Is the European Crohn's and Colitis organisation (ECCO) e-guide an acceptable and feasible tool for increasing gastroenterologists' guideline adherence? A mixed methods evaluation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Management of inflammatory bowel disease is constantly evolving, increasing the importance for gastroenterologists to keep up to date with guidelines. Traditional implementation strategies have had only small positive impacts on clinical practice. eHealth strategies such as the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation e-guide may be beneficial for clinician decision making in keeping with guidelines. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the e-guide. METHODS: A mixed methods approach was used to evaluate feasibility and acceptability. Cognitive (think-aloud) interviews were conducted with Australian gastroenterologists while using the e-guide. Two clinical scenarios were developed to allow evaluation of various aspects of the e-guide. Content analysis was applied to the qualitative interview data and descriptive analysis to the quantitative and observational data. RESULTS: Seventeen participants completed the study. Data saturation were reached. The ECCO e-guide was largely feasible and acceptable, as demonstrated by most clinical questions answered correctly, 87% reaching the answer within 3 min, and most feeling it was useful, would be beneficial to their practice and would use it again. Issues raised included difficulties with website navigation, layout of the e-guide and difficulties with access (network firewalls, paid subscription required). CONCLUSIONS: The ECCO e-guide is largely acceptable and feasible for gastroenterologists to use. Aspects of the e-guide could be modified to improve user experience. This study highlights the importance of engaging end-users in the development and evaluation of clinician educational tools.

Fidelity and acceptability of implementation strategies developed for adherence to a clinical pathway for screening, assessment and management of anxiety and depression in adults with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Implementation strategies are crucial to facilitate implementation success. To prepare and support implementation of a clinical pathway for screening, assessment and management of anxiety and depression in cancer patients (the ADAPT CP), six broad categories of implementation strategies; (1) Awareness campaigns, (2) Champions, (3) Education, (4) Academic Detailing and Support, (5) Reporting, (6) Technological Support, were developed. The aim of this paper is to describe the fidelity and acceptability of six categories of implementation strategies and any subsequent changes/adaptations made to those strategies. METHODS: The ADAPT CP was implemented in twelve cancer services in NSW, Australia, as part of a cluster randomised controlled trial of core versus enhanced implementation strategies. Fidelity to and any subsequent changes to the delivery of the planned six categories of implementation strategies were captured using the ADAPT contact log, which recorded the contacts made between the ADAPT research team and services, engagement meetings and monthly meetings. To explore acceptability and awareness/engagement with the implementation strategies, interviews with a purposively selected staff sample across both study arms were held prior to implementation (T0), six months into implementation (T1) and at the end of the 12-month implementation period (T2). Interviews were thematically analysed across the six categories of strategies. RESULTS: Delivery of all six categories of implementation strategies as planned was moderated by service context and resources and staff engagement. As such, for some implementation strategies, subsequent changes or adaptations to the content, mode of delivery, frequency and duration such as abbreviated training sessions, were made to optimise fidelity to and engagement with the strategies. Most strategies were perceived to be acceptable by service staff. Use of strategies prior to implementation of the ADAPT CP such as the engagement meetings and training sessions, positively impacted on ownership and preparedness to implement the ADAPT CP. Furthermore, ongoing support such as provision of additional training or monthly meetings facilitated increased awareness and engagement with the ADAPT program. CONCLUSION: Flexibility in delivering implementation strategies, and ensuring staff engagement with, and acceptability of those strategies, can support implementation of interventions within healthcare settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The ADAPT CRCT was registered prospectively with the ANZCTR on 22/3/2017. Trial ID ACTRN12617000411347.  https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=372486&isReview=true.

Clinician Adherence to Inflammatory Bowel Disease Guidelines: Results of a Qualitative Study of Barriers and Enablers.

