Cultural Values Influence on Rural Family Caregivers' Decision-Making for Ill Older Adult Loved Ones.

CONTEXT: Rural older adult Americans receive more intense treatment at end of life. Studies indicate that those who participate in goals of care conversations receive care more concordant with their values. Yet, rates of documented goals of care discussions are lower in rural and Black communities. Although multi-factorial, the role that rural family caregivers (FCGs) play in decision-making for ill loved ones is understudied. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore rural FCGs cultural values, beliefs, and attitudes about serious illness and treatment decision-making and to understand how these factors influence their decision-making around goals of care for their family members. METHODS: This is an embedded qualitative study within a tele-palliative care consult randomized trial that the PEN-3 theoretical model guided. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with FCGs who had completed study participation. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Twelve rural FCGs center their decisions around core values, and the decision-making experience was supported by faith. A model of how the key themes and subthemes interact around the central space of supporting the seriously ill loved to demonstrate the complexity of caregiving when race and rurality intersect is presented. CONCLUSION: This study is a foundational step in understanding how rural FCGs beliefs and values influence decision-making. We recommend incorporating those constructs into the development of culturally responsive decision-support interventions.

Telephone-Based Rehabilitation Intervention to Optimize Activity Participation After Breast Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Following treatment, breast cancer survivors face challenges participating in valued activities. Objective: To determine whether a telephone-based coaching rehabilitation intervention enhances activity participation in the year following breast cancer treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this multisite, single-blind randomized clinical trial (Optimizing Functional Recovery of Breast Cancer Survivors), recruitment occurred between August 28, 2019, and April 30, 2022. Data collection was completed by April 1, 2023. Participants were recruited from 2 cancer centers (Dartmouth College and the University of Alabama at Birmingham) and via social media advertisements. Women aged 18 years or older who had completed primary treatment for stage I to III breast cancer within 1 year and reported participation restrictions were eligible to participate. Randomization was stratified by site, treatment, and time since treatment. Interventions: The intervention, delivered via telephone over 9 sessions, used behavioral activation and problem-solving principles to promote activity participation. The education-based attention control condition was delivered via telephone at matched intervals. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was participation, assessed using 5 measures, including Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) social participation-satisfaction measure. One individualized outcome allowed participants to specify activities for which they wanted to foster recovery. Outcomes were collected by telephone by blinded coordinators at baseline and at 8, 20, and 44 weeks. The individualized outcome was assessed at the first and last intervention and control session. Results: Among 1996 patients identified, 303 were eligible and enrolled. Of these, 284 women (94%; mean [SD] age, 56.1 [10.2] years) completed baseline assessments and were randomized, and 81% or more of each group completed the final assessment with no adverse events. Of those who completed the final assessment, 118 of 114 (82%) were in the intervention group, and 113 of 140 (81%) were attention control participants. Between-group differences were not statistically significant for the main measures of PROMIS satisfaction (week 20: Cohen d, 0.1 [95% CI, -0.09 to 0.29] and week 44: Cohen d, -0.08 [95% CI, -0.27 to 0.11]) and ability (week 20: Cohen d, 0.15 [95% CI, -0.06 to 0.37] and week 44: Cohen d, -0.08 [95% CI, -0.27 to 0.11]). On the individualized outcome, intervention participants reported significantly greater improvements in activity satisfaction (Cohen d, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.48-1.02]) and performance (Cohen d, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.32-0.87]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the intervention catalyzed greater improvements in self-selected activity participation and goal disengagement but did not otherwise accelerate recovery compared with the control condition. Future research should determine what intervention features may lead to the greatest reductions in participation restrictions and other measures that may detect functional recovery. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03915548.

Developing a national implementation strategy to accelerate uptake of evidence-based family caregiver support in U.S. cancer centers.

