Impact of Real-World Outpatient Cancer Rehabilitation Services on Health-Related Quality of Life of Cancer Survivors across 12 Diagnosis Types in the United States.

Compared to adults without cancer, cancer survivors report poorer health-related quality of life (HRQOL), which is associated with negative treatment outcomes and increased healthcare use. Cancer-specialized physical and occupational therapy (PT/OT) could optimize HRQOL; however, the impact among survivors with non-breast malignancies is unknown. This retrospective (2020-2022), observational, study of medical record data of 12 cancer types, examined pre/post-HRQOL among cancer survivors who completed PT/OT. PROMIS® HRQOL measures: Global Health (physical [GPH] and mental [GMH]), Physical Function (PF), and Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities (SRA) were evaluated using linear mixed effect models by cancer type, then compared to the minimal important change (MIC, 2 points). Survivors were 65.44 ± 12.84 years old (range: 19-91), male (54%), with a median of 12 visits. Improvements in GPH were significant (p < 0.05) for all cancer types and all achieved MIC. Improvements in GMH were significant for 11/12 cancer types and 8/12 achieved MIC. Improvements in PF were significant for all cancer types and all achieved the MIC. Improvements in SRA were significant for all cancer types and all groups achieved the MIC. We observed statistically and clinically significant improvements in HRQOL domains for each of the 12 cancer types evaluated.

Geriatric assessment-identified impairments and frailty in adults with cancer younger than 65: An opportunity to optimize oncology care.

INTRODUCTION: Frailty, a state of increased vulnerability to stressors due to aging or treatment-related accelerated aging, is associated with declines in physical, cognitive and/or social functioning, and quality of life for cancer survivors. For survivors aged <65 years, little is known about frailty status and associated impairments to inform intervention. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of frailty and contributing geriatric assessment (GA)-identified impairments in adults aged <65 versus ≥65 years with cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study is a secondary analysis of clinical trial data (NCT04852575). Participants were starting a new line of systemic therapy at a community-based oncology private practice. Before starting treatment, participants completed an online patient-reported GA and the Physical Activity (PA) Vital Sign questionnaire. Frailty score and category were derived from GA using a validated deficit accumulation model: frail (>0.35), pre-frail (0.2-0.35), or robust (0-0.2). PA mins/week were calculated, and participants were coded as either meeting/not-meeting guidelines (≥90 min/week). We used Spearman (ρ) correlation to examine the association between age and frailty score and chi-squared/Fisher's-exact or ANOVA/Kruskal-Wallis statistic to compare frailty and PA outcomes between age groups. RESULTS: Participants (n = 96) were predominantly female (62%), Caucasian (68%), beginning first-line systemic therapy (69%), and 1.75 months post-diagnosis (median). Most had stage III to IV disease (66%). Common cancer types included breast (34%), gastrointestinal (23%), and hematologic (15%). Among participants <65, 46.8% were frail or pre-frail compared to 38.7% of those ≥65. There was no association between age and frailty score (ρ = 0.01, p = 0.91). Between age groups, there was no significant difference in frailty score (p = 0.95), the prevalence of frailty (p = 0.68), number of GA impairments (p = 0.33), or the proportion meeting PA guidelines (p = 0.72). However, older adults had more comorbid conditions (p = 0.03) and younger adults had non-significant but clinically relevant differences in functional ability, falls, and PA level. DISCUSSION: In our cohort, the prevalence of frailty was similar among adults with cancer <65 when compared to those older than 65, however, types of GA impairments differed. These results suggest GA and the associated frailty index could be useful to identify needs for intervention and inform clinical decisions during cancer treatment regardless of age. Additional research is needed to confirm our findings.

"A strong reason why I enjoy coming to work": Clinician acceptability of a palliative and supportive care intervention (PACT) for older adults with acute myeloid leukemia and their care partners.

INTRODUCTION: Studies about clinician acceptability of integrative palliative care interventions in the inpatient and outpatient cancer settings are limited. In this study, we examined clinician acceptability of a NIH-funded interdisciplinary PAlliative and Supportive Care inTervention (PACT) for older adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and their care partners that transcends both inpatient and outpatient settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data was collected using semi-structured interviews with clinicians who were directly involved in PACT. The domains of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability were used to guide the qualitative analysis. RESULTS: The clinicians consisted of occupational therapists (37%), physical therapists (25%), registered nurses (25%), and a clinical rehabilitation manager (13%). Five themes were identified in the thematic analysis: (1) Emotions and affect towards the intervention, (2) Intervention coherence and self-efficacy, (3) Barriers, burden, and opportunity costs of delivering the intervention, (4) Usefulness and effectiveness of the intervention, and (5) Recommendations to improve intervention delivery. DISCUSSION: All clinicians found the PACT intervention highly acceptable and expressed the positive impact of the intervention on job fulfillment and satisfaction. Our findings provide evidence to inform the delivery and implementation of future large scale integrative palliative care intervention trials.