Background: With the evolving inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) management landscape, it is critical that gastroenterologists keep up to date with the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Several studies in IBD have documented suboptimal adherence to CPGs. We aimed to gain an in-depth understanding of guideline adherence barriers reported by gastroenterologists and determine how evidence-based education can best be delivered. Methods: Interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of gastroenterologists' representative of the current workforce. Questions focused on previously identified problematic areas and shaped by the theoretical domains framework, a theory-informed approach to understanding clinician behavior, to assess all determinants of behavior. Questions explored perceived barriers to adherence and clinicians' preferred content and modes of delivery for an educational intervention. Interviews were conducted by a single interviewer and qualitative analysis performed. Results: A total of 20 interviews were conducted before data saturation was achieved (male = 12, work in a metropolitan area = 17). Five dominant subthemes for barriers to adherence emerged: negative experiences impacting future decisions, time constraints, long guidelines are impractical, unfamiliar with guideline specifics and prescribing restrictions. Adherence enablers were identified including features that improved the usability of CPGs. Computer- or smart phone-based educational interventions were preferred. Conclusions: This study identified several barriers and enablers for IBD guideline adherence and gained insight into how gastroenterologists prefer to receive evidence-based education. These results will inform the development of a targeted intervention to improve IBD guideline adherence. Improving guideline adherence is expected to facilitate standardized IBD care, ultimately leading to improved patient outcomes.

The Feasibility, Acceptability, and Effectiveness of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Symptom Monitoring for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Toxicities: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: Increasing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in routine cancer care will increase the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Systems are needed to support remote monitoring for irAEs. Electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) symptom monitoring systems can help monitor and manage symptoms and side effects. We assessed the content and features of ePRO symptom monitoring systems for irAEs, and their feasibility, acceptability, and impact on patient outcomes and health care utilization. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in May 2022 on MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Quantitative and qualitative data relevant to the review questions were extracted and synthesized in tables. RESULTS: Seven papers describing five ePRO systems were included. All systems collected PROs between clinic visits. Two of five used validated symptom questionnaires, 3/5 provided prompts to complete questionnaires, 4/5 provided reminders to self-report, and 3/5 provided clinician alerts for severe/worsening side effects. Four of five provided coverage of ≥26/30 irAEs in the ASCO irAE guideline. Feasibility and acceptability were demonstrated with consent rates of 54%-100%, 17%-27% of questionnaires generating alerts, and adherence rates of 74%-75%. One paper showed a reduction in grade 3-4 irAEs, treatment discontinuation, clinic visit duration, and emergency department presentations, while another showed no difference in these outcomes or the rate of steroid use. CONCLUSION: There is preliminary evidence of the feasibility and acceptability of ePRO symptom monitoring for irAEs. However, further studies are needed to confirm the impact on ICI-specific outcomes, such as the frequency of grade 3-4 irAEs and duration of immunosuppression. Suggestions for the content and features of future ePRO systems for irAEs are provided.

Effect of core versus enhanced implementation strategies on adherence to a clinical pathway for managing anxiety and depression in cancer patients in routine care: a cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Optimal strategies to facilitate implementation of evidence-based clinical pathways are unclear. We evaluated two implementation strategies (Core versus Enhanced) to facilitate implementation of a clinical pathway for the management of anxiety and depression in cancer patients (the ADAPT CP). METHODS: Twelve cancer services in NSW Australia were cluster randomised, stratified by service size, to the Core versus Enhanced implementation strategy. Each strategy was in place for 12 months, facilitating uptake of the ADAPT CP (the intervention being implemented). The Core strategy included a lead team with champions, staff training and awareness campaigns prior to implementation, plus access to feedback reports and telephone or online support during implementation. The Enhanced strategy included all Core supports plus monthly lead team meetings, and proactive, ongoing advice on managing barriers, staff training and awareness campaigns throughout implementation. All patients at participating sites were offered the ADAPT CP as part of routine care, and if agreeable, completed screening measures. They were allocated a severity step for anxiety/depression from one (minimal) to five (severe) and recommended management appropriate to their severity step. Multi-level mixed-effect regression analyses examined the effect of Core versus Enhanced implementation strategy on adherence to the ADAPT CP (binary primary outcome: adherent ≥ 70% of key ADAPT CP components achieved versus non-adherent < 70%), with continuous adherence as a secondary outcome. Interaction between study arm and anxiety/depression severity step was also explored. RESULTS: Of 1280 registered patients, 696 (54%) completed at least one screening. As patients were encouraged to re-screen, there were in total 1323 screening events (883 in Core and 440 in Enhanced services). The main effect of implementation strategy on adherence was non-significant in both binary and continuous analyses. Anxiety/depression step was significant, with adherence being higher for step 1 than for other steps (p = 0.001, OR = 0.05, 95% CI 0.02-0.10). The interaction between study arm and anxiety/depression step was significant (p = 0.02) in the continuous adherence analysis only: adherence was significantly higher (by 7.6% points (95% CI 0.08-15.1%) for step 3 in the Enhanced arm (p = .048) and trending to significance for step 4. DISCUSSION: These results support ongoing implementation effort for the first year of implementation to ensure successful uptake of new clinical pathways in over-burdened clinical services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR Registration: ACTRN12617000411347 (Trial registered 22/03/2017; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=372486&isReview=true ).