OBJECTIVE: Characterize key factors and training needs of U.S. cancer centers in implementing family caregiver support services. METHODS: Sequential explanatory mixed methods design consisting of: (1) a national survey of clinicians and administrators from Commission-on-Cancer-accredited cancer centers (N = 238) on factors and training needed for establishing new caregiver programs and (2) qualitative interviews with a subsample of survey respondents (N = 30) to elicit feedback on survey findings and the outline of an implementation strategy to facilitate implementation of evidence-based family caregiver support (the Caregiver Support Accelerator). Survey data was tabulated using descriptive statistics and transcribed interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Top factors for developing new caregiver programs were that the program be: consistent with the cancer center's mission and strategic plan (87%), supported by clinic leadership (86.5%) and providers and staff (85.7%), and low cost or cost effective (84.9%). Top training needs were how to: train staff to implement programs (72.3%), obtain program materials (63.0%), and evaluate program outcomes (62.6%). Only 3.8% reported that no training was needed. Qualitative interviews yielded four main themes: (1) gaining leadership, clinician, and staff buy-in and support is essential; (2) cost and clinician burden are major factors to program implementation; (3) training should help with adapting and marketing programs to local context and culture; and (4) the Accelerator strategy is comprehensive and would benefit from key organizational partnerships and policy standards. CONCLUSION: Findings will be used to inform and refine the Accelerator implementation strategy to facilitate the adoption and growth of evidence-based cancer caregiver support in U.S. cancer centers.

A Process Evaluation of Intervention Delivery for a Cancer Survivorship Rehabilitation Clinical Trial Conducted during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The purpose of the present study was to conduct a process evaluation of intervention delivery for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic (NCT03915548). The RCT tested the effects of a telephone-delivered behavioral intervention on changes in breast cancer survivors' satisfaction with social roles and activities, as compared to an attention control condition. This process evaluation examined (a) fidelity monitoring scores; (b) participants' perceived benefit ratings for gaining confidence, reducing distress, adjusting habits and routines, setting goals, and increasing exercise; and (c) field notes, email communications, and transcripts of coach supervision and debriefing sessions. The behavioral and attention control conditions were delivered with a high degree of fidelity (global quality rating score for the BA/PS condition was M = 4.6 (SD = 0.6) and M = 4.9 (SD = 0.3) for the attention control condition, where "5" is the highest rating). The behavioral intervention participants perceived greater benefits than the control participants pertaining to goal setting, t(248) = 5.73, p = <0.0001, adjusting habits and routines, t(248) = 2.94, p = 0.0036, and increasing exercise, t(248) = 4.66, p = <0.0001. Moreover, coaches' perceptions regarding the behavioral intervention's therapeutic aspects aligned with the study's a priori conceptual model including the use of a structured process to set small, observable goals and facilitate the independent use of problem-solving skills. However, coaches also noted that aspects of the attention control condition, including the perceived relevance of the educational content and opportunities for social support, may have made it more therapeutically potent than intended. The pandemic may have affected the activity goals behavioral intervention participants could set as well as augmented the relevancy of social support provided in both conditions.

Availability of Family Caregiver Programs in US Cancer Centers.

Importance: Family caregivers provide the majority of health care to the 18 million patients with cancer in the US. Yet despite providing complex medical and nursing care, a large proportion of caregivers report no formal support or training. In recognition of this gap, many interventions to support cancer caregivers have been developed and tested over the past 2 decades. However, there are few system-level data on whether US cancer centers have adopted and implemented these interventions. Objective: To describe and characterize the availability of family caregiver support programs in US cancer centers. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional national survey study was conducted between September 1, 2021, and April 30, 2023. Participants comprised clinical and administrative staff of Commission on Cancer-accredited US cancer centers. Data analysis was performed in May and June 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survey questions about the availability of 11 types of family caregiver programs (eg, peer mentoring, education classes, and psychosocial programs) were developed after literature review, assessment of similar program evaluation surveys, and discussions among a 13-member national expert advisory committee. Family caregiver programs were defined as structured, planned, and coordinated groups of activities and procedures aimed at specifically supporting family caregivers as part of usual care. Survey responses were tabulated using standard descriptive statistics, including means, proportions, and frequencies. Results: Of the surveys sent to potential respondents at 971 adult cancer centers, 238 were completed (response rate, 24.5%). After nonresponse weight adjustment, most cancer centers (75.4%) had at least 1 family caregiver program; 24.6% had none. The most common program type was information and referral services (53.6%). Cancer centers with no programs were more likely to have smaller annual outpatient volumes (χ2 = 11.10; P = .011). Few centers had caregiver programs on training in medical and/or nursing tasks (21.7%), caregiver self-care (20.2%), caregiver-specific distress screening (19.3%), peer mentoring (18.9%), and children caregiving for parents (8.3%). Very few programs were developed from published evidence in a journal (8.1%). The top reason why cancer centers selected their programs was community members requesting the program (26.3%); only 12.3% of centers selected their programs based on scientific evidence. Most programs were funded by the cancer center or hospital (58.6%) or by philanthropy (42.4%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study, most cancer centers had family caregiver programs; however, a quarter had none. Furthermore, the scope of programming was limited and rarely evidence based, with few centers offering caregiving education and training. These findings suggest that implementation strategies are critically needed to foster uptake of evidence-based caregiver interventions.

