Enhancing integrated psychosocial oncology through leveraging the oncology social worker's role in collaborative care.

OBJECTIVE: The collaborative care model is effective in delivering evidence-based psychosocial oncology care. Social workers comprise the largest proportion of psychosocial oncology providers in the United States. This study describes the process and perceptions of clinical oncology social workers at a large comprehensive cancer center who transitioned to practicing as care managers within collaborative care. METHODS: We describe the process of engaging clinical oncology social workers as care managers as part of the implementation of collaborative care at the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance. We then present survey results from 2017 and 2020 of participating social workers' perceptions of the collaborative care model's advantages and disadvantages. RESULTS: Since the implementation of collaborative care at our institution, key functions of the social worker as care manager were defined. The majority of social workers surveyed in 2017 and 2020 agreed that collaborative care led to improved clinical outcomes, timely access to care, and greater patient satisfaction. They also reported professional advantages: more interdisciplinary team integration, working at the top of their licensure, and improved job satisfaction. Challenges identified included missing important patient needs and creating extra work burden for social workers. CONCLUSIONS: Oncology social workers can be successfully deployed as care managers within a collaborative care model, thus leveraging existing clinical staff to address unmet psychosocial patient needs. This model is feasible and sustainable in a large academic cancer center, requires minimal additional resources, and is favorably viewed by participating social workers in terms of perceived benefits to patients and their own professional roles.

Cannabis use among patients at a comprehensive cancer center in a state with legalized medicinal and recreational use.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis is purported to alleviate symptoms related to cancer treatment, although the patterns of use among cancer patients are not well known. This study was designed to determine the prevalence and methods of use among cancer patients, the perceived benefits, and the sources of information in a state with legalized cannabis. METHODS: A cross-sectional, anonymous survey of adult cancer patients was performed at a National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center in Washington State. Random urine samples for tetrahydrocannabinol provided survey validation. RESULTS: Nine hundred twenty-six of 2737 eligible patients (34%) completed the survey, and the median age was 58 years (interquartile range [IQR], 46-66 years). Most had a strong interest in learning about cannabis during treatment (6 on a 1-10 scale; IQR, 3-10) and wanted information from cancer providers (677 of 911 [74%]). Previous use was common (607 of 926 [66%]); 24% (222 of 926) used cannabis in the last year, and 21% (192 of 926) used cannabis in the last month. Random urine samples found similar percentages of users who reported weekly use (27 of 193 [14%] vs 164 of 926 [18%]). Active users inhaled (153 of 220 [70%]) or consumed edibles (154 of 220 [70%]); 89 (40%) used both modalities. Cannabis was used primarily for physical (165 of 219 [75%]) and neuropsychiatric symptoms (139 of 219 [63%]). Legalization significantly increased the likelihood of use in more than half of the respondents. CONCLUSIONS: This study of cancer patients in a state with legalized cannabis found high rates of active use across broad subgroups, and legalization was reported to be important in patients' decision to use. Cancer patients desire but are not receiving information about cannabis use during their treatment from oncology providers. Cancer 2017;123:4488-97. © 2017 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

Integrating psychosocial care into cancer services.

Despite substantial evidence that patients with cancer commonly have significant psychosocial problems, for which we have evidence-based treatments, many patients still do not receive adequate psychosocial care. This means that we risk prolonging life without adequately addressing the quality of that life. There are many challenges to improving the current situation, the major one of which is organizational. Many cancer centers lack a system of psychosocial care that is integrated with the cancer care of the patient. Psychosocial care encompasses a range of problems (emotional, social, palliative, and logistical). The integration must occur with the cancer care of the patient at all stages (from screening to palliative care) and across all clinical sites of care (inpatient and outpatient cancer services as well as primary care). In this article, we consider the challenges we face if we are to provide such integrated psychosocial services. We focus on the collaborative care service model. This model comprises systematic identification of need, integrated delivery of care by care managers, appropriate specialist supervision, and the stepping of care based on systematic measurement of outcomes. Several trials of this approach to the management of depression in patients with cancer have found it to be both feasible to deliver and effective. It provides a model for services to meet other psychosocial needs. We conclude by proposing the key components of an integrated psychosocial service that could be implemented now and by considering what we need to do next if we are to succeed in providing better and more comprehensive care to our patients.

Hypnosis for symptom management in women with breast cancer: a pilot study.