Cancer Care Team's Management of Clinical Alerts Generated by Electronically Collected Patient Reported Outcomes: We Could Do Better.

Electronically administered patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) are effective digital health tools for informing clinicians about cancer patients' symptoms and facilitating timely patient-centred care. This paper describes the delivery of healthcare activities supported by the PROMPT-Care model, including ePROMs generated clinical alerts, cancer care team (CCT) response to alerts, and patients' perceptions of the CCT response and ePROMs system. This mixed-methods study includes cancer patients from four cancer therapy centres in New South Wales, Australia. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected regarding clinical alert activity, CCT response, and patient perceptions of the CCT responses and ePROMs system. Qualitative data were thematically analysed. Of the 328 participants whose care was informed by the digital health tool, 70.8% (n = 233) generated at least one alert during the trial period, with 877 alerts generated in total. Although 43.7% (n = 383) were actioned by the CCT, at least 80% of participants found follow-up CCT phone calls beneficial, with multiple benefits confirmed in interviews. The cancer care delivery arm of the PROMPT-Care trial involving clinical alerts to the CCT was positively perceived by most participants, resulting in a diverse range of benefits. However, further work is required, informed by implementation science, to improve the percentage of actioned clinical alerts.

Encouraging Patients to Ask Questions: Development and Pilot Testing of a Question Prompt List for Patients Undergoing a Biopsy for Suspected Prostate Cancer.

This study assessed the acceptability and feasibility of a question prompt list (QPL) to facilitate informed treatment decision-making in men with suspected localised prostate cancer, which involves values-based choices between options with similar efficacy but different side effects. The QPL was developed through iterative consultation with consumers, clinicians and researchers. Acceptability was assessed using study-specific questions regarding QPL satisfaction and usefulness and qualitative interviews. Feasibility was determined via the proportion of men given the QPL according to medical records and the completion of standardised measures of decisional outcomes. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive and univariate statistics. Qualitative data were thematically analysed. Fifty-two men consented; 34 provided data for analysis. The QPL recipients reported moderate-high content satisfaction (70.6%) and perceived usefulness in guiding appointments when receiving biopsy results (64.7%). Two main qualitative themes also indicated the QPL acceptability: (1) the freedom to ask-acceptable timing, flexible usage and usefulness of the QPL, and (2) satisfaction with the QPL content. However, only 18.4% of eligible men received the QPL, indicating limited feasibility. The QPL is safe and acceptable, but further research is needed regarding how to facilitate the uptake of the question prompt list in clinical practice.

Finding My Way-Advanced: can a web-based psychosocial intervention improve the mental quality of life for women with metastatic breast cancer vs attention-control? Study protocol of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Women living with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are at risk of significantly impaired quality of life (QOL), symptom burden, distress and fear of progression, and unmet needs, yet they face barriers to accessing evidence-based psychosocial treatments. Our group therefore developed Finding My Way-Advanced (FMW-A), a web-based self-guided psychosocial program for women with MBC. This study aims to assess its efficacy in improving mental and other QOL domains, distress, fear of progression, unmet needs, and health service utilisation. METHODS: The multi-site randomised controlled trial (RCT) will enrol 370 Australian participants. Eligible participants are adult (18 years +) women diagnosed with MBC, with a life expectancy of 6 months or more, with sufficient English-language literacy to provide informed consent. Participants will be identified, screened and referred from one of 10 Australian sites, or via self-referral in response to advertisements. Participants complete four online questionnaires: prior to accessing their program ('baseline'), 6 weeks later ('post-intervention'), then 3 months and 6 months post-intervention. Consenting participants will be randomised to either FMW-A (intervention), or Breast Cancer Network Australia's (BCNA) online/app resource My Journey (minimal intervention attention-control). This is a single-blind study, with randomisation computer-generated and stratified by site. FMW-A is a 6-module program addressing some of the most common issues experienced by women with MBC, with BCNA control resources integrated within the 'resources' section. All modules are immediately accessible, with an additional booster module released 10 weeks later. The primary outcome is mental QOL; statistical criteria for superiority is defined as a 4-point difference between groups at post-treatment. Secondary outcomes include other QOL domains, distress, fear of progression, health service use, intervention adherence, and user satisfaction. DISCUSSION: This will be the first adequately powered RCT of a self-directed online intervention for women with MBC. If efficacious, FMW-A will help address two national key priorities for management of MBC - enhancing QOL and reducing symptom burden. FMW-A has the potential to address unmet needs and overcome access barriers for this overlooked population, while reducing health system burden. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered prospectively with the ANZCTR on 29/10/2021. Trial ID ACTRN12621001482853p.  https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=382714&isReview=true.

