A systematic review of rehabilitation and exercise recommendations in oncology guidelines.

Guidelines promote high quality cancer care. Rehabilitation recommendations in oncology guidelines have not been characterized and may provide insight to improve integration of rehabilitation into oncology care. This report was developed as a part of the World Health Organization (WHO) Rehabilitation 2030 initiative to identify rehabilitation-specific recommendations in guidelines for oncology care. A systematic review of guidelines was conducted. Only guidelines published in English, for adults with cancer, providing recommendations for rehabilitation referral and assessment or interventions between 2009 and 2019 were included. 13840 articles were identified. After duplicates and applied filters, 4897 articles were screened. 69 guidelines were identified with rehabilitation-specific recommendations. Thirty-seven of the 69 guidelines endorsed referral to rehabilitation services but provided no specific recommendations regarding assessment or interventions. Thirty-two of the 69 guidelines met the full inclusion criteria and were assessed using the AGREE II tool. Twenty-one of these guidelines achieved an AGREE II quality score of ≥ 45 and were fully extracted. Guidelines exclusive to pharmacologic interventions and complementary and alternative interventions were excluded. Findings identify guidelines that recommend rehabilitation services across many cancer types and for various consequences of cancer treatment signifying that rehabilitation is a recognized component of oncology care. However, these findings are at odds with clinical reports of low rehabilitation utilization rates suggesting that guideline recommendations may be overlooked. Considering that functional morbidity negatively affects a majority of cancer survivors, improving guideline concordant rehabilitative care could have substantial impact on function and quality of life among cancer survivors.

Exercise is medicine in oncology: Engaging clinicians to help patients move through cancer.

Multiple organizations around the world have issued evidence-based exercise guidance for patients with cancer and cancer survivors. Recently, the American College of Sports Medicine has updated its exercise guidance for cancer prevention as well as for the prevention and treatment of a variety of cancer health-related outcomes (eg, fatigue, anxiety, depression, function, and quality of life). Despite these guidelines, the majority of people living with and beyond cancer are not regularly physically active. Among the reasons for this is a lack of clarity on the part of those who work in oncology clinical settings of their role in assessing, advising, and referring patients to exercise. The authors propose using the American College of Sports Medicine's Exercise Is Medicine initiative to address this practice gap. The simple proposal is for clinicians to assess, advise, and refer patients to either home-based or community-based exercise or for further evaluation and intervention in outpatient rehabilitation. To do this will require care coordination with appropriate professionals as well as change in the behaviors of clinicians, patients, and those who deliver the rehabilitation and exercise programming. Behavior change is one of many challenges to enacting the proposed practice changes. Other implementation challenges include capacity for triage and referral, the need for a program registry, costs and compensation, and workforce development. In conclusion, there is a call to action for key stakeholders to create the infrastructure and cultural adaptations needed so that all people living with and beyond cancer can be as active as is possible for them.

Addressing Social Determinants of Health to Reduce Disparities Among Individuals with Cancer: Insights for Rehabilitation Professionals.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This report aims to provide a framework for cancer rehabilitation professionals to assess social determinants of health in individuals with cancer and discuss strategies that can be implemented in practice to overcome barriers to care. RECENT FINDINGS: There has been an increased focus in improving patient conditions that can affect access to cancer rehabilitation. Along with government and world health organization initiatives, healthcare professionals and institutions continue to work towards decreasing disparities. Several disparities exist in healthcare and education access and quality, patients' social and community context, neighborhood and built environments, and economic stability. The authors emphasized the challenges that patients who require cancer rehabilitation face that healthcare providers, institutions, and governments can mitigate with outlined strategies. Education and collaboration are essential to make true progress in decreasing disparities in the populations most in need.

Implementing process improvements to enhance distress screening and management.

INTRODUCTION: While distress is prevalent among individuals living with cancer, distress management has not been optimized across cancer care delivery despite standards for screening. This manuscript describes the development of an enhanced Distress Thermometer (eDT) and shares the process for deploying the (eDT) across a cancer institute by highlighting improvements at the provider, system, and clinic levels. METHODS: Focus groups and surveys were used at the provider-level to outline the problem space and to identify solutions to improve distress screening and management. Through stakeholder engagement, an eDT was developed and rolled out across the cancer institute. Technical EHR infrastructure changes were implemented at the system-level to improve the use of the distress screening findings and generate automated referrals for specialty services. Clinic workflows were adapted to improve screening and distress management using the eDT. RESULTS: Stakeholder focus group participants (n=17) and survey respondents (n=13) found the eDT to be feasible and acceptable for distress identification and management. System-level technical EHR changes resulted in high accuracy with patient identification for distress management, and 100% of patients with moderate to severe distress were connected directly to an appropriate specialty provider. Clinic-level workflow changes to expand eDT use improved compliance rates with distress screening from 85% to 96% over a 1-year period. CONCLUSIONS: An eDT that provides more context to patient-reported problems improved identification of referral pathways for patients experiencing moderate to high distress during cancer treatment. Combining process improvement interventions across multiple levels in the cancer care delivery system enhanced the success of this project. These processes and tools could support improved distress screening and management across cancer care delivery settings.

