Substance use disorders in hospice palliative care: A narrative review of challenges and a case for physician intervention.

OBJECTIVES: Substance use disorders (SUDs) are frequently encountered in hospice palliative care (HPC) and pose substantial quality-of-life issues for patients. However, most HPC physicians do not directly treat their patients' SUDs due to several institutional and personal barriers. This review will expand upon arguments for the integration of SUD treatment into HPC, will elucidate challenges for HPC providers, and will provide recommendations that address these challenges. METHODS: A thorough review of the literature was conducted. Arguments for the treatment of SUDs and recommendations for physicians have been synthesized and expanded upon. RESULTS: Treating SUD in HPC has the potential to improve adherence to care, access to social support, and outcomes for pain, mental health, and physical health. Barriers to SUD treatment in HPC include difficulties with accurate assessment, insufficient training, attitudes and stigma, and compromised pain management regimens. Recommendations for physicians and training environments to address these challenges include developing familiarity with standardized SUD assessment tools and pain management practice guidelines, creating and disseminating visual campaigns to combat stigma, including SUD assessment and intervention as fellowship competencies, and obtaining additional training in psychosocial interventions. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: By following these recommendations, HPC physicians can improve their competence and confidence in working with individuals with SUDs, which will help meet the pressing needs of this population.

Effectiveness and Predictors of Outcomes in a Psychiatric Day Treatment Program for Elementary-Age.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to (1) assess the effectiveness of an intensive multimodal day treatment program in improving externalizing problems and function in elementary-age children and (2) examine 3 predictors of the treatment outcome (i.e., family functioning, baseline severity, and comorbid disorders). METHODS: The sample included 261 children (80.9% boys) between ages of 5 and 12. A retrospective chart review, from 2013 to 2018, and a prospective chart review, from 2018 to 2019, were conducted to extract all relevant data for the present study. Parents and teachers provided reports on children's externalizing problems (i.e., aggressive behavior, attention problems, and rule-breaking behavior) and their level of function across different domains. The level of family functioning was also reported by parents, while clinicians assessed children's severity of disturbance and their diagnoses at intake. RESULTS: Based on both parents' and teachers' reports, children showed significant improvement in their externalizing problems. Moreover, children showed functional improvement at home, at school, with peers, and in hobbies by the end of the program. Based on teacher's reports, children with lower level of severity showed less improvement in their attention problems, and those with comorbid developmental problems showed less improvement in their aggressive and rule-breaking behaviors. Family functioning did not predict any treatment outcome. CONCLUSION: An intensive multimodal day treatment program was effective in reducing the symptoms of externalizing problems in elementary-age children. However, children with less severe difficulties and comorbid developmental problems showed less improvement in their externalizing problems.

The FCR-1: Initial validation of a single-item measure of fear of cancer recurrence.

OBJECTIVE: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is characterized by the fear, worry or concern that cancer will come back or progress. The negative effects associated with FCR are consistently identified by cancer survivors as one of their most prominent unmet needs. Current measures of FCR can be long, complex and burdensome for survivors to complete. The objective of the present study is to develop and validate a one-item measure of FCR. METHODS: The ability of the FCR-1 to detect change in FCR over time was analyzed using a repeated-measures ANOVA and paired-samples t-tests. Pearson correlations were used to measure the concurrent, convergent and discriminant validity of the FCR-1, and a ROC analysis was conducted to determine an optimal clinical cut-off score. RESULTS: The FCR-1 was found to be responsive to change in FCR over time. It demonstrated concurrent validity with the FCRI (r = .395, P = .010), and convergent validity with the Mishel Uncertainty in Illness Scale (r = .493, P = .001) and the Reassurance Questionnaire (r = .325, P = .044). Discriminant validity was confirmed when the FCR-1 did not significantly correlate with unrelated measures. A ROC analysis pinpointed an optimal clinical cut-off score of 45.0. CONCLUSIONS: The FCR-1 is a promising tool that can be incorporated in clinical and research settings. Due to its brevity, the care needs of highly distressed patients can be met quickly and efficiently. In research settings, the FCR-1 can reduce the cognitive burden experienced by survivors.