Effectiveness of a computer-facilitated intervention on improving provider delivery of tobacco treatment in a thoracic surgery and oncology outpatient setting: A pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Effective tobacco treatments are available but are often not delivered to individuals with an actual or potential diagnosis of thoracic malignancy. The specific aims of this study were to identify the prevalence of tobacco use and examine the effectiveness of the Clinical and community Effort Against Smoking and secondhand smoke Exposure (CEASE), a system-level computer-facilitated intervention, to improve provider delivery of tobacco treatment in a thoracic surgery and oncology outpatient setting. METHODS: A pre-post-test design was used to assess the effectiveness of CEASE. A 3-step approach was used to integrate tobacco treatment into routine care: ask about tobacco use, assist with cessation, and refer to a quitline. An end-of-visit survey was conducted to collect prevalence of tobacco use and delivery of tobacco treatment. Descriptive statistics and Fisher's exact test were used for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 218 individuals were enrolled; 105 participants were in usual care (UC) and 113 were in the CEASE group. Of those who enrolled, 27.6% were never smokers in UC and 27.7% in CEASE, 60% were former smokers in UC and 50% in CEASE, and 12.4% were current smokers in UC and 21.4% in CEASE. Significant differences were noted in delivery of tobacco treatment with 15.4% having received tobacco treatment in UC compared to 62.5% in CEASE (p<0.004). CONCLUSIONS: A computer-facilitated intervention increased provider delivery of tobacco treatment in a thoracic surgery and oncology outpatient setting. This intervention provided a low-resource approach that has the potential to be scaled and implemented more broadly.

A qualitative analysis of algorithm-based decision support usability testing for symptom management across the trajectory of cancer care: one size does not fit all.

BACKGROUND: Adults with cancer experience symptoms that change across the disease trajectory. Due to the distress and cost associated with uncontrolled symptoms, improving symptom management is an important component of quality cancer care. Clinical decision support (CDS) is a promising strategy to integrate clinical practice guideline (CPG)-based symptom management recommendations at the point of care. METHODS: The objectives of this project were to develop and evaluate the usability of two symptom management algorithms (constipation and fatigue) across the trajectory of cancer care in patients with active disease treated in comprehensive or community cancer care settings to surveillance of cancer survivors in primary care practices. A modified ADAPTE process was used to develop algorithms based on national CPGs. Usability testing involved semi-structured interviews with clinicians from varied care settings, including comprehensive and community cancer centers, and primary care. The transcripts were analyzed with MAXQDA using Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis method. A cross tabs analysis was also performed to assess the prevalence of themes and subthemes by cancer care setting. RESULTS: A total of 17 clinicians (physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants) were interviewed for usability testing. Three main themes emerged: (1) Algorithms as useful, (2) Symptom management differences, and (3) Different target end-users. The cross-tabs analysis demonstrated differences among care trajectories and settings that originated in the Symptom management differences theme. The sub-themes of "Differences between diseases" and "Differences between care trajectories" originated from participants working in a comprehensive cancer center, which tends to be disease-specific locations for patients on active treatment. Meanwhile, participants from primary care identified the sub-theme of "Differences in settings," indicating that symptom management strategies are care setting specific. CONCLUSIONS: While CDS can help promote evidence-based symptom management, systems providing care recommendations need to be specifically developed to fit patient characteristics and clinical context. Findings suggest that one set of algorithms will not be applicable throughout the entire cancer trajectory. Unique CDS for symptom management will be needed for patients who are cancer survivors being followed in primary care settings.

Dyspnea-Related Dimensions And Self-Efficacy: Associations With Well-Being in Advanced Lung Cancer.