In-Clinic versus Hybrid Cancer Rehabilitation Service Delivery during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Outcome Comparison Study.

Diminished health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is common among cancer survivors but often amendable to rehabilitation. However, few access real-world rehabilitation services. Hybrid delivery modes (using a combination of in-clinic and synchronous telehealth visits) became popular during the COVID-19 pandemic and offer a promising solution to improve access beyond the pandemic. However, it is unclear if hybrid delivery has the same impact on patient-reported outcomes and experiences as standard, in-clinic-only delivery. To fill this gap, we performed a retrospective, observational, comparative outcomes study of real-world electronic medical record (EMR) data collected by a national outpatient rehabilitation provider in 2020-2021. Of the cases meeting the inclusion criteria (N = 2611), 60 were seen to via hybrid delivery. The outcomes evaluated pre and post-rehabilitation included PROMIS® global physical health (GPH), global mental health (GMH), physical function (PF), and the ability to participate in social roles and activities (SRA). The patient experience outcomes included the Net Promoter Survey (NPS®) and the Select Medical Patient-Reported Experience Measure (SM-PREM). A linear and logistic regression was used to examine the between-group differences in the PROMIS and SM-PREM scores while controlling for covariates. The hybrid and in-clinic-only cases improved similarly in all PROMIS outcomes (all p < 0.05). The association between the delivery mode and the likelihood of achieving the minimal important change in the PROMIS outcomes was non-significant (all p > 0.05). No between-group differences were observed in the NPS or SM-PREM scores (all p > 0.05). Although more research is needed, this real-world evidence suggests that hybrid rehabilitation care may be equally beneficial for and acceptable to cancer survivors and supports calls to expand access to and reimbursement for telerehabilitation.

Implementation of the Web-Enabled Cancer & Aging Resilience Evaluation (WeCARE) in an outpatient oncology setting.

INTRODUCTION: Although geriatric assessments (GAs) are recommended for use in older adults with cancer, their integration into oncology practice remain suboptimal. Here, we report our experience integrating web-enabled GA (WeCARE) into oncology practice as an augmented delivery method and provider interface format to overcome implementation barriers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Older patients (≥60 years) with a gastro-intestinal (GI) malignancy presenting for an initial visit to medical oncology clinic at a single institution between December 7, 2021 and October 10, 2022 were contacted by staff two days in advance of their visits and sent a link to the WeCARE GA, rather than the paper version used previously. Results were directly embedded into the medical record. We describe our initial implementation outcomes and the results of a provider usability survey. RESULTS: Of 266 eligible patients, 221 (83.1%) were successfully contacted by telephone and 200 (75.2%) completed the WeCARE prior to their appointment. More than one phone call was required to make contact for 35.7% of patients, with a mean duration of phone conversation of 2.8 min. Most patients preferred email delivery to text (63% vs 31%); 4.5% were unable to access surveys due to inadequate technology, and 25.7% brought up additional logistical concerns. Among GI oncology providers surveyed, all six found the WeCARE tool and dashboard acceptable, appropriate, and feasible. However, only a third of providers often or always used the dashboard to inform treatment decisions and guide interventions. DISCUSSION: With nearly three-quarters of patients completing the WeCARE prior to their visits with minimal staff support and time required, this method of administration may be a viable format to overcome barriers to GA implementation. Additional work is needed to integrate the results meaningfully into clinical practice.

Preferences on Delivery of Cancer Rehabilitation Services for Cancer-Related Disability Among Older Individuals Surviving Breast Cancer: A Qualitative Study.