Decision support training for advanced cancer family caregivers: Study protocol for the CASCADE factorial trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced cancer face numerous decisions when diagnosed and often receive decision support from family caregivers. The CASCADE (CAre Supporters Coached to be Adept DEcision partners) factorial trial intervention aims to train caregivers in skills to provide effective decision support to patients and identify most effective intervention components. METHODS: This is a 2-site, single-blind, 24 factorial trial to test components of the CASCADE decision support training intervention for family caregivers of patients with newly-diagnosed advanced cancer delivered by specially-trained, telehealth, palliative care lay coaches over 24 weeks. Family caregivers (target N = 352) are randomly assigned to one of 16 combinations of four components with two levels each: 1) psychoeducation on effective decision partnering principles (1 vs. 3 sessions); 2) decision support communication training (1 session vs. none); 3) Ottawa Decision Guide training (1 session vs. none) and 4) monthly follow-up (1 call vs. calls for 24 weeks). The primary outcome is patient-reported decisional conflict at 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes include patient distress, healthcare utilization, caregiver distress, and quality of life. Mediators and moderators (e.g., sociodemographics, decision self-efficacy, social support) will be explored between intervention components and outcomes. Results will be used to build two versions of CASCADE: one with only effective components (d ≥ 0.30) and another optimized for scalability and cost. DISCUSSION: This protocol describes the first factorial trial, informed by the multiphase optimization strategy, of a palliative care decision-support intervention for advanced cancer family caregivers and will address the field's need to identify effective components that support serious illness decision-making. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04803604.

Feasibility and acceptability of an online intervention to enhance hopefulness among oncology professionals.

BACKGROUND: Patients prefer medical communication including both hopefulness and realism, though health-care professional (HCPs) struggle to balance these. Providers could thus benefit from a detailed personal understanding of hope, allowing them to model and convey it to patients. Additionally, given that hope is associated with lower levels of burnout, HCPs may benefit from tools designed to enhance their own personal hopefulness. Several investigators have proposed offering HCPs interventions to augment hope. We developed an online workshop for this purpose. METHODS: Feasibility and acceptability of the workshop were assessed in members of the SWOG Cancer Research Network. Three measures were used: the Was-It-Worth-It scale, a survey based on the Kirkpatrick Training Evaluation Model, and a single item prompting participants to rate the degree to which they believe concepts from the workshop should be integrated into SWOG studies. RESULTS: Twenty-nine individuals signed up for the intervention, which consisted of a single 2-hour session, and 23 completed measures. Results from Was-It-Worth-It items indicate that nearly all participants found the intervention relevant, engaging, and helpful. Mean ratings for Kirkpatrick Training Evaluation Model items were high, ranging from 6.91 to 7.70 on 8-point scales. Finally, participants provided a mean rating of 4.44 on a 5-point scale to the item "To what degree do you believe it may be useful to integrate concepts from this workshop into SWOG trials/studies?" CONCLUSIONS: An online workshop to enhance hopefulness is feasible and acceptable to oncology HCPs. The tool will be integrated into SWOG studies evaluating provider and patient well-being.

Building a Cardiac Palliative Care Program: A Qualitative Study of the Experiences of Ten Program Leaders From Across the United States.

CONTEXT: Palliative care is guideline-recommended for patients with advanced heart failure (HF). However, studies on how cardiac palliative care is provided in the United States are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To study how cardiac palliative care programs provide services, and to identify challenges and facilitators they encountered in program development. METHODS: In this qualitative descriptive study, we used purposive and snowball sampling approaches to identify cardiac palliative care program leaders across the United States, administered a survey and conducted semi-structured interviews. Interview transcripts were coded and evaluated using thematic analysis. RESULTS: While cardiac palliative care programs vary in their organizational setup, they all provide comprehensive interdisciplinary palliative care services, ideally across the care continuum. They predominantly serve HF patients who are evaluated for advanced therapies or have complex needs. The challenges which cardiac palliative care programs face include reaching those cardiac patients who need palliative care the most and collaborating with cardiologists who do not see value added from palliative care for their patients. Facilitators of cardiac palliative care program development include building personal relationships with cardiology providers, proactively assessing local institution needs, and tailoring palliative care services to meet patient and provider needs. CONCLUSION: Cardiac palliative care programs vary in their organizational setup but provide similar services and face similar challenges. The challenges and facilitators we identified can inform the development of future cardiac palliative care programs.