Feasibility and preliminary efficacy of iConquerFear: a self-guided digital intervention for fear of cancer recurrence.

PURPOSE: Approximately 50% of cancer survivors experience moderate-severe fear of cancer recurrence (FCR). Self-guided digital interventions have potential to address the high level of FCR-related unmet needs at scale, but existing digital interventions have demonstrated variable engagement and efficacy. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of iConquerFear, a five-module self-guided digital FCR intervention. METHODS: Eligible curatively treated breast cancer survivors were recruited. Participants reporting clinically significant FCR (≥ 13 on the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory-Short Form; FCRI-SF) were given access to iConquerFear. Feasibility was indicated by > 50% of eligible participants enrolling in iConquerFear and recording moderate (≥ 120 min) or greater usage. Preliminary efficacy was evaluated via changes in self-reported FCR severity, anxiety, depression, intrusions and metacognitions from baseline to immediately and 3 months post-intervention. RESULTS: Fifty-four (83%) of 65 eligible participants enrolled in iConquerFear; six subsequently withdrew. Thirty-nine (83%) participants recorded moderate (n = 24; 120-599 min) or high (n = 15; ≥ 600 min) usage. Engagement levels increased with participant age (p = 0.043), but were lower in participants with higher baseline FCR (p = 0.028). Qualitative feedback indicated engagement was sometimes limited by difficulties with navigation and relating to featured survivors. Participants reported significantly improved FCR (mean reduction (95%CI): baseline to post-intervention - 3.44 (- 5.18, - 1.71), baseline to 3-month follow-up - 4.52 (- 6.25, - 2.78), p = < 0.001). CONCLUSION: iConquerFear is a feasible and potentially efficacious intervention for reducing FCR in breast cancer survivors. Easier navigation and more relatable examples may enhance engagement. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: iConquerFear may help address moderate but burdensome FCR levels in cancer survivors.

Parkinson's disease - palliative care needs assessment tool: adaptation and psychometric testing.

OBJECTIVE: Parkinson's disease is a progressive, life-limiting disease, which benefits from structured palliative care. Systematic recognition and triage of needs helps facilitate care, allows focused referral to specialist palliative care and aids sustainability of services. Existing palliative care tools for Parkinson's are patient/caregiver completed and focus on quantification rather than identification of the need. The Needs Assessment Tool: Progressive Disease in Cancer was designed for rapid identification of unmet needs in cancer. We describe adaptation and psychometric testing of the tool for Parkinson's disease (NAT:Parkinson's disease). METHODS: Set in secondary care, Parkinson's disease outpatient clinics in the UK, this study included people with Parkinson's, age >18, including all disease stages. People with atypical Parkinsonian syndromes were excluded. Adaptation was made using systematic review and focus groups. Construct validity was tested in 50 consecutive patients against established patient and caregiver measures, analysed with Kendall's Tau B. Inter-rater reliability, using video consultations, were calculated in broad range of clinicians involved in Parkinson's disease care using a weighted kappa; 0-0.2=slight, 0.21-0.40=fair, 0.41-0.60=moderate, 0.61-0.80=substantial and p<0.05 indicative of statistically significant agreement. RESULTS: Validity was substantial for two, moderate for five and fair for four constructs. Inter-rater reliability was substantial for one, moderate for three and fair for six constructs. Two constructs failing to demonstrate fair reliability did show very high percentage agreement. CONCLUSION: Findings support the suitability of the NAT:Parkinson's disease for everyday clinical use in the identification and triage of unmet palliative need for people with Parkinson's disease.

Stepping into the real world: a mixed-methods evaluation of the implementation of electronic patient reported outcomes in routine lung cancer care.

