the impact of cancer on the ability to work; implementing routine screening for impairments and facilitating referrals to cancer rehabilitation specialists; and focusing rehabilitation interventions on preserving employment. Coordinated strategies are presented to achieve these 3 goals, including the following: implementing changes to clinical practice to routinely screen for impairments; working with oncology providers and patients to better understand the benefits of cancer rehabilitation to facilitate referrals and uptake; training more cancer rehabilitation providers to handle the increased need; better coordination of care across providers and with employers; and filling research gaps needed to proactively anticipate how cancer treatment would affect work for a given patient and deploy personalized interventions to preserve the ability to work.

A Practice-Based Evaluation of Distress Screening Protocol Adherence and Medical Service Utilization.

Background: This study examined the extent to which cancer programs demonstrated adherence to their own prescribed screening protocol, and whether adherence to that protocol was associated with medical service utilization. The hypothesis is that higher rates of service utilization are associated with lower rates of adherence to screening protocols. Methods: Oncology social workers at Commission on Cancer-accredited cancer programs reviewed electronic health records (EHRs) in their respective cancer programs during a 2-month period in 2014. Rates of overall adherence to a prescribed distress screening protocol were calculated based on documentation in the EHR that screening adherence and an appropriate clinical response had occurred. We examined documentation of emergency department (ED) use and hospitalization within 2 months after the screening visit. Results: Review of 8,409 EHRs across 55 cancer centers indicated that the overall adherence rate to screening protocols was 62.7%. The highest rates of adherence were observed in Community Cancer Programs (76.3%) and the lowest rates were in NCI-designated Cancer Centers (43.3%). Rates of medical service utilization were significantly higher than expected when overall protocol adherence was lacking. After controlling for patient and institutional characteristics, risk ratios for ED use (0.82) and hospitalization (0.81) suggest that when overall protocol adherence was documented, 18% to 19% fewer patients used these medical services. Conclusions: The observed associations between a mandated psychosocial care protocol and medical service utilization suggest opportunities for operational efficiencies and costs savings. Further investigations of protocol integrity, as well as the clinical care models by which psychosocial care is delivered, are warranted.

Toward a National Initiative in Cancer Rehabilitation: Recommendations From a Subject Matter Expert Group.

The health care delivery system in the United States is challenged to meet the needs of a growing population of cancer survivors. A pressing need is to optimize overall function and reduce disability in these individuals. Functional impairments and disability affect most patients during and after disease treatment. Rehabilitation health care providers can diagnose and treat patients' physical, psychological, and cognitive impairments in an effort to maintain or restore function, reduce symptom burden, maximize independence and improve quality of life in this medically complex population. However, few care delivery models integrate comprehensive cancer rehabilitation services into the oncology care continuum. The Rehabilitation Medicine Department of the Clinical Center at the National Institutes of Health with support from the National Cancer Institute and the National Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research convened a subject matter expert group to review current literature and practice patterns, identify opportunities and gaps regarding cancer rehabilitation and its support of oncology care, and make recommendations for future efforts that promote quality cancer rehabilitation care. The recommendations suggest stronger efforts toward integrating cancer rehabilitation care models into oncology care from the point of diagnosis, incorporating evidence-based rehabilitation clinical assessment tools, and including rehabilitation professionals in shared decision-making in order to provide comprehensive cancer care and maximize the functional capabilities of cancer survivors. These recommendations aim to enable future collaborations among a variety of stakeholders to improve the delivery of high-quality cancer care.

Institutional capacity to provide psychosocial oncology support services: A report from the Association of Oncology Social Work.

BACKGROUND: This study reports cancer-treating institutions' capacity to deliver comprehensive psychosocial support services. METHODS: Oncology care providers at 60 cancer-treating institutions completed surveys assessing the capacity of their institutions to provide psychosocial care. Capacity was assessed with the Cancer Psychosocial Care Matrix (CPCM) from the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Scores represented individuals' perceptions of their cancer program's performance with respect to 10 fundamental elements of psychosocial care. RESULTS: Among 2134 respondents, 62% reported a mid-level capacity for ≥5 of 10 CPCM items. In comparison with other types of cancer programs (eg, NCI-designated, academic, or comprehensive centers), providers at community cancer programs reported a significantly greater capacity with respect to patient-provider communication, psychosocial needs assessment, and continuity in the delivery of psychosocial care over time. Nurses and primary medical providers reported a significantly lower capacity for linking patients and families with needed psychosocial services within their respective cancer programs. They also reported a significantly higher capacity for conducting follow-up, re-evaluations, and adjustments of psychosocial treatment plans. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer programs are performing moderately well in terms of communicating to patients the importance of psychosocial care, identifying patient psychosocial needs, and referring patients and families to psychosocial services. They are doing less well with respect to the provision of that care over time. Findings suggest that gaps in psychosocial service capacity are a function of patient, provider, and system characteristics. These results may be useful in formulating strategies to enhance psychosocial care delivery. Cancer 2016;122:1937-45. © 2016 American Cancer Society.