CONTEXT: Dyspnea is a complex, multidimensional symptom comprising sensory-perceptual, affective, and functional domains that commonly persists in patients with lung cancer and impairs mental health and quality of life (QOL). However, data are lacking on how dyspnea's dimensions or self-efficacy to manage dyspnea are associated with patient outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To assess the associations of dyspnea dimensions (dyspnea-related sensory-perceptual experience, affective distress, and functional impact) and dyspnea self-efficacy with depression, anxiety, and QOL in patients with advanced lung cancer reporting dyspnea. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of baseline clinical trial data testing a supportive care intervention for dyspnea. Patients with advanced lung cancer reporting at least moderate dyspnea (≥2 on the Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale) self-reported dyspnea and patient outcome measures. Hierarchical regressions tested the associations of the dyspnea dimensions with depressive and anxiety symptoms (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) and QOL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung) while adjusting for variables known to affect these outcomes. RESULTS: The sensory-perceptual experience of dyspnea (effort) was associated with worse depressive symptoms (b = 0.21, P < 0.01) and QOL (b = -0.53, P = 0.01). Dyspnea self-efficacy was associated with improved depressive (b = -1.26, P < 0.01) and anxiety symptoms (b = -1.72, P < 0.01) and QOL (b = 3.66, P < 0.01). The affective and functional dimensions of dyspnea were not associated with the patient outcomes in the final models. CONCLUSIONS: Dyspnea-related sensory-perceptual experience and self-efficacy were associated with mental health and QOL outcomes in patients with lung cancer. Examining the individual contributions of dyspnea's multiple dimensions provides a nuanced understanding of its patient impact.

Predictors of Nicotine Replacement Therapy Adherence: Mixed-Methods Research With a Convergent Parallel Design.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined the effect of baseline attitudes toward nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) on its actual adherence in a smoking cessation intervention. PURPOSE: This study (i) examined the predictability of baseline variables (quantitative data) on NRT adherence and (ii) explored the congruence of participants' statements about NRT products (qualitative data) during counseling sessions with their baseline attitudes. METHODS: This is a mixed-methods research study using a convergent parallel design. Participants included 74 individuals in the treatment group who received behavioral counseling and combination NRT. A Poisson regression analysis was performed to identify baseline variables predicting NRT adherence. Thematic analysis was completed with a subset of participants (n = 38) who varied in NRT attitude scores and adherence. A joint display was created to integrate quantitative and qualitative data and discover convergence. RESULTS: Approximately 59% of the participants (41/74) used NRT continuously for ≥5 weeks. Having negative attitudes toward NRT and depressive symptoms predicted NRT adherence even after controlling for education and anxiety symptoms. Thematic analysis revealed that NRT adherence is a learning process that consists of the following three distinctive but interrelated phases: (i) information needs, (ii) comprehensive readiness, and (iii) experiential learning. Of the 38 participants, 34 (89.5%) showed convergence between baseline attitude scores and statements about NRT made during counseling sessions. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals who have negative attitudes toward NRT are less likely to use the products in a smoking cessation intervention. Counselors should assess attitudes toward NRT at baseline and address them proactively during counseling sessions.

Few research studies have explored how attitudes toward nicotine substitutes (nicotine patches, gum, and lozenges) affect people's adherence to those substitutes (using them consistently as directed). This study examined (i) whether age, gender, education, attitudes toward the substitutes, and depressive and anxiety symptoms would predict peoples' adherence to these nicotine substitutes during a study to help stop smoking and (ii) whether peoples' statements about their experiences with the substitutes would reveal any patterns. The study was conducted with 74 individuals who received behavioral counseling and combination nicotine substitutes. Having negative attitudes toward the substitutes and depressive symptoms predicted adherence. Age, gender, education, positive attitudes, and anxiety symptoms did not. Statements from a subset of participants (n = 38) revealed that adherence to the substitutes is a learning process that consists of the following three phases: (i) needing more information assuring the safety of the substitutes, (ii) being mentally and situationally ready, and (iii) learning while being involved in the process such as "trial and error." Individuals who have negative attitudes toward the substitutes are less likely to use them, and counselors should assess attitudes toward nicotine replacement therapy before suggesting their use and address these attitudes proactively during smoking cessation counseling sessions.

Common and distinct risk factors that influence more severe and distressing shortness of breath profiles in oncology outpatients.

BACKGROUND: Shortness of breath occurs in 10%-70% of oncology patients. Very little is known about interindividual variability in its severity and distress and associated risk factors. Using latent profile analyses (LPAs), purpose was to identify subgroups of patients with distinct severity and distress profiles for shortness of breath as single symptom dimensions. In addition, a joint LPA was done using patients' severity AND distress ratings. For each of the three LPAs, differences among the shortness of breath classes in demographic, clinical, symptom, stress, and resilience characteristics were evaluated. METHODS: Patients completed ratings of severity and distress from shortness of breath a total of six times over two cycles of chemotherapy. All of the other measures were completed at enrollment (i.e., prior to the second or third cycle of chemotherapy). Separate LPAs were done using ratings of severity and distress, as well as a joint analysis using severity AND distress ratings. Differences among the latent classes were evaluated using parametric and nonparametric tests. RESULTS: For severity, two classes were identified (Slight to Moderate [91.6%] and Moderate to Severe [8.4%]). For distress, two classes were identified (A Little Bit to Somewhat [83.9%] and Somewhat to Quite a Bit [16.1%]). For the joint LPA, two classes were identified (Lower Severity and Distress [79.9%] and Higher Severity and Distress [20.1%]). While distinct risk factors were associated with each of the LPAs, across the three LPAs, the common risk factors associated with membership in the worse class included: a past or current history of smoking, poorer functional status, and higher comorbidity burden. In addition, these patients had a higher symptom burden and higher levels of cancer-specific stress. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians can use the information provided in this study to identify high-risk patients and develop individualized interventions.