Background: Older individuals surviving breast cancer often encounter cancer-related disability as a short-term or long-term effect of cancer and related treatment. Cancer rehabilitation interventions have the potential to prevent, mitigate, or remediate cancer-related disability. However, use of these services remains limited. Understanding the priorities and perspectives of older individuals surviving breast cancer is key to developing effective and implementable cancer rehabilitation interventions. This qualitative descriptive study examined individuals' preferred and valued methods of cancer rehabilitation intervention delivery. Methods: Using a qualitative descriptive design, older individuals surviving breast cancer (n=14) completed a single telephone-based semi-structure interview. Interviews explored survivors' preferences for cancer rehabilitation service delivery. Interview transcriptions were thematically analyzed. Open codes were inductively generated and reviewed for agreement by an independent reviewer. The codes were deductively organized. Differences were resolved through consensus meetings. Results: Findings revealed preferred intervention delivery characteristics for intervention setting, mode of delivery, format, and timing. Participants predominantly preferred interventions delivered in community-based settings, with both in-person and remote components. Participants also appeared to value one-on-one interventions and those delivered post-treatment. Survivors' overarching preferences were based on desire for patient-centric care, one-on-one therapist time, complex medical schedules, and financial concerns. Discussion: Study findings provide guidance on the modification of existing and creation of new cancer rehabilitation interventions addressing cancer-related disability in older individuals surviving breast cancer. Adoption of stakeholder-driven intervention delivery characteristics may improve value and acceptability of interventions. Future intervention research should incorporate and test these characteristics to ensure their effectiveness in real-world settings.

Camera-Based Short Physical Performance Battery and Timed Up and Go Assessment for Older Adults With Cancer.

This paper presents an automatic camera-based device to monitor and evaluate the gait speed, standing balance, and 5 times sit-stand (5TSS) tests of the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) and the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test. The proposed design measures and calculates the parameters of the SPPB tests automatically. The SPPB data can be used for physical performance assessment of older patients under cancer treatment. This stand-alone device has a Raspberry Pi (RPi) computer, three cameras, and two DC motors. The left and right cameras are used for gait speed tests. The center camera is used for standing balance, 5TSS, and TUG tests and for angle positioning of the camera platform toward the subject using DC motors by turning the camera left/right and tilting it up/down. The key algorithm for operating the proposed system is developed using Channel and Spatial Reliability Tracking in the cv2 module in Python. Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs) in the RPi are developed to run tests and adjust cameras, controlled remotely via smartphone and its Wi-Fi hotspot. We have tested the implemented camera setup prototype and extracted all SPPB and TUG parameters by conducting several experiments on a human subject population of 8 volunteers (male and female, light and dark complexions) in 69 test runs. The measured data and calculated outputs of the system consist of tests of gait speed (0.041 to 1.92 m/s with average accuracy of >95%), and standing balance, 5TSS, TUG, all with average time accuracy of >97%.

Healthcare providers' experiences of continuing care for older adults with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused great strain on older adults with cancer and their healthcare providers. This study explored healthcare providers' reported changes in cancer care, clinical barriers to care, patient questions, and the overall experiences of caring for older adults with cancer during the COVID-19 crisis. METHODS: The Advocacy Committee of the Cancer and Aging Research Group and the Association of Community Cancer Centers developed a survey for healthcare providers of adults with cancer, inquiring about their experiences during the pandemic. Responses from the survey's four open-ended items were analyzed by four independent coders for identification of common themes using deductive and inductive methods. RESULTS: Participants (n = 137) represented a variety of demographic and clinical experiences. Six overall themes emerged, including (1) telehealth use, (2) concerns for patient mental health, (3) patient physical and social isolation, (4) patient fear of contracting COVID-19, (5) continued disruptions to cancer care, and (6) patients seeking guidance, particularly regarding COVID-19 vaccination. Questions fielded by providers focused on the COVID-19 vaccination's safety and efficacy during older adults' cancer treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Additional resources (e.g., technology support, established care guidelines, and sufficient staffing) are needed to support older adults with cancer and healthcare providers during the pandemic. Future research should explore universally effective in-person and virtual treatment strategies for older adults with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Persistence of telehealth barriers, particularly a lack of infrastructure to support telehealth visits, social isolation, and restrictive visitor policies as a result of COVID-19, negatively impacted the mental health of older adults with cancer.

Understanding Patient Experience with Outpatient Cancer Rehabilitation Care.