The critical need to implement and utilize patient-reported measures of function in cancer care delivery.

The study by Smith et al. on the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Cancer Function Brief 3D Profile shows that it can be used to measure how an individual functions and how his or her function changes during cancer treatments. This is important because most patients will experience a decline in function during cancer treatment and will struggle to fully participate in their life roles. Strong evidence demonstrates that rehabilitation improves function for individuals with cancer; rehabilitation is relatively underutilized. We suggest that using the PROMIS tool as a repeated measure throughout cancer treatment will help to identify those with functional decline who will benefit most from rehabilitation.

Recent progress in the treatment and prevention of cancer-related lymphedema.

This article provides an overview of the recent developments in the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of cancer-related lymphedema. Lymphedema incidence by tumor site is evaluated. Measurement techniques and trends in patient education and treatment are also summarized to include current trends in therapeutic and surgical treatment options as well as longer-term management. Finally, an overview of the policies related to insurance coverage and reimbursement will give the clinician an overview of important trends in the diagnosis, treatment, and management of cancer-related lymphedema.

Practical clinical interventions for diet, physical activity, and weight control in cancer survivors.

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE The importance of expanding cancer treatment to include the promotion of overall long-term health is emphasized in the Institute of Medicine report on delivering quality oncology care. Weight management, physical activity, and a healthy diet are key components of tertiary prevention but may be areas in which the oncologist and/or the oncology care team may be less familiar. This article reviews current diet and physical activity guidelines, the evidence supporting those recommendations, and provides an overview of practical interventions that have resulted in favorable improvements in lifestyle behavior change in cancer survivors. It also describes current lifestyle practices among cancer survivors and the role of the oncologist in helping cancer patients and survivors embark upon changes in lifestyle behaviors, and it calls for the development of partnerships between oncology providers, primary care providers, and experts in nutrition, exercise science, and behavior change to help positively orient cancer patients toward longer and healthier lives.

Effects of Multimodal Inpatient Rehabilitation vs Conventional Pulmonary Rehabilitation on Physical Recovery After Esophageal Cancer Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of multimodal rehabilitation initiated immediately after esophageal cancer surgery on physical recovery compared with conventional pulmonary rehabilitation. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Private quaternary care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-nine inpatients (N=59) who participated in either conventional pulmonary rehabilitation (n=30) or in multimodal rehabilitation (n=29) after esophageal cancer surgery were included. INTERVENTIONS: Both groups performed pulmonary exercises, including deep breathing, chest expansion, inspiratory muscle training, coughing, and manual vibration. In the conventional pulmonary rehabilitation group, light-intensity mat exercise, stretching, and walking were performed. The multimodal rehabilitation group performed resistance exercises and moderate- to high-intensity aerobic interval exercises using a bicycle. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), pain, 6-minute walk test (6MWT), 30-second chair stand test, and grip strengths were assessed before and after the rehabilitation programs. RESULTS: Symptom scales of pain, dyspnea, and insomnia in the EORTC QLQ-C30 as well as 6MWT improved significantly after each program (P<.05). 6MWT (73.1±52.6 vs 28.4±14.3, P<.001, d=1.15), 30-second chair stand test (3.5±3.9 vs 0.35±2.0, P<.001, d=1.06), and left grip strength (1.2±1.3 vs 0.0±1.5, P=.002, d=0.42) improved significantly in the multimodal rehabilitation group compared with the pulmonary rehabilitation group. While right grip strength also showed more improvement for those undergoing the multimodal program, the mean strength difference was not clinically meaningful. CONCLUSIONS: A multimodal inpatient rehabilitation program instituted early after esophageal cancer surgery improved endurance for walking more than conventional pulmonary rehabilitation as measured by the 6MWT and the 30-second chair stand test.

Moving through cancer: Setting the agenda to make exercise standard in oncology practice.

LAY SUMMARY: International evidence-based guidelines support the prescription of exercise for all individuals living with and beyond cancer. This article describes the agenda of the newly formed Moving Through Cancer initiative, which has a primary objective of making exercise standard practice in oncology by 2029.

Promoting assessment and management of function through navigation: opportunities to bridge oncology and rehabilitation systems of care.