Barriers, facilitators, and recommendations for sexual orientation and gender identity data collection in community oncology practices.

BACKGROUND: Sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) data collection in community oncology practices is critical to identify and address cancer inequities, but less than 20% of NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP)-affiliated practices regularly collect SOGI data despite widespread recommendations. We evaluated multilevel barriers and facilitators for SOGI data collection at NCORP practices. METHODS: We conducted 14 semi-structured interviews at seven purposefully sampled NCORP oncology practices. We interviewed one clinician (oncologist, advanced practice provider) and one clinic staff member per practice. Thematic analysis informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was conducted to identify barriers and facilitators. RESULTS: Thematic saturation occurred after interviews at six practices and was confirmed with interviews at an additional practice. Participants highlighted multilevel barriers including low levels of understanding, information technology infrastructure, and perceived low relative priority. Not understanding the role of SOGI data in oncology care contributed to cis-heteronormative culture. At the clinic level, this culture coincided with a lack of processes and policies for collecting SOGI from all patients. At the care team level, perceived irrelevance to oncology care was related to discomfort asking SOGI, fear of patient discomfort, and limited awareness of SOGI in electronic health records. Suggested solutions included: normalizing asking SOGI questions, giving patients privacy to complete SOGI, and clarifying clinical relevance. CONCLUSIONS: SOGI data collection barriers stemmed from perceptions that SOGI disclosure does not influence care quality. Oncology teams may benefit from training on culturally sensitive SOGI collection, education on SOGI data relevance to oncology practices, and support for implementing SOGI data collection policies.

Neighborhood Deprivation and Rurality Associated With Patient-Reported Outcomes and Survival in Men With Prostate Cancer in NRG Oncology RTOG 0415.

PURPOSE: Rurality and neighborhood deprivation can contribute to poor patient-reported outcomes, which have not been systematically evaluated in patients with specific cancers in national trials. Our objective was to examine the effect of rurality and neighborhood socioeconomic and environmental deprivation on patient-reported outcomes and survival in men with prostate cancer in NRG Oncology RTOG 0415. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Data from men with prostate cancer in trial NRG Oncology RTOG 0415 were analyzed; 1,092 men were randomized to receive conventional radiation therapy or hypofractionated radiation therapy. Rurality was categorized as urban or rural. Neighborhood deprivation was assessed using the area deprivation index and air pollution indicators (nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter with a diameter less than 2.5 micrometers) via patient ZIP codes. Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite measured cancer-specific quality of life. The Hopkins symptom checklist measured anxiety and depression. EuroQoL-5 Dimension assessed general health. RESULTS: We analyzed 751 patients in trial NRG Oncology RTOG 0415. At baseline, patients from the most deprived neighborhoods had worse bowel (P = .011), worse sexual (P = .042), and worse hormonal (P = .015) scores; patients from the most deprived areas had worse self-care (P = .04) and more pain (P = .047); and patients from rural areas had worse urinary (P = .03) and sexual (P = .003) scores versus patients from urban areas. Longitudinal analyses showed that the 25% most deprived areas (P = .004) and rural areas (P = .002) were associated with worse EuroQoL-5 Dimension visual analog scale score. Patients from urban areas (hazard ratio, 1.81; P = .033) and the 75% less-deprived neighborhoods (hazard ratio, 0.68; P = .053) showed relative decrease in risk of recurrence or death (disease-free survival). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with prostate cancer from the most deprived neighborhoods and rural areas had low quality of life at baseline, poor general health longitudinally, and worse disease-free survival. Interventions should screen populations from deprived neighborhoods and rural areas to improve patient access to supportive care services.

A scoping review on the nurse scientist role within healthcare systems.