BACKGROUND: Understanding patient experience is key to optimize access and quality of outpatient cancer rehabilitation (physical or occupational therapy, PT/OT) services. METHODS: We performed a retrospective mixed-method analysis of rehabilitation medical record data to better understand patient experience and aspects of care that influenced experience. From the medical record, we extracted case characteristics, patient experience data (Net Promoter Survey®, NPS) and patient-reported outcome (PRO) data. We categorized cases as 'promoters' (i.e., highly likely to recommend rehabilitation) or 'detractors', then calculated NPS score (-100 [worst] to 100 [best]). We identified key themes from NPS free-text comments using inductive content analysis, then used Pearson [r] or Spearman [ρ] correlation to explore relationships between NPS, characteristics, and PRO improvement. RESULTS: Patients (n = 383) were 60.51 ± 12.02 years old, predominantly women with breast cancer (69.2%), and attended 14.23 ± 12.37 visits. Most were 'promoters' (92%); NPS score was 91.4. Patients described two experiences (themes) that influenced their likelihood to recommend rehabilitation: (1) feeling comfortable with the process and (2) observable improvement in health/functioning, and described attributes of clinic staff, environment and clinical care that influenced themes. Likelihood to recommend rehabilitation was associated with achieving the minimal clinical important difference on a PRO (ρ = 0.21, p < 0.001) and cancer type (ρ = 0.10, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients who received specialized cancer PT/OT were highly likely to recommend rehabilitation. Feeling comfortable with the rehabilitation process and making observable improvements in health and/or functioning influenced likelihood to recommend. Rehabilitation providers should leverage the findings of this study optimize access to and quality of cancer rehab services.

Healthcare providers' attitudes towards delay in cancer treatment during COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has created unprecedented obstacles leading to delays in treatment for older adults with cancer. Due to limited resources at the height of the pandemic, healthcare providers were constantly faced with ethical dilemmas regarding postponing or rescheduling care for their patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two survey-based studies were conducted at different time-points during the pandemic looking at factors affecting oncology care providers' attitudes towards delay in treatment for older adults with cancer. Eligible participants were recruited by email sent through professional organizations' listservs, email blasts, and social media. Change in provider attitude over time was analyzed by comparing responses from the 2020 and 2021 surveys. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and chi-squares. RESULTS: In 2020, 17.5% of respondents were strongly considering/considering postponing cancer treatment for younger patients (age 30 and below), while 46.2% were considering delaying treatment for patients aged >85. These responses were in stark contrast to the results of the 2021 survey, where only 1.4% of respondents strongly considered postponing treatment for younger patients, and 13.5% for patients aged >85. DISCUSSION: All recommendations to postpone treatment for older adults with cancer must be made after mutual discussion with the patient. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, oncology care providers had to consider multiple factors while treating patients, frequently making most decisions without appropriate institutional support.

Perspectives of caregivers of older adults with acute myeloid leukemia during initial hypomethylating agents and venetoclax chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Older adults with AML commonly receive a hypomethylating agent (HMA) as first-line therapy. The addition of venetoclax (VEN) to HMAs has been shown to improve remission rates and overall survival. The use of combination therapy (HMA + VEN) requires frequent follow-up, results in longer infusion times, and likely increases caregiver responsibility at home. We describe experiences of informal caregivers (family/friends) providing care to older adults with AML receiving HMA + VEN. METHODS: Fourteen caregivers of older adults with AML receiving HMA + VEN (September 2020 to September 2021) were recruited as part of a control group of an ongoing NIH-funded clinical trial. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to gain initial insight into caregiver experiences at the start of HMA + VEN treatment. Two researchers analyzed the data using thematic content analysis. Data saturation occurred when no new themes were found in subsequent interviews, but all interviews were coded and synthesized. RESULTS: Of the 14 caregivers interviewed, the majority were spouses (n = 10), female (n = 13), and aged 45 to 83 (median age 65). We identified five themes: (1) the impact of an AML diagnosis in older adulthood, (2) care recipient condition changes, (3) perspectives of caregiving roles and tasks, (4) factors influencing caregiving experiences, and (5) support system roles. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Caregivers for older adults with AML report a range of experiences navigating health systems, caregiving responsibilities, and resource needs. The risk for caregiver burden and unmet needs should be addressed to improve caregivers' abilities to provide care.

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.

Current Trends in Occupational Therapy for Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivors: A Scoping Review.

Adolescent and young adult cancer survivors experience barriers to occupational participation following cancer treatment. This article aims to identify the scope of occupational therapy evidence for adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. A scoping review of articles cited in CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE (EBSCO), Academic Search Complete, APA PsycINFO, and PubMed was performed. The initial search yielded 391 articles, with eight publications included in the final review. Results revealed a significant lack of age-specific occupational therapy-based resources for adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. Evidence supports the use of self-management, physical activity, therapeutic exercise, activities of daily living training and adaptation, and app-based coaching to improve client outcomes. Further research is required to determine the effectiveness of occupational therapy services, as well as to establish evidence-based guidelines for practice.