Patterns of Pediatric Palliative and End-of-Life Care in Neonatal Intensive Care Patients in the Southern U.S.

CONTEXT: Despite high rates of mortality among infants in the Southern U.S., little is known about the timing of pediatric palliative care (PPC), the intensity of end-of-life care, and whether there are differences among sociodemographic characteristics. OBJECTIVES: To describe PPC patterns and treatment intensity during the last 48 hours of life among neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) patients in the Southern U.S. who received specialized PPC. METHODS: Medical record abstraction of infant decedents who received PPC consultation in two NICUs (in Alabama and Mississippi) from 2009 to 2017 (n = 195) including clinical characteristics, palliative and end-of-life care characteristics, patterns of PPC, and intensive medical treatments in the last 48 hours of life. RESULTS: The sample was racially (48.2% Black) and geographically (35.4% rural) diverse. Most infants died after withdrawal of life-sustaining interventions (58%) and had do not attempt resuscitation orders documented (75.9%); very few infants enrolled in hospice (6.2%). Initial PPC consult occurred a median of 13 days after admission and a median of 17 days before death. Infants with a primary diagnosis of genetic or congenital anomaly received earlier PPC consultation (P = 0.02) compared to other diagnoses. In the last 48 hours of life, NICU patients received intensive interventions including mechanical ventilation (81.5%), CPR (27.7%) and surgeries or invasive procedures (25.1%). Black infants were more likely to receive CPR compared to White infants (P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Overall, PPC consultation occurred late in NICU hospitalizations, infants received high-intensity medical interventions in the last 48 hours of life, and there are disparities in intensity of treatment interventions at end of life. Further research is needed to explore if these patterns of care reflect parent preferences and goal concordance.

Project EPIC (Early Palliative Care In COPD): A Formative and Summative Evaluation of the EPIC Telehealth Intervention.

CONTEXT: Early, concurrent palliative care interventions in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are limited. Project EPIC (Early Palliative Care In COPD) is a multiphase mixed methods study working to fill this gap. OBJECTIVES: To conduct a formative and summative evaluation of EPIC, a telephonic nurse coach-led early palliative care intervention for COPD adapted from the ENABLE© intervention in cancer. METHODS: Phase I Formative Evaluation: Patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD, family caregivers, and pulmonary and palliative care clinicians rated the acceptability and feasibility of EPIC (≥4 out of five on a Likert-scale survey). Phase II Summative Evaluation: Patients and family caregivers in Phase I participated in a pilot of the three month EPIC prototype to evaluate intervention and data collection feasibility (≥70% completion) and to seek qualitative feedback. RESULTS: Phase I Formative Evaluation: Patients (n=10), family caregivers (n=10), pulmonary clinicians (n=6), and palliative care clinicians (n=6) found EPIC acceptable and feasible to support adaptation, while priority early palliative care needs in COPD from our prior research mapped well to the EPIC prototype. Phase II Summative Evaluation: Patients (n=5; ages 49-72, 40% moderate COPD, 40% Black) and their family caregivers (n=5; ages 51-73, 40% Black) completed 100% of EPIC prototype components, including weekly telephone sessions, a one month follow-up call, Advance Directive, palliative care clinic attendance, and 95% of monthly phone data collection sessions. Feedback from participants about EPIC was all positive. CONCLUSION: EPIC was acceptable and feasible in patients with COPD and their family caregivers. Larger feasibility and effectiveness trials are warranted.

Primary palliative care for heart failure provided within ambulatory cardiology: A randomized pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure is characterized by physical and emotional symptoms and decreased quality of life (QoL). Palliative care can reduce burdens of serious illness but often is limited to inpatient or academic settings. OBJECTIVES: To develop and test the Primary Education for Nurses in Palliative care-HF (PENPal-HF) intervention, training outpatient cardiology nurses to address symptom burden, patient priorities for care and QoL, and advance care planning as part of quarterly HF visits. METHODS: We conducted a pilot randomized clinical trial for adults with NYHA Stage III or IV HF and ≥ 2 hospitalizations in the past 12 months, recruited from a community-based cardiology clinic. Participants were randomized 2:1, PENPal-HF plus usual care versus usual care alone. Primary outcomes were feasibility and acceptability. RESULTS: We randomized 30 adults with Stage III HF - 20 to PENPal-HF and 10 to usual care. Most in the intervention group (71%) and in the control group (62%) completed the study through the final outcome assessment in week 56; 5 participants died. Of 20 participants in the intervention, 14 (70%) remained in the study through the end of intervention visits; 11 (55%) completed all visits. Most intervention participants (93.75%) agreed or strongly agreed that they were satisfied with their care, and 87.5% agreed or strongly agreed that all people with HF should receive the intervention. Most intervention group participants (93.75%) reported a perceived improvement in physical symptoms, mood, and/or QoL. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study suggests that nurse-led primary palliative care in outpatient cardiology settings is promising. Research is warranted to determine efficacy and effectiveness.