BACKGROUND: The role of the nurse scientist in the clinical setting is not well defined, which contributes to variability in role implementation, scope, administration, funding, and affiliation across healthcare sites. AIMS: The aim of this scoping review was to identify attributes of the clinical nurse scientist role and its operationalization in the clinical setting through available evidence. METHODS: A comprehensive, computerized search of the literature in PubMed, Medline, and CINAHL was conducted in early May 2020 by a medical research librarian and repeated in July 2021 and April 2022. The 5-step framework described by Arskey and O'Malley guided the review methodology. Two reviewers conducted an independent screen of all articles, followed by a full-text review of eligible articles by two independent reviewers each using a standardized data extraction template. Themes were then organized and synthesized using descriptive content analysis from the included articles. RESULTS: A final sample of 55 full-text articles were included in the review. Overall, the findings suggest that the nurse scientist role in a clinical setting can be challenging to implement in complex healthcare environments. Successful models include the nurse scientist in a leadership role, alignment of research with institutional priorities, and strong support from senior leadership. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: Findings suggest that standardized guidelines are lacking to govern the implementation of the nurse scientist role in the clinical setting. To succeed, the nurse scientist role must be valued and supported by organizational leaders. Further, access to resources to build infrastructure must be provided. The magnitude and scope of individual organizational support can be tailored based on the resources of the institution; however, the foundation of having institutional leadership support is critical to role success of the clinical nurse researcher.

Protocol for a randomized controlled trial of the Enhanced Smoking Cessation Approach to Promote Empowerment (ESCAPE) digitalized intervention to promote lung health in high-risk individuals who smoke.

Low dose computed tomography (LDCT) is an effective screening test to decrease lung cancer deaths. Lung cancer screening may be a teachable moment helping people who smoke to quit, which may result in increased benefit of screening. Innovative strategies are needed to engage high-risk individuals in learning about LDCT screening. More precise methods such as polygenic risk scores quantify genetic predisposition to tobacco use, and optimize lung health interventions. We present the ESCAPE (Enhanced Smoking Cessation Approach to Promote Empowerment) protocol. This study will test a smoking cessation intervention using personal stories and a lung cancer screening decision-aide compared to standard care (brief advice, referral to a quit line, and a lung cancer screening decision-aide), examine the relationship between a polygenic risk score and smoking abstinence, and describe perceptions about integration of genomic information into smoking cessation treatment. A randomized controlled trial followed by a sequential explanatory mixed methods approach will compare the efficacy of the interventions. Interviews will add insight into the use of genomic information and risk perceptions to tailor smoking cessation treatment. Two-hundred and fifty individuals will be recruited from primary care, community-based organizations, mailing lists and through social media. Data will be collected at baseline, 1, 3 and 6-months. The primary outcomes are 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence and stage of lung cancer screening at 6-months. The results from this study will provide information to refine the ESCAPE intervention and facilitate integration of precision health into future lung health interventions. Clinical trial registration number: NCT0469129T.

Translation of Evidence-Based Interventions Into Oncology Care Settings: An Integrative Review.

BACKGROUND: Adoption of evidence remains slow, leading to variations in practices and quality of care. Examining evidence-based interventions implemented within oncology settings can guide knowledge translation efforts. OBJECTIVE: This integrative review aimed to (1) identify topics implemented for oncology-related evidence-based practice (EBP) change; (2) describe frameworks, guidelines, and implementation strategies used to guide change; and (3) evaluate project quality. METHODS: PubMed and CINAHL were searched to identify published practice change projects. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines were followed. Fifty articles met the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted; content analysis was conducted. The Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set guided quality assessment. RESULTS: Topics included infection control/prevention (n = 18), pain/palliative care (n = 13), psychosocial assessment (n = 11), and medication adherence (n = 8). Among the projects, Plan, Do, Study, Act (n = 8) and Lean Six Sigma (n = 6) frameworks were used most. Thirty-six projects identified guidelines that directed interventions. Multiple implementation strategies were reported in all articles with planning, education, and restructuring the most common. Reach, sustainability, and ability to be replicated were identified as quality gaps across projects. CONCLUSION: The EBP topics that emerged are consistent with the oncology nursing priorities, including facilitating integration of EBP into practice. The studies identified used national guidelines and implementation strategies to move evidence into practice. Heterogeneity in measurement made synthesis of findings difficult across studies, although individual studies showed improvement in patient outcomes. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Development of an interprofessional oncology consortium could facilitate a standardized approach to implementation of high-priority topics that target improved patient outcomes, harmonize measures, and accelerate translation of evidence into practice.

