Addressing distress management challenges: Recommendations from the consensus panel of the American Psychosocial Oncology Society and the Association of Oncology Social Work.

Distress management (DM) (screening and response) is an essential component of cancer care across the treatment trajectory. Effective DM has many benefits, including improving patients' quality of life; reducing distress, anxiety, and depression; contributing to medical cost offsets; and reducing emergency department visits and hospitalizations. Unfortunately, many distressed patients do not receive needed services. There are several multilevel barriers that represent key challenges to DM and affect its implementation. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used as an organizational structure to outline the barriers and facilitators to implementation of DM, including: 1) individual characteristics (individual patient characteristics with a focus on groups who may face unique barriers to distress screening and linkage to services), 2) intervention (unique aspects of DM intervention, including specific challenges in screening and psychosocial intervention, with recommendations for resolving these challenges), 3) processes for implementation of DM (modality and timing of screening, the challenge of triage for urgent needs, and incorporation of patient-reported outcomes and quality measures), 4) organization-inner setting (the context of the clinic, hospital, or health care system); and 5) organization-outer setting (including reimbursement strategies and health-care policy). Specific recommendations for evidence-based strategies and interventions for each of the domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research are also included to address barriers and challenges.

Association of pre-existing mental illness with all-cause and cancer-specific mortality among Medicare beneficiaries with pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with pancreatic cancer, the association of pre-existing mental illness with long-term outcomes remains unknown. METHODS: Individuals diagnosed with pancreatic adenocarcinoma were identified in the SEER-Medicare database. Patients were classified as having mental illness if an ICD9/10CM code for anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia or other psychotic disorder was recorded. RESULTS: Among the 54,234 Medicare beneficiaries with pancreatic cancer, roughly 1 in 12 (n = 4793, 8.83%) individuals had a diagnosis of a mental illness. The majority (n = 4029, 84.1%) had anxiety or depression, while 16% (n = 764) had bipolar/schizophrenic disorders. On multivariable analysis, among patients with early stage cancer, individuals with pre-existing anxiety/depression and bipolar/schizophrenic disorders had 22% (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69-0.86) and 46% (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.42-0.70) reduced odds, respectively, to undergo cancer-directed surgery. Furthermore, patients with a pre-existing history of bipolar/schizophrenic disorders had a 20% (HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.21-1.40) higher risk of all-cause mortality and 27% (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.17-1.37) higher risk of pancreatic cancer-specific mortality compared to individuals without a history of mental illness. CONCLUSION: One in twelve patients with pancreatic cancer had a pre-existing mental illness. Individuals with mental illness were more likely to have worse overall and cancer-specific long-term outcomes.

Supportive Care Needs of Patients with Head and Neck Cancer Referred to Palliative Medicine.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) face a unique set of unmet needs. A subset of these patients experience symptom control challenges related to their disease burden and treatments. A multidisciplinary approach involving palliative medicine is underutilized but crucial to identify and address these concerns. There is limited information on palliative integration with head and neck oncology. STUDY DESIGN: Case series with planned data collection. SETTING: Academic quaternary care center. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We provide descriptive analyses of patients with HNC, including psychodiagnostic assessment and validated quality-of-life screening, from patients' first encounter at outpatient palliative medicine. RESULTS: HNC (N = 80) contributed the greatest number of palliative referrals (25%) between 2010 and 2012. This cohort was 74% male and 79% Caucasian with a mean age of 53 years (95% CI, 51.1-54.9) and with stage IV disease of the oral cavity (28%) or oropharynx (31%). Sixty-three percent of patients had no evidence of disease. Seventy-five percent had a psychological history based on DSM-IV criteria (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition), and 70% had a history of substance use disorder. The most distressing quality-of-life concerns were pain, housing and financial problems, and xerostomia. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HNC who were referred to palliative medicine are burdened by multiple physical, psychological, substance use, and social challenges. We recommend comprehensive cancer-specific screening, such as the James Supportive Care Screening, to triage patients to appropriate supportive care services. Palliative care is one of many services that these patients may need, and it should be utilized at any point of the disease trajectory rather than reserved for end-of-life care.

Validation of the Family Meeting Behavioral Skills Checklist. An Instrument to Assess Fellows' Communication Skills.