Recent calls from oncology providers and cancer policy forums advocate for improved connections between rehabilitation services and cancer care delivery. Traditionally, this intersection has occurred when patients present with overt disability related to cancer treatment and is driven by reactive approaches to care. A growing body of evidence suggests that a proactive approach to functional screening and assessment encourages the identification and management of functional impairment and morbidity earlier in the cancer care continuum and contributes to better outcomes. A clinical pathway that prompts screening and referral to rehabilitation services in an expedited manner is needed. Cancer patient navigators provide care coordination through the duration of medical treatment, survivorship, and end-of-life. This article presents a framework for navigation workflows to support functional assessment and provide early triage pathways to the rehabilitation system of care. We provide a case example of novel approach to patient navigation from a Southeastern United States community cancer center that uses a patient navigator with a rehabilitation background to serve in this role. An overview of the position skills, functional assessment and referral pathways, and perspective on quality improvements related to this approach are described. The use of rehabilitation providers beyond traditional clinical roles should be further explored. Their expertise in functional assessment and interpretation could foster improvements in cancer care delivery and outcomes for survivors in both the short and long term.

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.

Implementing a Clinical Pathway for Needs Assessment and Supportive Care Interventions.

Despite advances in clinical cancer care, cancer survivors frequently report a range of persisting issues, unmet needs, and concerns that limit their ability to participate in life roles and reduce quality of life. Needs assessment is recognized as an important component of cancer care delivery, ideally beginning during active treatment to connect patients with supportive services that address these issues in a timely manner. Despite the recognized importance of this process, many health care systems have struggled to implement a feasible and sustainable needs assessment and management system. This article uses an implementation science framework to guide pragmatic implementation of a needs assessment clinical system in cancer care. According to this framework, successful implementation requires four steps including (1) choosing a needs assessment tool; (2) carefully considering the provider level, clinic level, and health care system-level strengths and barriers to implementation and creating a pilot system that addresses these factors; (3) making the assessment system actionable by matching needs with clinical workflow; and (4) demonstrating the value of the system to support sustainability.

Gaps in Access to Medically Necessary Dental Care for Patients Living With and Beyond Cancer: We Must Do Better.

Delivery of high-quality, evidence-based oral care for those living with and beyond cancer needed!

Unmet Needs and Care Delivery Gaps Among Rural Cancer Survivors.

Community-based healthcare delivery systems frequently lack cancer-specific survivorship support services. This leads to a burden of unmet needs that is magnified in rural areas. Using sequential mixed methods we assessed unmet needs among rural cancer survivors diagnosed between 2015 and 2021. The Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS) assessed 5 domains; Physical and Daily Living, Psychological, Support and Supportive Services, Sexual, and Health Information. Needs were analyzed across domains by cancer type. Survey respondents were recruited for qualitative interviews to identify care gaps. Three hundred and sixty two surveys were analyzed. Participants were 85% White (n = 349) 65% (n = 234) female and averaged 2.03 years beyond cancer diagnosis. Nearly half (49.5%) of respondents reported unmet needs, predominantly in physical, psychological, and health information domains. Needs differed by stage of disease. Eleven interviews identified care gap themes regarding; Finding Support and Supportive Services and Health Information regarding Care Delivery and Continuity of Care. Patients experience persistent unmet needs after a cancer diagnosis across multiple functional domains. Access to community-based support services and health information is lacking. Community based resources are needed to improve access to care for long-term cancer survivors.

Implementing and sustaining a breast cancer prospective surveillance rehabilitation program: an institutional perspective.

BACKGROUND: The prospective surveillance model (PSM) is an evidence-based rehabilitation care delivery model that facilitates functional screening and intervention for individuals undergoing cancer treatment. While PSM is empirically validated and feasible in practice, implementation into cancer care delivery has languished. The purpose of this manuscript is to characterize the barriers and facilitators to implementing PSM in a breast cancer center and to share policy and process outcomes that have sustained the model in practice. METHODS: The PSM implementation was undertaken as a quality improvement initiative of our cancer center. We retrospectively assessed barriers to implementation and define those according to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Implementation strategies are defined based on the Expert Recommendations for Implementation Change (ERIC) taxonomy. Breast center policy changes and stakeholder-reported process improvement outcomes at the clinic and system level are described. RESULTS: PSM implementation facilitation was driven primarily by adapting the model to align with the cancer center workflow, engaging interdisciplinary stakeholders as program champions, enhancing knowledge and awareness among cancer care providers, and changing infrastructure to support the model. System and clinic-level policy and process changes included the development of clinical pathways, EHR order sets and automated referrals, new staffing models, and adapted clinical workflows. CONCLUSION: Our report provides insight on implementing the PSM at a single institution in a cancer care delivery setting. Successful implementation strategies addressed individual, clinic, and system-level barriers and facilitated process and policy changes that have enabled PSM sustainment. Improving integration of rehabilitation services into oncology care has significant implications for survivorship care by enhancing proactive management of functional morbidity. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Improving integration of rehabilitation services into oncology care has significant implications for survivorship care by enhancing proactive management of functional morbidity.

