Difficulties encountered by physicians and mental health professionals in evaluating and caring for affective and behavioral problems in pediatric brain tumor survivors.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric brain tumor survivors (PBTS) present a high risk for emotional and behavioral disorders. When addressing these difficulties, differences in study designs; variety of and disagreement about diagnoses; and intricate links of emotional, behavioral, and cognitive issues may complicate the interpretation of studies and probably also the work of clinicians. We aimed to survey the difficulties perceived by physicians and mental health professionals in their practice and their interest in developing a new evaluative tool. METHODOLOGY: We surveyed 29 health professionals involved in the follow-up of this population. They completed questionnaires about their clinical practice (difficulties, needs, activities) and indicated diagnosis hypotheses and treatment plans on a clinical case developed for this study. RESULTS: Emotional and behavioral disorders were reported as difficult to assess for 93% of participants. The overlap of symptoms (90%) and the lack of an adapted diagnostic framework (90%) were the main reasons mentioned. Respectively 93%, 90%, and 65% of participants would at least "often" make referrals to psychological (93%), neuropsychological (90%), and psychiatric (65%) assessments and care. Family and group therapy were less common as was drug management. All participants were in favor of creating a tool to help with diagnosis and treatment. When responding to a clinical case, the heterogeneity of participants' responses highlighted their issues in diagnosing and managing these patients. CONCLUSION: This survey exemplifies the difficulties of health professionals related to the evaluation and management of affective and behavioral disorders experienced by PBTS. It underlines the need to help professionals by initiating systematic assessment strategies with this vulnerable population.

How do professionals assess the quality of life of children with advanced cancer receiving palliative care, and what are their recommendations for improvement?

BACKGROUND: It is known that information regarding the quality of life of a patient is central to pediatric palliative care. This information allows professionals to adapt the care and support provided to children and their families. Previous studies have documented the major areas to be investigated in order to assess the quality of life, although it is not yet known what operational criteria or piece of information should be used in the context of pediatric palliative care. The present study aims to: 1) Identify signs of quality of life and evaluation methods currently used by professionals to assess the quality of life of children with cancer receiving palliative care. 2) Collect recommendations from professionals to improve the evaluation of quality of life in this context. METHODS: We selected a qualitative research design and applied an inductive thematic content analysis to the verbal material. Participants included 20 members of the Department of Hematology-Oncology at CHU Sainte-Justine from various professions (e.g. physicians, nurses, psychosocial staff) who had cared for at least one child with cancer receiving palliative care in the last year. RESULTS: Professionals did not have access to pre-established criteria or to a defined procedure to assess the quality of life of children they followed in the context of PPC. They reported basing their assessment on the child's non-verbal cues, relational availability and elements of his/her environment. These cues are typically collected through observation, interpretation and by asking the child, his/her parents, and other members of the care. To improve the assessment of quality of life professionals recommended optimizing interdisciplinary communication, involving the child and the family in the evaluation process, increasing training to palliative care in hematology/oncology, and developing formalized measurement tools. CONCLUSION: The formulation of explicit criteria to assess the quality of life in this context, along with detailed recommendations provided by professionals, support the development of systematic measurement strategy. Such a strategy would contribute to the development of common care goals and further facilitate communication between professionals and with the family.

Relations between arthralgia and fear of recurrence: results of a cross-sectional study of breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant aromatase inhibitors therapy.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to explore associations between arthralgia and fear of recurrence in breast cancer patients treated by aromatase inhibitors (AI). METHOD: We sent a set of questionnaires to 100 patients examining their pain characteristics, anxiety (STAI), depression (BDI-SF), quality of life (SF-36), fear of recurrence (FCRI), and representations of AI treatment (ad hoc questionnaire). Nonparametric tests were used to investigate between-group comparisons (arthralgia vs. nonarthralgia) in these domains as well as the associations between arthralgia and fear of recurrence. RESULTS: Of the 77 patients who returned the questionnaires (response rate = 77%), 60 (78%) reported arthralgia. The mean score of fear of recurrence exceeded the pathological threshold in the arthralgia group and was significantly higher than that in the nonarthralgia group (14.8 vs. 10.7, p < 0.01). Significant associations were observed between fear of recurrence and pain intensity (r = 0.274, p < 0.05) and pain relief (r = -0.409, p < 0.05). More than 80% of the total sample declared that they were well informed about the aim of AI, their side effects, and the risk of developing arthralgia. Fear of recurrence did not appear to be associated with representations of AI. CONCLUSION: The study revealed a close relationship between pain intensity and fear of recurrence. In particular, it showed that effective pain management was accompanied by a reduced fear of recurrence. Information, although essential, appeared insufficient to overcome patients' concerns about pain. Therefore, the implement of a systematic screening for arthralgia and the improvement of analgesic treatment are essential issues. New strategies for pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment must be developed.