The Project ENABLE Cornerstone randomized controlled trial: study protocol for a lay navigator-led, early palliative care coaching intervention for African American and rural-dwelling advanced cancer family caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Family caregivers play a vital, yet stressful role in managing the healthcare needs and optimizing the quality of life of patients with advanced cancer, from the time they are newly diagnosed until end of life. While early telehealth palliative care has been found to effectively support family caregivers, little work has focused on historically under-resourced populations, particularly African American and rural-dwelling individuals. To address this need, we developed and are currently testing Project ENABLE (Educate, Nurture, Advise, Before Life Ends) Cornerstone, a lay navigator-led, early palliative care coaching intervention for family caregivers of African American and rural-dwelling patients with newly diagnosed advanced cancer. METHODS: This is a 2-site, single-blind, hybrid type I implementation-effectiveness trial of the Cornerstone intervention versus usual care. Cornerstone is a multicomponent intervention based on Pearlin's Stress-Health Process Model where African American and/or rural-dwelling family caregivers of patients with newly diagnosed advanced cancer (target sample size = 294 dyads) are paired with a lay navigator coach and receive a series of six, brief 20-60-min telehealth sessions focused on stress management and coping, caregiving skills, getting help, self-care, and preparing for the future/advance care planning. Subsequent to core sessions, caregivers receive monthly follow-up indefinitely until the patient's death. Caregiver and patient outcomes are collected at baseline and every 12 weeks until the patient's death (primary outcome: caregiver distress at 24 weeks; secondary outcomes: caregiver: quality of life and burden; patient: distress, quality of life, and healthcare utilization). Implementation costs and the intervention cost effectiveness are also being evaluated. DISCUSSION: Should this intervention demonstrate efficacy, it would yield an implementation-ready model of early palliative care support for under-resourced family caregivers. A key design principle that has centrally informed the Cornerstone intervention is that every caregiving situation is unique and each caregiver faces distinct challenges that cannot be addressed using a one-size-fits all approach. Hence, Cornerstone employs culturally savvy lay navigator coaches who are trained to establish a strong, therapeutic alliance with participants and tailor their coaching to a diverse range of individual circumstances. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04318886 . Registered on 20 March, 2020.

Development of a measure of clinicians' self-efficacy for medical communication (SEMC).

OBJECTIVES: Studies of clinician-patient communication have used varied, ad hoc measures for communication efficacy. We developed and validated the Self-Efficacy for Medical Communication (SEMC) scale as a standard, quantitative measure of clinician-reported skills in communicating difficult news. METHODS: Using evidence-based scale development guidelines, we created two 16-item forms of the SEMC, one assessing communication with patients and one assessing communication with families. Clinicians providing oncological care in four organisations were invited to participate and provided consent. Participant demographics, responses to the SEMC items and responses to convergent and discriminant measures (those expected to relate strongly and weakly to the SEMC) were collected online. We performed analyses to determine the convergent and discriminant validity of the SEMC as well as its reliability and factor structure. RESULTS: Overall, 221 oncology clinicians (including physicians, residents, fellows, medical students, nurses, nurse practitioners and physician assistants) participated. The patient and family forms both demonstrated high internal consistency reliability (alpha=0.94 and 0.96, respectively) and were strongly correlated with one another (r=0.95, p<0.001). Exploratory factor analysis demonstrated that the SEMC measures a unitary construct (eigenvalue=9.0), and its higher mean correlation with convergent (r=0.46) than discriminant (r=0.22) measures further supported its validity. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the SEMC's validity and reliability as a measure of clinician-rated communication skills regarding conducting difficult conversations with patients and families. It provides a useful standard tool for future research in oncology provider-patient serious illness communication.

