Evaluating Nurses' Time to Response by Severity and Cancer Stage in a Remote Symptom Monitoring Program for Patients With Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Remote symptom monitoring (RSM) using electronic patient-reported outcomes enables patients with cancer to communicate symptoms between in-person visits. A better understanding of key RSM implementation outcomes is crucial to optimize efficiency and guide implementation efforts. This analysis evaluated the association between the severity of patient-reported symptom alerts and time to response by the health care team. METHODS: This secondary analysis included women with stage I-IV breast cancer who received care at a large academic medical center in the Southeastern United States (October 2020-September 2022). Symptom surveys with at least one severe symptom alert were categorized as severe. Response time was categorized as optimal if the alert was closed by a health care team member within 48 hours. Odds ratios (ORs), predicted probabilities, and 95% CIs were estimated using a patient-nested logistic regression model. RESULTS: Of 178 patients with breast cancer included in this analysis, 63% of patients identified as White and 85% of patients had a stage I-III or early-stage cancer. The median age at diagnosis was 55 years (IQR, 42-65). Of 1,087 surveys included, 36% reported at least one severe symptom alert and 77% had an optimal response time by the health care team. When compared with surveys that had no severe symptom alerts, surveys with at least one severe symptom alert had similar odds of having an optimal response time (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.38). The results were similar when stratified by cancer stage. CONCLUSION: Response times to symptom alerts were similar for alerts with at least one severe symptom compared with alerts with no severe symptoms. This suggests that alert management is being incorporated into routine workflows and not prioritized based on disease or symptom alert severity.

Witnesses and Victims Both: Healthcare Workers and Grief in the Time of COVID-19.

Heathcare Workers (HCWs) recognize their responsibility to support the bereaved loved ones of our patients, but we also must attend to our own professional and personal grief in the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 grief is occurring in the setting of incomplete grief, disenfranchised grief, fractured US governmental leadership, and evidence of great mistrust, systemic racism, and social injustice. In the intensity and pervasiveness of COVID-19, HCW fears for themselves, their colleagues, and their own loved ones are often in conflict with professional commitments. Even at the dawn of promising national and global vaccination programs, significant HCW morbidity and mortality in COVID-19 has already become clear, will continue to grow, and these effects likely will last far into the future. Given the risks of complicated grief for HCWs in the setting of COVID-19 deaths, individual HCWs must put every effort into their own preparation for these deaths as well as into their own healthy grieving. Equally importantly, our healthcare systems have a primary responsibility both to prepare HCWs and to support them in their anticipatory and realized grief. Special attention must be paid to our HCW trainees, who may have not yet developed personal or professional grief management strategies and are coming into healthcare practice during a time of great disruption to both teaching and clinical care.

Implementing a Clinic-Based Telehealth Support Service (FamilyStrong) for Family Caregivers of Individuals with Grade IV Brain Tumors.

Background: Nearly 3 million U.S. family caregivers support someone with cancer. However, oncology clinic-based service lines that proactively screen, assess, and support cancer caregivers are nearly nonexistent. Objective: To examine first-year experiences of a nurse-led clinic-based telehealth support service (FamilyStrong) for family caregivers of patients with recently diagnosed grade IV brain tumors. Methods: This is a retrospective evaluation of operational outcomes from initial implementation of the FamilyStrong Service, developed in partnership with Caregiver and Bereavement Support Services at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) and the UAB Center for Palliative and Supportive Care. From August 2018 to December 2019, 53 family caregivers were proactively identified and enrolled by a palliative care nurse, working approximately one day/week, who performed monthly caregiver distress thermometer screenings by phone and provided emotional, educational, problem-solving, and referral support. Results: Enrolled family caregivers were a mean age of 53.5 years and mostly female (62.3%), full- or part-time employed (67.9%), and the patient's spouse/partner (79.3%). Caregivers provided support 6.7 days/week for 11.2 hours/day. The palliative care nurse performed 235 distress screenings and provided support that included 68 documented instances of emotional, problem-solving, and educational support, 41 nurse-facilitated communications with the neuro-oncology team about patient issues, and 24 referrals to UAB and community services (e.g., counseling). The most common problems caregivers wanted assistance with included: managing their relative's health condition and symptoms (51%), coordinating care/services (21%), and planning for the future/advance care planning (17%). Discussion: The FamilyStrong Program is among the first "real world" oncology clinic-based formal support services for advance cancer family caregivers.

Lay Patient Navigators' Perspectives of Barriers, Facilitators and Training Needs in Initiating Advance Care Planning Conversations With Older Patients With Cancer.

CONTEXT: Respecting Choices is an evidence-based model of facilitating advance care planning (ACP) conversations between health-care professionals and patients. However, the effectiveness of whether lay patient navigators can successfully initiate Respecting Choices ACP conversations is unknown. As part of a large demonstration project (Patient Care Connect [PCC]), a cohort of lay patient navigators underwent Respecting Choices training and were tasked to initiate ACP conversations with Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with cancer. OBJECTIVES: This article explores PCC lay navigators' perceived barriers and facilitators in initiating Respecting Choices ACP conversations with older patients with cancer in order to inform implementation enhancements to lay navigator-facilitated ACP. METHODS: Twenty-six lay navigators from 11 PCC cancer centers in 4 states (Alabama, George, Tennessee, and Florida) completed in-depth, one-on-one semistructured interviews between June 2015 and August 2015. Data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: This evaluation identifies 3 levels-patient, lay navigator, and organizational factors in addition to training needs that influence ACP implementation. Key facilitators included physician buy-in, patient readiness, and navigators' prior experience with end-of-life decision-making. Lay navigators' perceived challenges to initiating ACP conversations included timing of the conversation and social and personal taboos about discussing dying. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that further training and health system support are needed for lay navigators playing a vital role in improving the implementation of ACP among older patients with cancer. The lived expertise of lay navigators along with flexible longitudinal relationships with patients and caregivers may uniquely position this workforce to promote ACP.