RESUMEN
AIMS: To understand the strategies used to continue providing psychosocial support to cancer patients during the pandemic, including outcomes and implications beyond the pandemic. DESIGN: A systematic review of original research. DATA SOURCES: ProQuest Health & Medicine, CINAHL Complete (via EBSCOhost), Scopus, and PubMed were searched for original work published between January 2020 and December 2022. METHODS: Abstract and title screening identified eligible articles for full-text review. Following a full-text review, data were extracted from eligible articles, and a risk of bias assessment was conducted. A synthesis without meta-analysis was performed. RESULTS: Thirty-four articles met the selection criteria. These articles provide evidence that systematic adaptations during the pandemic improved the assessment and screening of psychological needs and/or increased the number of clients accessing services. Additionally, while the pandemic was associated with decreased psychosocial well-being for cancer patients, five intervention studies reported improvements in psychosocial well-being. Barriers, strategies, and recommendations were described. CONCLUSION: Adapting psychosocial support during a pandemic can be successful, achieved relatively quickly, and can increase the uptake of support for people experiencing cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PATIENT CARE: It is imperative that these adaptations continue beyond the pandemic to maximize adaptive psychosocial outcomes for a group vulnerable to ongoing mental health concerns. IMPACT: While the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with increased psychosocial need for cancer patients, evidence in the review suggested that adaptations made to service delivery facilitated increased access for patients who may not previously have been able to access support. Additionally, improvements in psychosocial well-being were achieved. These findings are relevant for clinicians and decision-makers who fund and design psychosocial support services for cancer patients. REPORTING METHOD: The review was guided by PRISMA Guidelines and the SWiM Reporting Guideline. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Prevalence of distress in cancer patients is established at approximately 50%, yet uptake of psychosocial support is minimal. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand why clinically distressed oncology patients choose not to access psychosocial support, including whether this differs by geographic location. It also aimed to determine the proportion of rural and metropolitan patients experiencing clinical levels of distress, and of these, the proportion who do not wish to access support. DESIGN: The study used a cross-sectional design. Two hundred and ninety-eight Australian cancer patients completed an online survey, including the Distress Thermometer and open-ended questions about reasons for declining support. Descriptive statistics and content analysis were used to analyse the data. FINDINGS: More than half (56%) of participants reported experiencing clinically significant levels of distress. Of these, almost half (47%) declined psychosocial support. Content analysis of reasons for declining psychosocial support resulted in six main concepts: I don't need support; I'm using personal resources to cope; negative perceptions and attitudes; life doesn't stop for cancer; I'm focussed on fighting cancer; and systemic barriers. Rural cancer patients most often indicated using personal resources to cope, while metropolitan participants most commonly indicated not needing support. A range of subconcepts were also identified. Perceiving distress as manageable or transient was almost exclusively reported by metropolitan participants, while stigma was almost exclusively reported by rural participants. DISCUSSION: The findings provided greater depth of insight into reasons cancer patients decline psychosocial support and identified several qualitative differences in the reasons provided by metropolitan and rural patients. Recommendations are provided for clinicians, in particular for clinicians who work with rural cancer patients and their supporters. CONCLUSION: These findings can inform equitable resourcing of psychosocial support in rural areas and the adaptation of psychosocial interventions to be more flexible and responsive to individual needs. This may help increase patient uptake of support, particularly in rural areas.