An Early Palliative Care Telehealth Coaching Intervention to Enhance Advanced Cancer Family Caregivers' Decision Support Skills: The CASCADE Pilot Factorial Trial.

CONTEXT: Patients with advanced cancer often involve family caregivers in health-related decision-making from diagnosis to end-of-life; however, few interventions have been developed to enhance caregiver decision support skills. OBJECTIVES: Assess the feasibility, acceptability, and potential efficacy of individual intervention components of CASCADE (CAre Supporters Coached to be Adept DEcision Partners), an early telehealth, palliative care coach-led decision support training intervention for caregivers. METHODS: Pilot factorial trial using the multiphase optimization strategy (October 2019-October 2020). Family caregivers and their care recipients with newly-diagnosed advanced cancer (n = 46 dyads) were randomized to1 of 8 experimental conditions that included a combination of one of the following three CASCADE components: 1) effective decision support psychoeducation; 2) decision support communication training; and 3) Ottawa Decision Guide training. Feasibility was assessed by completion of sessions and questionnaires (predefined as ≥80%). Acceptability was determined through postintervention interviews and participants' ratings of their likelihood to recommend. Measures of effective decision support and caregiver and patient distress were collected at Twelve and Twenty four weeks. RESULTS: Caregiver participants completed 78% of intervention sessions and 81% of questionnaires; patients completed 80% of questionnaires. Across conditions, average caregiver ratings for recommending the program to others was 9.9 on a scale from 1-Not at all likely to 10-Extremely likely. Individual CASCADE components were observed to have potential benefit for effective decision support and caregiver distress. CONCLUSION: We successfully piloted a factorial trial design to examine components of a novel intervention to enhance the decision support skills of advanced cancer family caregivers. A fully-powered factorial trial is warranted. KEY MESSAGE: We pilot tested components of CASCADE, an early palliative care decision support training intervention for family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer. CASCADE components were acceptable and the trial design feasible, providing promising future directions for palliative care intervention development and testing. Pilot results will inform a fully-powered trial.

A lay navigator-led, early palliative care intervention for African American and rural family caregivers of individuals with advanced cancer (Project Cornerstone): Results of a pilot randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and potential efficacy of ENABLE (Educate, Nurture, Advise, Before Life Ends) Cornerstone-a lay navigator-led, early palliative care telehealth intervention for African American/Black and/or rural-dwelling family caregivers of individuals with advanced cancer (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03464188). METHODS: This was a pilot randomized trial (November 2019 to March 2021). Family caregivers of patients with newly diagnosed, stage III/IV, solid-tumor cancers were randomized to receive either an intervention or usual care. Intervention caregivers were paired with a specially trained lay navigator who delivered 6 weekly, 20-minute to 60-minute telehealth coaching sessions plus monthly follow-up for 24 weeks, reviewing skills in stress management, self-care, getting help, staying organized, and future planning. Feasibility was assessed according to the completion of sessions and questionnaires (predefined as a completion rate ≥80%). Acceptability was determined through intervention participants' ratings of their likelihood of recommending the intervention. Measures of caregiver distress and quality of life were collected at 8 and 24 weeks. RESULTS: Sixty-three family caregivers were randomized (usual care, n = 32; intervention, n = 31). Caregivers completed 65% of intervention sessions and 87% of questionnaires. Average ratings for recommending the program were 9.4, from 1 (not at all likely) to 10 (extremely likely). Over 24 weeks, the mean ± SE Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale score improved by 0.30 ± 1.44 points in the intervention group and worsened by 1.99 ± 1.39 points in the usual care group (difference, -2.29; Cohen d, -0.32). The mean between-group difference scores in caregiver quality of life was -1.56 (usual care - intervention; d, -0.07). Similar outcome results were observed for patient participants. CONCLUSIONS: The authors piloted ENABLE Cornerstone, an intervention for African American and rural-dwelling advanced cancer family caregivers. The acceptability of the intervention and data collection rates were high, and the preliminary efficacy for caregiver distress was promising. LAY SUMMARY: To date, very few programs have been developed to support under-resourced cancer family caregivers. To address this need, the authors successfully pilot tested an early palliative care program, called Educate, Nurture, Advise, Before Life Ends (ENABLE) Cornerstone, for African American and rural family caregivers of individuals with advanced cancer. Cornerstone is led by specially trained lay people and involves a series of weekly phone sessions focused on coaching caregivers to manage stress and provide effective support to patients with cancer. The authors are now testing Cornerstone in a larger trial. If the program demonstrates benefit, it may yield a model of caregiver support that could be widely implemented.