Implementation of a Cancer Rehabilitation Navigation Program: a qualitative analysis of implementation determinants and strategies.

BACKGROUND: Cancer rehabilitation navigation (CRNav) is a care delivery model that expedites identification and management of symptom-related functional morbidity for individuals undergoing cancer treatment. A CRNav program is unique in that it embeds a cancer rehabilitation professional in the cancer center for patient screening and assessment. The implementation of CRNav programs has not been studied and doing so could facilitate greater uptake of these programs. METHODS: Using implementation science frameworks, we conducted a qualitative, post-implementation analysis of a CRNav program that was implemented in 2019. Semi-structured, 1:1 interviews were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and a combination of deductive and inductive analyses, using a priori established codes, was used to assess the implementation context, and identify emergent themes of barriers and facilitators to implementation. Participant described implementation strategies were characterized and defined using the Expert Consensus Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) taxonomy. RESULTS: Eleven stakeholders including physicians, administrators, clinical staff, and patients, involved with program development and the implementation effort, participated in interviews. Predominant barriers to implementation included developing the program infrastructure, and lack of awareness of rehabilitation services among oncology professionals, predominant facilitators of implementation included; physical co-location of the navigator in the cancer center, individual characteristics of the navigator, and unique characteristics of the program. Strategies described that supported implementation included developing stakeholder interrelationships, evaluating and iteratively adapting the program, creating infrastructure, training and education, and supporting clinicians. CONCLUSION: This analysis uses implementation science to methodically analyze and characterize factors that may contribute to successful implementation of a CRNav program. These findings could be used alongside a prospective context-specific analysis to tailor future implementation efforts. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Implementing a CRNav program expedites a patient's direct contact with a rehabilitation provider complementing the cancer care delivery team, and providing an additive and often missing service.

Integrating a prospective surveillance model for rehabilitation into breast cancer survivorship care.

At some point during or after treatment, breast cancer may be considered a chronic illness, presenting many choices for managing the disease, its adverse treatment-related effects, other medical comorbidities as well as the biobehavioral burden of having a life-threatening disease, even for individuals with potentially curable breast cancer. Health care models, such as the chronic care model, the medical home, and the shared care model, provide a context for building survivorship health care models. Goals and characteristics of recently proposed shared care models for cancer survivorship health care delivery closely align with the goals and concepts of the prospective surveillance model (PSM) proposed elsewhere in this supplement to the journal Cancer. Given these similarities, along with the growth and expansion of survivorship care models and impending mandates for delivery, there is merit to considering how implementation of the PSM can be integrated with models of survivorship care delivery. The PSM model will likely face many similar challenges and barriers that have impeded widespread dissemination of other survivorship models of care. There exist opportunities to integrate lessons learned as well as to align efforts to achieve greater impact on the shared goal of improving health outcomes for breast cancer survivors.

Stakeholder perspectives on dissemination and implementation of a prospective surveillance model of rehabilitation for breast cancer treatment.

The prospective surveillance model proposes a paradigm shift in the delivery of care for patients with breast cancer. The model is based on clinical research and clinical practice experience that was reviewed and discussed at a multidisciplinary meeting. The model identifies critical physical sequelae of treatment as well as timeframes for identification of and surveillance for these issues. Although the model of ongoing assessment for physical impairment and early rehabilitative intervention creates a framework for care, broad support and active dissemination among a variety of stakeholders will be required to transform patient care. Translating research findings to transform practice often occurs on a protracted timeline. The authors sought participation from a variety of stakeholder representatives throughout the process of creating this model in an effort to ensure that it reflects the realities of the patient experience and care delivery, to incorporate their input regarding the construct and viability of the model, and to potentiate effective and efficient strategies for implementation. This article summarizes comments from stakeholder representatives concerning the prospective surveillance model for rehabilitation for women treated for breast cancer. Concerns addressed include the scope of impairments included in the model, the potential creation of barriers to exercise and participation in community exercise programs, and cost and feasibility issues. Stakeholder disseminations strategies are also presented. Overall, there is recognition by the stakeholder group that this model calls attention to important unmet needs and defines a crucial opportunity to improve care for breast cancer survivors.