A scoping review of ageism towards older adults in cancer care.

INTRODUCTION: Ageism towards older adults with cancer may impact treatment decisions, healthcare interactions, and shape health/psychosocial outcomes. The purpose of this review is twofold: (1) To synthesize the literature on ageism towards older adults with cancer in oncology and (2) To identify interventions that address ageism in the healthcare context applicable to oncology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a scoping review following Arksey and O'Malley and Levac methods and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We conducted an exhaustive multi-database search, screening 30,926 titles/abstracts. Following data abstraction, we conducted tabular, narrative, and textual synthesis. RESULTS: We extracted data on 133 papers. Most (n = 44) were expert opinions, reviews, and letters to editors highlighting the negative impacts of ageism, expressing the need for approaches addressing heterogeneity of older adults, and calling for increased clinical trial inclusion for older adults. Qualitative studies (n = 3) described healthcare professionals' perceived influence of age on treatment recommendations, whereas quantitative studies (n = 32) were inconclusive as to whether age-related bias impacted treatment recommendations/outcomes or survival. Intervention studies (n = 54) targeted ageism in pre/post-licensure healthcare professionals and reported participants' improvement in knowledge and/or attitudes towards older adults. No interventions were found that had been implemented in oncology. DISCUSSION: Concerns relating to ageism in cancer care are consistently described in the literature. Interventions exist to address ageism; however, none have been developed or tested in oncology settings. Addressing ageism in oncology will require integration of geriatric knowledge/interventions to address conscious and unconscious ageist attitudes impacting care and outcomes. Interventions hold promise if tailored for cancer care settings. 249/250.

Community-based outpatient rehabilitation for the treatment of breast cancer-related upper extremity disability: an evaluation of practice-based evidence.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact and acceptability of outpatient physical or occupational therapy (PT/OT) for breast cancer survivors (BCS) with varying levels of upper extremity disability (UED). METHODS: We retrospectively extracted patient and therapy characteristics, UED measured by quick-disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (QuickDASH, 0-100 pts.), and patient-rated acceptability (1-item, 0-10 pts) from rehabilitation charts of BCS who completed cancer-specialized PT/OT provided by a single national institution in 2019. We summarized characteristics and acceptability using descriptive statistics, then used established parameters to group BCS by baseline UED severity: high- (QuickDASH > 31.5), moderate- (QuickDASH = 18.5-31.5), or low-UED (QuickDASH = 13-18.5). To evaluate within-group pre-to-post QuickDASH change, we used paired samples t test (p < 0.01), then calculated the proportion who achieved the minimally clinical important difference (MCID, 15.9 points). To compare between-groups difference in QuickDASH improvement, we used Kruskal-Wallis test and Chi-squared test. RESULTS: Patients (N = 417) were 59.89 ± 12.06 years old, 99% female, and attended approximately 10 PT/OT sessions (IQR = 6.0-16.0). Most had high baseline UED (62%), followed by moderate (25%) or low UED (13%). For each severity group, mean pre-to-post change in QuickDASH was significant: high-UED (M∆ = 25.13 ± 20.33, d = 1.24, p < 0.01), moderate-UED (M∆ = 11.36 ± 11.9, d = 0.95, p < 0.01), and low-UED (M∆ = 4.84 ± 9.15, d = 0.53, p < 0.01). Most with high UED achieved the MCID (n = 176, 68.2%). In the moderate- and low-UED groups 44% (n = 46) and 4% (n = 2) achieved the MCID, respectively. Acceptability was high (n = 167, Median = 10). CONCLUSION: Outpatient cancer rehabilitation is associated with significant improvement in UED for BCS and was acceptable to patients regardless of UED severity at baseline.