Feasibility of collecting computer-facilitated patient-reported tobacco use, interest, and preferences for smoking cessation in an outpatient thoracic surgery and oncology setting.

INTRODUCTION: Effective strategies are needed to facilitate collection of tobacco use information and integrate smoking cessation treatment into the routine care of all high-risk patient populations to improve clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to establish the feasibility of collecting computer-facilitated patient-reported tobacco use, identify patient interest and preferences for smoking cessation in an outpatient thoracic surgery and oncology setting with higher prevalence of tobacco use than the general population. METHODS: A brief patient-administered tobacco screening survey was handed out on an iPad in the waiting room of a thoracic surgery and oncology practice setting to sequential patients with varying diagnoses. Tobacco use, household exposure to tobacco, and interest and preferences for smoking cessation treatment were recorded. Descriptive statistics and Pearson's chi-squared test were used for analysis. RESULTS: Of the 599 surveys administered, 594 (99%) were completed. Self-reported smoking status included 36.4% (n=218) never smokers, 53.3% (n=319) former smokers, and 10.4% (n=62) current smokers. Among current smokers, 45.2% (n=28) were interested in receiving smoking cessation treatment. Preferences for treatment included: 21.4% (n=6) who wanted Quitline only, 25% (n=7) medication alone, and 53.6% (n=15) combined Quitline plus medication. Current smokers (55.7%, n=34) were more likely to live in households with tobacco exposure compared to those with former (11.4%, n=36) or never smokers (8.3%, n=18) (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing a computer-facilitated system to screen for current smoking and provide smoking cessation services was feasible in the outpatient thoracic surgery and oncology setting. Almost half of the smokers indicated an interest in receipt of smoking cessation treatment. Household exposure was more frequent among current smokers, therefore routine screening for secondhand smoke exposure from other household members is an important consideration in developing smoking cessation treatment plans to mitigate health risks among vulnerable patient populations.

Proceedings of the Survivorship Care in Neuro-Oncology Workshop sponsored by the Comprehensive Oncology Network Evaluating Rare CNS Tumors (NCI-CONNECT).

Background: Survivorship for those living with primary CNS cancers begins at diagnosis, continues throughout a person's life, and includes caregivers. Opportunities and challenges exist to advance survivorship care for those living with primary CNS cancers that necessitate stakeholder involvement. Methods: In June 2021, NCI-CONNECT convened a two-day virtual workshop about survivorship care in neuro-oncology. Two expert panels provided key recommendations and five working groups considered critical questions to identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to the advancement of survivorship care and developed recommendations and action items. Results: The following action items emanated from the workshop: seek endorsement of meeting report from stakeholder organizations; address barriers in access to survivorship care and provider reimbursement; advance survivorship research through NIH and private grant support; develop a survivorship tool kit for providers, people living with primary CNS cancers and their caregivers; provide accessible educational content for neuro-oncology, neurology, and oncology community providers about survivorship care in neuro-oncology; and establish core competencies for survivorship care for neuro-oncology providers to be included in training and standardized exams. Conclusions: Action items aim to address access and reimbursement barriers, expand patient and provider education, develop core competencies, and support survivorship research through funding and other supports.

Developing and Field Testing BOLSTER: A Nurse-Led Care Management Intervention to Support Patients and Caregivers following Hospitalization for Gynecologic Cancer-Associated Peritoneal Carcinomatosis.

Introduction: Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) afflicts women with advanced gynecologic cancers. Patients with PC often require ostomies, gastric tubes, or catheters to palliate symptoms, yet patients and caregivers report feeling unprepared to manage these devices. The purpose of this study was to develop and field test the Building Out Lifelines for Safety, Trust, Empowerment, and Renewal (BOLSTER) intervention to support patients and their caregivers after hospitalization for PC. Materials and Methods: We adapted components of the Standard Nursing Intervention Protocol with stakeholders and topical experts. We developed educational content; built a smartphone application to assess patients' symptoms; and assessed preliminary feasibility and acceptability in two single-arm prepilot studies. Eligible participants were English-speaking adults hospitalized for gynecologic cancer-associated PC and their caregivers. Feasibility criteria were a ≥50% consent-to-approach ratio and ≥80% outcome measure completion. The acceptability criterion was ≥70% of participants recommending BOLSTER. Results: During the first prepilot, BOLSTER was a 10-week intervention. While 7/8 (87.5%) approached patients consented, we experienced high attrition to hospice. Less than half of patients (3/7) and caregivers (3/7) completed outcome measures. For the second prepilot, BOLSTER was a four-week intervention. All (7/7) approached patients consented. Two withdrew before participating in any study activity because they were "too overwhelmed." We excluded data from one caregiver who completed baseline measures with the patient's assistance. All remaining patients (5/5) and caregivers (4/4) completed outcome measures and recommended BOLSTER. Conclusion: BOLSTER is a technology-enhanced, nurse-led intervention that is feasible and acceptable to patients with gynecologic cancer-associated PC and their caregivers.