BACKGROUND: To realize the broader benefits of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) in routine care, we used the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) framework to inform the translation of a clinically effective ePROM system (hereafter referred to as the PRM system) into practice. The study aimed to evaluate the processes and success of implementing the PRM system in the routine care of patients diagnosed with lung cancer. METHOD: A controlled before-and-after mixed-methods study was undertaken. Data sources included a self-report questionnaire and interviews with healthcare providers, electronic health record data for PRMs patients and historical controls, and field notes. Descriptive statistics, logistic regression modelling, negative binomial models, generalized estimating equations and repeated measures ANOVA were used to analyze quantitative data. Qualitative data was thematically analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 48/79 eligible people diagnosed with lung cancer completed 90 assessments during the 5-month implementation period (RE-AIM reach). Every assessment breached the pre-defined threshold and care coordinators reviewed and actioned 95.6% of breaches, resulting in 146 referrals to allied health services, most frequently for social work (25.3%), dietetics (18.5%), physiotherapy (18.5%) and occupational therapy (17.1%). PRMs patients had significantly fewer visits to the cancer assessment unit for problematic symptoms (M = 0.23 vs. M = 0.43; p = 0.035), and were significantly more likely to be offered referrals (71% vs. 29%, p < 0.0001) than historical controls (RE-AIM effect). The levels of 'organizational readiness for implementing change' (ORIC) did not show much differences between baseline and follow-up, though this was already high at baseline; but significantly more staff reported improved confidence when asking patients to complete assessments (64.7% at baseline vs. 88.2% at follow-up, p = 0.0046), and when describing the assessment tool to patients (64.7% at baseline vs. 76.47% at follow-up, p = 0.0018) (RE-AIM adoption). A total of 78 staff received PRM system training, and 95.6% of the PRM system alerts were actioned (RE-AIM implementation); and all lung cancer care coordinators were engaged with the PRM system beyond the end of the study period (RE-AIM maintenance). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the potential of the PRM system in enhancing the routine care of lung cancer patients, through leveraging the capabilities of automated web-based care options. Research has shown the clear benefits of using electronically collected patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) for cancer patients and health services. However, we need to better understand how to implement ePROMs as part of routine care. This study evaluated the processes and outcomes of implementing an ePROMs system in the routine care of patients diagnosed with lung cancer. Key findings included: (a) a majority of eligible patients completed the scheduled assessments; (b) patient concerns were identified in every assessment, and care coordinators reviewed and actioned almost all of these, including making significantly more referrals to allied health services; (c) patients completing assessments regularly were less likely to present to the cancer assessment unit with problematic symptoms, suggesting that ePROMs identified patient concerns early and this led to a timely response to concerns; (d) staff training and engagement was high, and staff reporting increased confidence when asking patients to complete assessments and when describing the assessment tool to patients at the end of the implementation period. This study shows that implementing ePROMs in routine care is feasible and can lead to improvements in patient care.

Implementing patient-reported outcomes into routine care: an audit of cancer patients from two local health districts in New South Wales to understand their capabilities and preferences.

Objective It has been established that the implementation of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in routine care provides significant benefits to patients, providers and health services. However, there are patient-level barriers that must be identified and addressed for the successful implementation of PROMs. This study aimed to understand the capabilities and preferences of our cancer patient population prior to implementation of electronically collected PROMs (ePROMs). Specifically, we conducted a clinic audit to determine the proportion of patients in clinics with access to out-of-clinic internet; those preferring to complete PROMs on paper or via an electronic device; those capable of completing PROMs in English; and those anticipating requiring assistance to complete PROMs. Methods Patients receiving cancer treatment or follow-up care at two Local Health Districts (LHDs) in New South Wales, Australia, completed a questionnaire (audit form) with items about internet and mobile access, communication preferences and assistance needed to complete PROMs. Participant demographic and treatment information were extracted from their electronic medical records. Results Across both LHDs, 637 of 1668 participants (38%) completed the audit forms. Mean participant age was 65 years (range = 23-98), 53% were female, and 92% were outpatients. Patients in the two LHDs differed in their levels of internet and email access, and ability to complete PROMs independently in English, suggesting that some LHD-specific tailoring of implementation strategies is necessary to optimise ePROMs uptake. Conclusion This study highlights the importance of understanding the specific local contexts and patient populations, including potential technology and language barriers, which can influence patient ability to complete ePROMs.