Eight women who were in treatment for breast cancer (n = 4) or breast cancer survivors (n = 4), presenting with 1 or more of 4 symptoms (chronic pain, fatigue, hot flashes, and sleep difficulties), were given 4 to 5 sessions of self-hypnosis training for symptom management. Analyses revealed (a) significant pre- to posttreatment decreases in pain intensity, fatigue, and sleep problems and (b) that pain intensity continued to decrease from posttreatment to 6-month follow-up. Although there was a slight increase in fatigue severity and sleep problems from posttreatment to 6-month follow-up, the follow-up scores did not return to pretreatment levels. The findings provide initial support for using hypnosis to manage symptoms in women who are breast cancer survivors. Clinical trials evaluating hypnosis efficacy over and above other treatments are warranted.

Psychosocial care in cancer.

Psychosocial care for cancer patients historically has been overlooked as an aspect of quality clinical care. However, several organizations have recently made strong recommendations for inclusion of psychosocial care across the continuum of treatment, from diagnosis, through treatment, into survivorship, and in the palliative stages of care. The evidence base for screening, diagnosis, and effective treatment of psychosocial issues in the context of cancer care is growing. Recent highly relevant research covering major topics in psycho-oncology, including distress, delivery of care, psychoneuroimmunology, and cognitive deficits related to cancer, is reviewed in this article.

Enhancing patient-provider communication with the electronic self-report assessment for cancer: a randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Although patient-reported cancer symptoms and quality-of-life issues (SQLIs) have been promoted as essential to a comprehensive assessment, efficient and efficacious methods have not been widely tested in clinical settings. The purpose of this trial was to determine the effect of the Electronic Self-Report Assessment-Cancer (ESRA-C) on the likelihood of SQLIs discussed between clinicians and patients with cancer in ambulatory clinic visits. Secondary objectives included comparison of visit duration between groups and usefulness of the ESRA-C as reported by clinicians. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized controlled trial was conducted in 660 patients with various cancer diagnoses and stages at two institutions of a comprehensive cancer center. Patient-reported SQLIs were automatically displayed on a graphical summary and provided to the clinical team before an on-treatment visit (n = 327); in the control group, no summary was provided (n = 333). SQLIs were scored for level of severity or distress. One on-treatment clinic visit was audio recorded for each participant and then scored for discussion of each SQLI. We hypothesized that problematic SQLIs would be discussed more often when the intervention was delivered to the clinicians. RESULTS: The likelihood of SQLIs being discussed differed by randomized group and depended on whether an SQLI was first reported as problematic (P = .032). Clinic visits were similar with regard to duration between groups, and clinicians reported the summary as useful. CONCLUSION: The ESRA-C is the first electronic self-report application to increase discussion of SQLIs in a US randomized clinical trial.

Physician staffing for the practice of psychosomatic medicine in general hospitals: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of psychiatric illnesses, prevalent in the general hospital, requires broadly trained providers with expertise at the interface of psychiatry and medicine. Since each hospital operates under different economic constraints, it is difficult to establish an appropriate ratio of such providers to patients. OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to determine the current staffing patterns and ratios of Psychosomatic Medicine practitioners in general hospitals, to better align manpower with clinical service and educational requirements on consultation-liaison psychiatry services. METHOD: Program directors of seven academic Psychosomatic Medicine (PM) programs in the Northeast were surveyed to establish current staffing patterns and patient volumes. Survey data were reviewed and analyzed along with data from the literature and The Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine (APM) fellowship directory. RESULTS: Staffing patterns varied widely, both in terms of the number and disciplines of staff providing care for medical and surgical inpatients. The ratio of initial consultations performed per hospital bed varied from 1.6 to 4.6. CONCLUSION: Although staffing patterns vary, below a minimum staffing level, there is likely to be significant human and financial cost. Efficient sizing of a PM staff must be accomplished in the context of a given institution's patient population, the experience of providers, the presence/absence and needs of trainees, and the financial constraints of the department and institution. National survey data are needed to provide benchmarks for both academic and nonacademic PM services.

Depression treatment preferences after traumatic brain injury.

OBJECTIVE: To determine preferences for depression treatment modalities and settings among persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI). DESIGN: Telephone survey. Depression status was determined using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. SETTING: Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, the level I trauma center serving Washington, Idaho, Montana, and Alaska. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred forty-five adults, English-speaking consecutive patients admitted with complicated mild to severe TBI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Telephone survey within 12 months post-TBI ascertaining preferences for depression treatment modalities and settings. RESULTS: More patients favored physical exercise or counseling as a depression treatment than other treatment modalities. Group therapy was the least favored modality. Patients favored speaking with a clinician in the clinic or over the telephone and were less likely to communicate with a clinician over the Internet. Subjects with probable major depression or a history of antidepressant use or outpatient mental health treatment were more likely to express a preference for antidepressants for treatment of depression. CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores the importance of understanding patient preferences and providing patient education in selecting a treatment for depression after TBI. Future studies should examine psychotherapy and alternative treatment modalities and delivery models for the management of depression in this vulnerable population.