RATIONALE: Fellows in pulmonary and critical care medicine are required to show competency in facilitating family meetings for critically ill patients. There are many assessment measures available for evaluating physician-patient communication (e.g., the SEGUE Framework [Set the stage, Elicit information, Give information, Understand the patient's perspective, End the encounter]) and some designed for family meetings. However, no validated measure exists that is specifically designed to assess communication skills during family meetings with surrogate decision makers in intensive care settings. OBJECTIVES: We developed the Family Meeting Behavioral Skills Checklist (FMBSC) to measure advanced communication skills of fellows in family meetings of critically ill patients based on a literature review and consensus of an interdisciplinary group of communications experts. We evaluated the psychometric properties of the FMBSC. METHODS: We digitally recorded 16 pulmonary/critical care fellows performing a simulated family meeting for a critically ill patient at the end of 1 year of fellowship training. Two clinical health psychologists evaluated each recording independently using the FMBSC Rating Scale and the SEGUE Framework. Judges recorded the number of skills performed using the checklist and employed a summary rating scale to judge the level of performance for each of nine subsets of skills. Each instrument was scored and converted to percentage scores. The FMBSC and SEGUE Framework items were summed and converted to percentage scores for each category and as a total for each instrument. The rating scale items on the FMBSC were also summed and converted to a percentage score. Four primary analyses were conducted to evaluate interjudge reliability, internal consistency, and concurrent validity. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Interrater reliability was higher for the FMBSC (intraclass correlation [ICC2,2] = 0.57) than for the SEGUE instrument (ICC2,2 = 0.32) or the FMBSC Rating Scale (ICC2,2 = 0.23). The FMBSC demonstrated evidence of concurrent validity through high positive correlations with both the FMBSC Rating Scale and the SEGUE instrument (r = +0.83, P ≤ 0.01; r = +0.65, P ≤ 0.01 respectively). All but one of the nine subscales on the FMBSC showed adequate internal consistency (reliabilities ranged from 0.18 to 0.68). Interjudge reliability was higher for the FMBSC (ICC2,2 = 0.57) than for the SEGUE instrument (ICC2,2 = 0.32) or the FMBSC Rating Scale (ICC2,2 = 0.23). CONCLUSIONS: The FMBSC demonstrated internal consistency and structural validity in assessing advanced communication skills of fellows in facilitating family meetings of critically ill patients in the ICU. Interjudge reliability was better for the FMBS Checklist than it was for the other measures.

Communication skills training curriculum for pulmonary and critical care fellows.

RATIONALE: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires physicians training in pulmonary and critical care medicine to demonstrate competency in interpersonal communication. Studies have shown that residency training is often insufficient to prepare physicians to provide end-of-life care and facilitate patient and family decision-making. Poor communication in the intensive care unit (ICU) can adversely affect outcomes for critically ill patients and their family members. Despite this, communication training curricula in pulmonary and critical care medicine are largely absent in the published literature. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the effectiveness of a communication skills curriculum during the first year of a pulmonary and critical care medicine fellowship using a family meeting checklist to provide formative feedback to fellows during ICU rotations. We hypothesized that fellows would demonstrate increased competence and confidence in the behavioral skills necessary for facilitating family meetings. METHODS: We evaluated a 12-month communication skills curriculum using a pre-post, quasiexperimental design. Subjects for this study included 11 first-year fellows who participated in the new curriculum (intervention group) and a historical control group of five fellows who had completed no formal communication curriculum. Performance of communication skills and self-confidence in family meetings were assessed for the intervention group before and after the curriculum. The control group was assessed once at the beginning of their second year of fellowship. RESULTS: Fellows in the intervention group demonstrated significantly improved communication skills as evaluated by two psychologists using the Family Meeting Behavioral Skills Checklist, with an increase in total observed skills from 51 to 65% (P ≤ 0.01; Cohen's D effect size [es], 1.13). Their performance was also rated significantly higher when compared with the historical control group, who demonstrated only 49% of observed skills (P ≤ 0.01; es, 1.55). Fellows in the intervention group also showed significantly improved self-confidence scores upon completion of the curriculum, with an increase from 77 to 89% (P ≤ 0.01; es, 0.87) upon completion of the curriculum CONCLUSIONS: A structured curriculum that includes abundant opportunities for fellows to practice and receive feedback using a behavioral checklist during their ICU rotations helps to develop physicians with advanced communication skills.

The James Supportive Care Screening: integrating science and practice to meet the NCCN guidelines for distress management at a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: Selecting a measure for oncology distress screening can be challenging. The measure must be brief, but comprehensive, capturing patients' most distressing concerns. The measure must provide meaningful coverage of multiple domains, assess symptom and problem-related distress, and ideally be suited for both clinical and research purposes. METHODS: From March 2006 to August 2012, the James Supportive Care Screening (SCS) was developed and validated in three phases including content validation, factor analysis, and measure validation. Exploratory factor analyses were completed with 596 oncology patients followed by a confirmatory factor analysis with 477 patients. RESULTS: Six factors were identified and confirmed including (i) emotional concerns; (ii) physical symptoms; (iii) social/practical problems; (iv) spiritual problems; (v) cognitive concerns; and (vi) healthcare decision making/communication issues. Subscale evaluation reveals good to excellent internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and convergent, divergent, and predictive validity. Specificity of individual items was 0.90 and 0.87, respectively, for identifying patients with DSM-IV-TR diagnoses of major depression and generalized anxiety disorder. CONCLUSIONS: Results support use of the James SCS to quickly detect the most frequent and distressing symptoms and concerns of cancer patients. The James SCS is an efficient, reliable, and valid clinical and research outcomes measure.