Dispositional hope as a potential outcome parameter among patients with advanced malignancy: An analysis of the ENABLE database.

BACKGROUND: Hopefulness, whether inherently present (dispositional hope) or augmented (by enhancement techniques), may affect outcomes. This study was performed to determine the association of dispositional hope with survival among patients diagnosed with advanced cancer. METHODS: Data from ENABLE (Educate, Nurture, Advise, Before Life Ends), a palliative care intervention, were reanalyzed to determine the association of higher dispositional hope and patient survival. This was a secondary analysis of data combined from the ENABLE II and ENABLE III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with respect to dispositional hope and survival. A dispositional hope index was created from 3 hope items from 2 validated baseline questionnaires. Dispositional hope and survival data were collected during the 2 RCTs. In ENABLE II, participants were randomly assigned to the ENABLE intervention or to usual care. In ENABLE III, participants were randomly assigned to receive the intervention immediately or 12 weeks after enrollment. RESULTS: In all, 529 persons were included in Cox proportional hazards regression analyses to model the effects of dispositional hope on survival. An initial analysis without covariates yielded a significant effect of hope (Wald statistic, 8.649; hazard ratio, 0.941; confidence interval, 0.904-0.980; P = .003), such that higher dispositional hope was associated with longer survival. In a subsequent analysis that included all covariates, the effect of dispositional hope approached statistical significance (Wald statistic, 2.96; hazard ratio, 0.933; confidence interval, 0.863-1.010; P = .085). CONCLUSIONS: Higher levels of dispositional hope were associated with longer survival in patients with advanced cancer. Prospective trials are needed to determine the effects of dispositional and augmented hope on the outcomes of patients with advanced cancer.

Effect of an Oncology Nurse-Led Primary Palliative Care Intervention on Patients With Advanced Cancer: The CONNECT Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Guidelines recommend early specialty palliative care for all patients with advanced cancer, but most patients lack access to such services. Objective: To assess the effect of CONNECT (Care Management by Oncology Nurses to Address Supportive Care Needs), a primary palliative care intervention delivered by oncology nurses, on patient outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized clinical trial of the CONNECT intervention vs standard care was conducted from July 25, 2016, to October 6, 2020. Participants were adult patients with metastatic solid tumors who were undergoing oncological care and for whom an oncologist would agree with the statement "would not be surprised if the patient died in the next year." The trial was conducted at 17 community oncology practices in western Pennsylvania. Data analyses adhered to the intention-to-treat principle. Interventions: The CONNECT intervention included 3 monthly visits with an existing infusion room nurse who was trained to address symptoms, provide emotional support, engage in advance care planning, and coordinate care. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was quality of life. At baseline and 3 months, participants completed assessments of quality of life (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliative care: score range, 0-184, with higher scores indicating better quality of life), symptom burden (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale: score range, 0-90, with higher scores indicating greater symptom burden), and mood symptoms (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS]: score range, 0-21, with higher scores indicating substantial anxiety and depression). Linear mixed-effects models were used to estimate adjusted mean differences in 3-month outcomes. Preplanned, intensity-adjusted analyses were conducted. Results: A total of 672 patients were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 69.3 [10.2] years; 360 women [53.6%]). The mean (SD) number of CONNECT visits completed was 2.2 (1.0). At 3 months, no difference in mean (SD) quality-of-life score was found between the CONNECT and standard care groups (130.7 [28.2] vs 134.1 [28.1]; adjusted mean difference, 1.20; 95% CI, -2.75 to 5.15; P = .55). Similarly, there was no difference between groups in 3-month mean (SD) symptom burden (23.2 [16.6] vs 24.0 [16.1]; adjusted mean difference, -2.64; 95% CI, -5.85 to 0.58; P = .11) or mood symptoms (HADS depression subscale score: 5.1 [3.4] vs 4.8 [3.7], adjusted mean difference, -0.08 [95% CI, -0.71 to 0.57], P = .82; HADS anxiety subscale score: 5.7 [3.9] vs 5.4 [4.2], adjusted mean difference, -0.31 [95% CI, -0.96 to 0.33], P = .34). Intensity-adjusted analyses revealed a larger estimated treatment effect for patients who received a full dose (3 visits) of the CONNECT intervention. Conclusions and Relevance: This cluster randomized clinical trial found that a primary palliative care intervention that was delivered by oncology nurses did not improve patient-reported outcomes at 3 months. Primary palliative care interventions with a higher dose intensity may be beneficial for most patients with advanced cancer who lack access to palliative care specialists. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02712229.