A Delphi-based approach to developing the contents of an online resource, Care Assist, for male caregivers of women with breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Informal male caregivers of women with breast cancer (BC) have significant psychological, emotional, and social burdens that are inadequately addressed by current face-to-face interventions. Online interventions overcome barriers that limit engagement with face-to-face interventions. This study aimed to develop the contents of Care Assist, an online supportive care resource for male caregivers of BC patients, through expert consensus. METHODS: A Delphi study comprising two survey rounds and an expert consultation was conducted. In Round 1, experts in BC care rated the importance of 25 content items. In Round 2, they re-rated content items that failed to reach consensus (i.e. 80% agreement) in Round 1 or were newly developed. Free-text responses were also collected. During expert consultation, the resource was reviewed and revised for clarity. Iterative refinement followed all rounds. Quantitative data was analysed descriptively, and qualitative data was analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-two experts participated and reached consensus on 96% of items, with 217 comments provided on: (a) the perceived benefits of Care Assist to caregivers and care recipients, (b) recommendations of newly suggested content items, wording, and use of external links, and (c) concerns regarding information overload and need for tailoring. The expert consultation comments focused on clarifying scope, wording, and information tailoring. CONCLUSION: The rigorous Delphi process resulted in the content for a comprehensive online supportive care intervention for male caregivers. Information overload can be minimised through self-identification of needs and utilisation of eHealth to personalise the resource for the heterogeneous male caregiver population.

Adapting an integrated care pathway for implementing electronic patient reported outcomes assessment in routine oncology care: Lessons learned from a case study.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVE: Details of the development and implementation of integrated care pathways (ICPs) in the context of electronic collection of patient reported outcomes (ePROs) for cancer patients are largely lacking in the literature. This study describes what, why and how decisions were made to adapt and implement an ePROs ICP for patients with lung cancer. METHODS: A consensus process was utilized, with the implementation advisory group including multidisciplinary representation from three participating hospitals, to identify local champions and adapt and incorporate the ePRO ICP into the local contexts. Engagement meetings were documented via meeting transcripts, and detailed notes from October 2019 to November 2020 were content-analysed to identify decision-making themes based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research; workflows and process maps were reviewed and modified to integrate ePROs. RESULTS: In total, 55 engagement activities were held (24 meetings, 20 workshops 11 educational sessions), with n = 96 staff from multiple disciplines participating in the ePROs implementation through advisory meetings, process mapping, change management and staff education. Decisions were made regarding eligible patient cohorts to include, the process for onboarding patients onto the ePRO system, and follow-up and referral pathways. Rationales for decisions included alignment with existing workflows, utilizing available staff, minimizing staff and patient burden and maximizing patient engagement. CONCLUSION: Existing resources, staff input and technical and logistical reasons often guided the ICP decisions, highlighting the need for in-depth engagement across all stakeholders for optimal implementation of ePRO ICPs. The ePRO implementation required substantial dialogue and systematic resolution to reach agreement on the final processes. Adapting the local ICP through rigorous engagement facilitated the successful implementation of ePROs as business-as-usual at all three cancer centres. Involving all relevant stakeholders is critical to the successful adaptation of ICPs before their introduction into routine care.

Staff perspectives on the feasibility of a clinical pathway for anxiety and depression in cancer care, and mid-implementation adaptations.

BACKGROUND: Clinical pathways (CPs) are intended to standardise and improve care but do not always produce positive outcomes, possibly because they were not adapted to suit the specific context in which they were enacted. This qualitative study aimed to explore staff perspectives of implementation of a CP for routine screening, assessment, referral and management of anxiety and depression (the ADAPT CP) for patients with cancer, focussing on perceived feasibility of the CP and negotiated adaptations made during the implementation phase. METHODS: The ADAPT CP was implemented in 12 urban and regional oncology services in Australia. Services were randomised to receive core versus enhanced implementation strategies. Core sites received support until implementation commencement and could access progress reports. Enhanced sites received proactive, ongoing support during the 12-month implementation. Purposively selected staff were interviewed prior to implementation (n = 88) and 6 months later, half-way through the implementation period (n = 89). Monthly meetings with lead multi-disciplinary teams at the eight enhanced sites were recorded. Data were thematically analysed. RESULTS: Six overarching themes were identified: ADAPT is of high value; timing for introducing the CP and screening is difficult; online screening is challenging; a burden too much; no-one to refer patients to; and micro-logistics are key. While early screening was deemed desirable, diverse barriers meant this was complex, with adaptations made to time and screening location. Online screening prompted by email, seen as time-saving and efficient, also proved unsuccessful in some services, with adaptations made to in-clinic or phone screening, or repeated email reminders. Staff negative attitudes to ADAPT, time constraints, and perceived poor fit of ADAPT to work roles and flows, all impacted implementation, with key tasks often devolving to a few key individuals. Nevertheless, services remained committed to the ADAPT CP, and worked hard to create, review and adapt strategies to address challenges to optimise success. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the interactive nature of health service change, with staff actively engaging with, forming views on, and problem-solving adaptations of the ADAPT CP to overcome barriers. Obtaining staff feedback is critical to ensure health service change is sustainable, meaningful and achieves its promise of improving patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered prospectively with the ANZCTR on 22/3/2017. Trial ID ACTRN12617000411347.

Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of an online mindfulness program (MindOnLine) to reduce fear of recurrence among people with cancer: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is a common condition among cancer survivors that can lead to significant levels of distress, anxiety and depression. Online mindfulness programmes may provide the mechanism to support cancer survivors manage FCR and distress, and improve people's well-being over the short, medium and long term. The primary aim of this study is to determine the potential efficacy of MindOnLine, a 9 session mindfulness-based programme for survivors of breast, prostate and colorectal cancer. A formal economic programme will also be conducted. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A single-blind randomised controlled trial to determine the efficacy and cost-efficacy of a MindOnLine programme for cancer survivors. A total of 400 people living with cancer will be recruited via online advertisements on social media platforms, peak consumer advocacy groups or through outpatient services at healthcare providers across Victoria, Australia. People will be randomly allocated to either the MindOnLine programme (n=200) or waitlist control (n=200). Participant assessments will occur at baseline, at 9 weeks and 9-month follow-up. The primary outcome is change in Fear of Recurrence Index Score total score between baseline and 9 weeks; secondary outcomes are changes in depression and anxiety, quality of life and mindfulness. The economic analysis comprises a cost-consequences analysis where all outcomes will be compared with costs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre (20-53) and Deakin University (2020-284). All participants will be required to provide written informed consent. Findings will be disseminated in peer reviewed journals and among key stakeholder organisations including hospitals, cancer and community organisations and Government. If successful the project will be rolled out nationally with a formal implementation plan. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (12620000645954); Pre-results. Registered 6 June 2020, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=379520&isReview=true.

eHealth tools for childhood cancer survivorship care: A qualitative analysis of survivors', parents', and general practitioners' views.

Objective: We assessed the acceptability of, and perceived benefits/barriers to, using Electronic health (eHealth) technology for childhood cancer survivorship care. Methods: We interviewed survivors, their parents, and their nominated GP. We described a hypothetical eHealth tool to manage survivorship care and asked their likely use of, and perceived benefits/concerns for, the use of the tool. Results: 31 survivors (mean age = 27.0), 29 parents (survivors' mean age = 12.6), and 51 GPs (mean years practising = 28.2) participated. Most survivors/parents (85%) and GPs (75%) indicated that they would be willing to use an eHealth tool. Survivors/parents reported that an eHealth tool would increase their confidence in their ability, and their GP's ability, to manage their survivorship care. GPs agreed that an eHealth tool would provide easier access to survivors' medical information and increase their capacity to provide support during survivorship. Some GPs (7%) and survivors (43%) reported being hesitant to use eHealth tools due to privacy/security concerns. Conclusion: Overall, eHealth tools appear acceptable and may help to improve the management of late effects for childhood cancer survivors and assist their GPs to coordinate their care. Innovation: Concerns raised by key stakeholders should be addressed in the design of eHealth technologies to optimise their uptake and effectiveness.

Having breast reconstruction post-mastectomy: barriers and facilitators reported by Vietnamese- versus English-speaking women with breast cancer.

