A multi-dimensional assessment of financial hardship of cancer patients using existing health system data.

BACKGROUND: Existing financial hardship screening does not capture the multifaceted and dynamic nature of the problem. The use of existing health system data is a promising way to enable scalable and sustainable financial hardship screening. METHODS: We used existing data from 303 adult patients with cancer at the University of Virginia Comprehensive Cancer Center (2016-2018). All received distress screening and had a valid financial assistance screening based solely on household size-adjusted income. We constructed a composite index that integrates multiple existing health system data (Epic, distress screening, and cancer registry) to assess comprehensive financial hardship (e.g., material conditions, psychological responses, and coping behaviors). We examined differences of at-risk patients identified by our composite index and by existing single-dimension criterion. Dynamics of financial hardship over time, by age, and cancer type, were examined by fractional probit models. RESULTS: At-risk patients identified by the composite index were generally younger, better educated, and had a higher annual household income, though they had lower health insurance coverage. Identified periods to intervene for most patients are before formal diagnosis, 2 years, and 6 years after diagnosis. Within 2 years of diagnosis and more than 4 years after diagnosis appear critical for subgroups of patients who may suffer from financial hardship disparities. CONCLUSION: Existing health system data provides opportunities to systematically measure and track financial hardship in a systematic, scalable and sustainable way. We find that the dimensions of financial hardship can exhibit different patterns over time and across patient subgroups, which can guide targeted interventions. The scalability of the algorithm is limited by existing data availability.

Feasibility of ecological momentary assessment to study depressive symptoms among cancer caregivers.

OBJECTIVE: Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) may help with the development of more targeted interventions for caregivers' depression, yet the use of this method has been limited among cancer caregivers. This study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of EMA among cancer caregivers and the use of EMA data to understand affective correlates of caregiver depressive symptoms. METHODS: Caregivers (N = 25) completed a depressive symptom assessment (Patient Health Questionnaire-8) and then received eight EMA survey prompts per day for 7 days. EMA surveys assessed affect on the orthogonal dimensions of valence and arousal. Participants completed feedback surveys regarding the EMA protocol at the conclusion of the week-long study. RESULTS: Of 32 caregivers approached, 25 enrolled and participated (78%), which exceeded the a priori feasibility cutoff of 55%. The prompt completion rate (59%, or 762 of 1,286 issued) did not exceed the a priori cutoff of 65%, although completion was not related to caregivers' age, employment status, physical health quality of life, caregiving stress, or depressive symptoms or the patients' care needs (ps > 0.22). Caregivers' feedback about their study experience was generally positive. Mixed-effects location scale modeling showed caregivers' higher depressive symptoms were related to overall higher reported negative affect and lower positive affect, but not to affective variability. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this feasibility study refute potential concerns that an EMA design is too burdensome for distressed caregivers. Clinically, findings suggest the potential importance of not only strategies to reduce overall levels of negative affect, but also to increase opportunities for positive affect.

I Did OK, but Did I Like It? Using Ecological Momentary Assessment to Examine Perceptions of Social Interactions Associated With Severity of Social Anxiety and Depression.

Socially anxious and depressed individuals tend to evaluate their social interactions negatively, but little is known about the specific real-time contributors to these negative perceptions. The current study examined how affect ratings during social interactions predict later perceptions of those interactions, and whether this differs by social anxiety and depression severity. Undergraduate participants (N = 60) responded to a smartphone application that prompted participants to answer short questions about their current affect and social context up to 6 times a day for 2 weeks. At the end of each day, participants answered questions about their perceptions of their social interactions from that day. Results indicated that the link between negative affective experiences reported during social interactions and the end-of-day report of enjoyment (but not effectiveness) of those experiences was more negative when social anxiety was more severe. The link between negative affective experiences rated during social interactions and the end-of-day report of effectiveness (but not enjoyment) during those social encounters was more negative when depression was more severe. These findings demonstrate the importance of examining self-perceptions of social interactions based both on the extent to which individuals think that they met the objective demands of an interaction (i.e., effectiveness, mastery) and the extent to which they liked or disliked that interaction (i.e., enjoyment, pleasure). These findings also highlight how real-time assessments of daily social interactions may reveal the key experiences that contribute to negative self-evaluations across disorders, potentially identifying critical targets for therapy.