Resilience, preparedness, and distress among family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Resilience has been proposed as a primary factor in how many family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer are able to resist psychological strain and perform effectively in the role while bearing a high load of caregiving tasks. To evaluate this hypothesis, we examined whether self-perceived resilience is associated with distress (anxiety and depressive symptoms), caregiver preparedness, and readiness for surrogate decision-making among a racially diverse sample of family caregivers of patients with newly diagnosed advanced cancer. METHODS: Secondary analysis of baseline data from two small-scale, pilot clinical trials that both recruited family caregivers of patients with newly diagnosed advanced cancer. Using multivariable linear regression, we analyzed relationships of resilience as a predictor of mood, caregiving preparedness, and readiness for surrogate decision-making, controlling for sociodemographics. RESULTS: Caregiver participants (N = 112) were mean 56 years of age and mostly female (76%), the patient's spouse/partner (52%), and White (56%) or African-American/Black (43%). After controlling for demographics, standardized results indicated that higher resilience was relevantly associated with higher caregiver preparedness (beta = .46, p < .001), higher readiness for surrogate decision-making (beta = .20, p < .05) and lower anxiety (beta = - .19, p < .05), and depressive symptoms (beta = - .20, p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that resilience may be critical to caregivers' abilities to manage stress, be effective sources of support to patients, and feel ready to make future medical decisions on behalf of patients. Future work should explore and clinicians should consider whether resilience can be enhanced in cancer caregivers to optimize their well-being and ability to perform in the caregiving and surrogate decision-making roles.

Creating Effective Models for Delivering Palliative Care in Advanced Liver Disease.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The current healthcare system is not fully equipped to provide comprehensive support for patients with advanced liver disease (ALD) and their caregivers resulting in concomitant suffering and reduced quality of life (QoL). Integration of palliative care (PC) within routine care has demonstrated benefits in improving symptoms and QoL and reducing healthcare utilization for other serious illnesses but has been underutilized or delayed for ALD care. The purpose of this article is to outline the domains and benefits of PC and discuss the misconceptions and barriers for PC integration, and healthcare delivery models supporting PC integration within ALD care. RECENT FINDINGS: PC has eight key domains related to physical and mental health, goals for future care, and care of the caregivers. PC offers benefits to improve health outcomes and patient satisfaction and reduce healthcare utilization. To date there have been successful models of PC that are primarily hospital- or community-based; successful models have been PC specialist- or primary/generalist-led. SUMMARY: Concurrent PC within oncology has formed the basis for most evidence-based guidelines. PC integration within ALD care is still in its infancy. While amassing evidence in ALD, hepatology organizations can promote consensus-based integrated PC models that can guide research and practice efforts to increase supportive care for these patients in need and their family caregivers.

Hope, Burnout, and Life Satisfaction: An Intriguing Trinity Among Investigators of the SWOG Cancer Research Network.

PURPOSE: Although hope has been explored in patients, few studies have investigated hopefulness in health care professionals. We surveyed oncology professionals within the SWOG Cancer Research Network, exploring relationships among personal hopefulness, social support, work stress, burnout, and life satisfaction. We hypothesized that hope would mediate the relationships between these other variables and life satisfaction. METHODS: SWOG members were randomly selected for an online survey containing measures of hope, social support, work stress, burnout, and satisfaction with life. Of 1,000 invitees, 226 responded. RESULTS: We tested a multiple mediational model using Hayes' bootstrapping approach (ie, PROCESS v3.4). As hypothesized, hope partially mediated the relationships between burnout and life satisfaction as well as between social support and life satisfaction. In particular, hopefulness was associated with lower burnout (-0.23; P = .005), greater social support (0.23; P = .005), and greater life satisfaction (0.50; P < .001). Work stress was associated with greater burnout (0.57; P < .001) but was not associated with general life satisfaction. Finally, social support was associated with lower burnout (-0.16; P = .005) and greater life satisfaction (0.24; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that hope may mitigate the effects of burnout. The combination of hope and social support may prove helpful for reducing burnout and improving life satisfaction. Single-session hope-enhancement interventions incorporating both hope and social support have previously been shown to increase hope and well-being in non-health care professionals. Such interventions for health care providers warrant further study.