Community-based outpatient cancer rehabilitation services for women with gynecologic cancer: acceptability and impact on patient-reported outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Women with gynecologic cancers often experience functional impairments impacting quality of life. Physical and occupational therapy (PT/OT) treat functional impairment; however, the acceptability and impact of these services for women with gynecologic cancer are unknown. METHODS: We reviewed rehabilitation charts of women with gynecologic cancer who received PT/OT (i.e., patients) in 2019 and completed patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) selected by their therapist at intake (pre) and discharge (post). We calculated descriptive statistics for patient, rehabilitation, and acceptability (0-10) data. For PROM data, we used paired samples t-tests to evaluate pre-post change, and then calculated effect size (Hedge's g) and the proportion who achieved a minimal detectable change (MDC). RESULTS: PT/OT patients (N = 84) were 64.63 ± 11.04 years old with predominant diagnoses of ovarian (41.7%) or endometrial (32.1%) cancer. They attended a median of 13 sessions (IQR = 8.0-19.0). Sessions were predominantly PT (86%) vs. OT (14%). Median acceptability was 10 (IQR = 9.8-10.0). Pre-post improvement was observed for each of the 17 PROMs used by therapists. Significant improvement (p < .05) was observed for four PROMs: the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (M∆ = 2.93 ± 2.31, g = 1.47, 71% achieved MDC), the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (M∆ = 12.88 ± 12.31, g = 0.61, 60% achieved MDC), the Lymphedema Life Impact Scale (M∆ = 20.50 ± 20.61, g = 1.18, 58% achieved MDC), and the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (M∆ = 6.55 ± 9.69, g = 0.33, 7% achieved MDC). CONCLUSION: PT/OT was acceptable and improved patient-reported outcomes for women with gynecologic cancers. Future research is needed to establish gynecologic-specific guidelines for referral and PT/OT practice.

Development of an intervention influencing activity limitations in older breast cancer survivors: A modified Delphi study.

INTRODUCTION: Older breast cancer survivors have difficulty accessing rehabilitation interventions addressing activity limitations. Stakeholder input may improve accessibility of interventions. We sought expert consensus on intervention content and delivery features (e.g., where, mode, duration) to inform development of more accessible interventions for this population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a modified Delphi process with patient, clinical, administrative, and research experts. In Round 1, experts evaluated content and delivery features according to domains of feasibility and prioritization. In Round 2, panelists were asked to re-rank or confer agreement of content and delivery features that met Round 1 consensus. Ranking was based on median score. Consensus was defined as a percentage of panelists that ranked an option within one unit of the median. For nominal data, consensus was defined as percent agreement. RESULTS: Panelists (n = 20) prioritized physical activity strategies (Median Rank: 2; Consensus: 85%) and adaptive skills training (3; 65%). Panelists also prioritized delivery through outpatient services (1; 100%), post-treatment (1; 100%), combination mode of delivery (100%), duration of three months or less (100%) and occurring one to two days per week (100%). DISCUSSION: Cancer rehabilitation interventions should be designed with input from stakeholders. The stakeholder intervention priorities identified in this study (e.g., content, setting, and mode) may improve relevance and accessibility of future cancer rehabilitation interventions. Interventions delivered in outpatient clinics and post-treatment using virtual and in-person visits may improve accessibility. Future research should examine the effectiveness and implementation of these intervention characteristics.

Usability, acceptability, and implementation strategies for the Exercise in Cancer Evaluation and Decision Support (EXCEEDS) algorithm: a Delphi study.

INTRODUCTION: Oncology guidelines recommend participation in cancer rehabilitation or exercise services (CR/ES) to optimize survivorship. Yet, connecting the right survivor, with the right CR/ES, at the right time remains a challenge. The Exercise in Cancer Evaluation and Decision Support (EXCEEDS) algorithm was developed to enhance CR/ES clinical decision-making and facilitate access to CR/ES. We used Delphi methodology to evaluate usability, acceptability, and determine pragmatic implementation priorities. METHODS: Participants completed three online questionnaires including (1) simulated case vignettes, (2) 4-item acceptability questionnaire (0-5 pts), and (3) series of items to rank algorithm implementation priorities (potential users, platforms, strategies). To evaluate usability, we used Chi-squared test to compare frequency of accurate pre-exercise medical clearance and CR/ES triage recommendations for case vignettes when using EXCEEDS vs. without. We calculated mean acceptability and inter-rater agreement overall and in 4 domains. We used the Eisenhower Prioritization Method to evaluate implementation priorities. RESULTS: Participants (N = 133) mostly represented the fields of rehabilitation (69%), oncology (25%), or exercise science (17%). When using EXCEEDS (vs. without), their recommendations were more likely to be guideline concordant for medical clearance (83.4% vs. 66.5%, X2 = 26.61, p < .0001) and CR/ES triage (60.9% vs. 51.1%, X2 = 73.79, p < .0001). Mean acceptability was M = 3.90 ± 0.47; inter-rater agreement was high for 3 of 4 domains. Implementation priorities include 1 potential user group, 2 platform types, and 9 implementation strategies. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the EXCEEDS algorithm can be a pragmatic and acceptable clinical decision support tool for CR/ES recommendations. Future research is needed to evaluate algorithm usability and acceptability in real-world clinical pathways.