Objective: Little is known about the experience of women of culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds in relation to breast reconstruction following mastectomy as treatment for their breast cancer. The aim of this study was to explore the factors that influenced Vietnamese- and English-speaking women's decisions about breast reconstruction post-mastectomy for their breast cancer, in Australia.Design: The participants in this study comprised of Vietnamese-speaking women of Vietnamese heritage, and English-speaking women from mixed ethnicities (Vietnamese included). In this qualitative study, Vietnamese-speaking and English-speaking women who had breast cancer treated by mastectomy with or without breast reconstruction participated in in-depth interviews. Interviews were undertaken in the woman's chosen language (Vietnamese or English), audio-recorded, transcribed/translated and analysed using thematic analysis.Results: Fourteen Vietnamese-speaking and 13 English-speaking patients were recruited. Participants identified age, lack of information, concerns regarding surgical procedure, fears about complications and cancer recurrence as barriers to breast reconstruction. Many more Vietnamese-speaking participants identified lack of information about breast reconstruction as a barrier compared to English-speaking participants. Both groups described the ability to wear clothing of their choice, partner influence, and the need to feel 'normal' as facilitators to having breast reconstruction. Vietnamese-speaking participants in particular identified doctor recommendation of breast reconstruction as a major facilitator.Conclusion: Lack of information about reconstruction was a persistent theme, though it was identified by more Vietnamese women as a barrier to having breast reconstruction. The results reinforce the importance of doctors' recommendations in helping particularly the Vietnamese women make an informed decision about reconstruction following mastectomy as treatment for their breast cancer.

The unmet supportive care needs of Chinese patients and caregivers affected by cancer: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer patients and caregivers have myriad unmet needs which can have detrimental consequences on their psychosocial wellbeing. This systematic review aims to identify the unmet supportive care needs of immigrant and native Chinese cancer patients and caregivers. METHODS: We systematically searched various electronic databases (e.g. Scopus, CINAHL, PsycInfo, etc.) from the earliest date available until January 2018. Additional studies were identified through reference lists and citation tracking. Eligibility criteria included: (a) qualitative, quantitative and/or mixed methods studies published in English; (b) immigrant and native Chinese cancer patients and/or caregivers (age ≥18 years); (c) unmet needs and/or their correlates. Studies were assessed for their risk of bias, and a narrative synthesis of findings was performed. RESULTS: Forty-seven papers from 45 studies met eligibility criteria. The most prevalent area of unmet needs was health system and information. Patients most commonly desired one member of the hospital to talk to about all aspects of their care. Caregivers preferred information about the patient's prognosis and likely outcome. Anxiety was most commonly associated with higher levels of health system and information needs. CONCLUSION: Chinese patients and caregivers experience a range of unmet health system and information needs, which differ depending on their stage along the cancer trajectory.

Low conflict and high satisfaction: Decisional outcomes after attending a combined clinic to choose between robotic prostatectomy and radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Decisional conflict and post-treatment decisional regret have been documented in men with localised prostate cancer (LPC). However, there is limited evidence regarding decisional outcomes associated with the choice between robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and radiotherapy, when both treatment options are available in the public health system. There is increasing support for multidisciplinary approaches to guide men with LPC in their decision-making process. This study assessed decisional outcomes in men deciding between RARP or radiotherapy treatment before and after attending a LPC combined clinic (CC). METHODS: Quantitative longitudinal data were collected from 52 men who attended a LPC CC, where they saw both a urologist and radiation oncologist. Patients completed questionnaires assessing involvement in decision-making, decisional conflict, satisfaction and regret before and after the CC, three months, six months and 12 months post-treatment. Urologists and radiation oncologists also reported their perceptions regarding patients' suitability for, openness to, perceived preferences and appropriateness for each treatment. Data was analysed using paired/independent samples t-tests and McNemar's tests. RESULTS: Most participants (n = 37, 71%) opted for RARP over radiotherapy (n = 14, 27%); one participant deferred treatment (2%). Urologists and radiation oncologists reported low agreement (κ = 0.26) regarding the most appropriate treatment for each patient. Participants reported a desire for high levels of control over their decision-making process (77.5% patient-led, 22.5% shared) and high levels of decisional satisfaction (M = 4.4, SD = 0.47) after the CC. Decisional conflict levels were significantly reduced (baseline: M = 29.3, SD = 16.9, post-CC: M = 16.3, SD = 11.5; t = 5.37, P < 0.001) after the CC. Mean decisional regret scores were 'mild' at three-months (M = 16.0, SD = 17.5), six-months (M = 18.8, SD = 18.7) and 12-months (M = 18.2, SD = 15.1) post-treatment completion. CONCLUSION: This is the first Australian study to assess decisional outcomes when patients are offered the choice between RARP and radiotherapy in the public health system. A CC seems to support decision-making in men with LPC and positively impact some decisional outcomes. However, larger-scale controlled studies are needed to confirm these findings.