Impact of a Multidisciplinary Supportive Care Model Using Distress Screening at an Asian Ambulatory Cancer Center: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: The Accessible Cancer Care to Enable Support for Cancer Survivors (ACCESS) program adopts a multidisciplinary supportive care model with routine distress screening to triage newly diagnosed cancer survivors for additional support on the basis of distress levels. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of ACCESS over 1 year. METHODS: We performed cluster random assignment at the oncologist level in a 1:1 ratio to receive ACCESS or usual care. Participants 21 years and older, newly diagnosed with breast or gynecologic cancer, and receiving care at National Cancer Centre Singapore were included. Outcomes assessed every 3 months for 1 year included quality of life (QoL) (primary), functioning, physical and psychological symptom burden, and activity levels. Data were analyzed using mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Participants from 16 clusters (control = 90, intervention = 83) were analyzed. The ACCESS program did not significantly improve QoL (primary outcome). However, compared with usual care recipients, ACCESS recipients reported higher physical functioning (P = .017), role functioning (P = .001), and activity levels (P < .001) at 9 months and lower psychological distress (P = .025) at 12 months. ACCESS recipients screened with high distress had poorer QoL, lower role and social functioning, and higher physical symptom distress at 3 months but had comparable scores with ACCESS recipients without high distress after 12 months. CONCLUSION: Compared with usual care, participation in the ACCESS program did not yield QoL improvement but showed earlier functioning recovery related to activities of daily living and reduced psychological distress. Routine distress screening is a promising mechanism to identify survivors with poorer health for more intensive supportive care.

Implementing an Inclusive, Multidisciplinary Supportive Care Model to Provide Integrated Care to Breast and Gynaecological Cancer Survivors: A Case Study at an Asian Ambulatory Cancer Centre.

Introduction: Supportive care models considering inclusivity and community services to improve integrated care for cancer survivors are limited. In this case study, we described the implementation of a multidisciplinary care model employing routine distress screening and embedded integrated care pathways to integrate care across disciplines and care sectors, while remaining inclusive of the multi-ethnic and multilingual population in Singapore. We reported implementation outcomes after 18 months of implementation. Description: We reviewed the model's process indicators from September 2019 to February 2021 at the largest public ambulatory cancer centre. Outcomes assessed included penetration, fidelity to screening protocol, and feasibility in three aspects - inclusiveness of different ethnic and language groups, responsiveness to survivors reporting high distress, and types of community service referrals. Discussion/conclusion: We elucidated opportunities to promote access to community services and inclusivity. Integration of community services from tertiary settings should be systematic through mutually beneficial educational and outreach initiatives, complemented by their inclusion in integrated care pathways to encourage systematic referrals and care coordination. A hybrid approach to service delivery is crucial in ensuring inclusivity while providing flexibility towards external changes such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Future work should explore using telehealth to bolster inclusiveness and advance community care integration.