Oncology Nursing Symptom Science: Overview of the NINR, ONS, and NCI Symptom Science Colloquium.

This article provides an overview of the process, development, and evaluation of the Symptom Science Colloquium sponsored by the National Institute of Nursing Research, Oncology Nursing Society (ONS), and National Cancer Institute. This colloquium was the first of its kind to leverage the common goals of these institutes to advance oncology symptom science. Specifically, this article will identify the goals of the agencies involved and synergy in forming this collaboration, review the ONS Research Agenda that provided the blueprint for the colloquium, and offer insights and lessons learned to be used for future planning. The colloquium engaged roughly 500 participants from all levels of clinical (RNs, advanced practice nurses), educational (undergraduate, master's, doctorate), and research (students, faculty, scientists) expertise. Six featured expert speakers and 115 poster presentations focused on the latest research in symptom science, cancer survivorship, palliative and end-of-life care, and hot topics (COVID-19, health disparities). Fourteen networking sessions fostered opportunities to engage with international experts. Special awards emphasized mentee-mentor relationships and exemplary midcareer faculty. Based on this emphasis, the authors provide themes from the successful award applications as exemplars. A summary of participant satisfaction and recommendations for future collaborations to enhance and advance oncology symptom science are provided.

Development of a psychosocial oncology core curriculum for multidisciplinary education and training: Initial content validation using the modified Delphi Method.

OBJECTIVE: Despite its four decade history, the multidisciplinary specialty of psychosocial oncology (PSO) has no official consensus on core content. In 2014, the American Psychosocial Oncology Society (APOS) Board charged the APOS Professional Education Committee with outlining curricular content needed for core competence. METHODS: Content validation was completed using a four-phase modified Delphi Method. During Phase I, a Professional Education Committee subgroup proposed domains and items, which were rated by the APOS Fellows and Board via online survey. During Phase II, Fellows completed a second, revised survey. Phase III incorporated early career members. Developmental and diversity items were integrated into each domain. In Phase IV, a larger group of subject matter experts were surveyed, with feedback incorporated. Validation across phases involved average rating thresholds, intraclass correlations, and final percent agreement. RESULTS: The Delphi Method supported 12 content domains: Cancer Basics, Psychosocial Oncology, Professional Development, Ethics, Emotional/Psychological Concerns, Sexuality and Relationship Concerns, Spiritual/Religious Concerns, Healthcare Communication and Decision Making, Social/Practical Problems, Caregiver Concerns, Cognitive Concerns, Physical Symptoms and Psychosocial Assessment/Treatment. High levels of agreement were achieved across domains (86%-100%) and items, with no significant rating differences by discipline. CONCLUSIONS: This proposed core content can enhance and standardize education and training in PSO including APOS' Virtual Psychosocial Oncology Core Curriculum, focused on broadly expanding the PSO workforce, particularly in underserved areas. Next steps include development of core competencies and establishment of online training modules based on this content validation.

Digital Health Information Disparities in Older Adults: a Mixed Methods Study.

Important health information including disease prevention and chronic disease self-management is increasingly packaged for digital use. The purpose of this sequential explanatory mixed methods study was to describe the extent of computer ownership, Internet access, and digital health information use in an ethnically diverse sample of older adults, comparing ownership, access, and use of digital health information (DHI) across ethnic groups and identifying the factors associated with them quantitatively. Significant differences in computer ownership, Internet access, and DHI use were found across ethnic groups (African American, Afro-Caribbean, Hispanic American, and European American). Logistic regression identified older age, less education, lower income, and minority group membership as significant predictors of limited DHI use. Older African Americans were one-fifth as likely to own a computer than were European Americans; Hispanic Americans were one-half as likely to have access to the Internet. We then conducted a series of focus groups which highlighted differences across ethnic groups. Participants in the African American/Afro-Caribbean group expressed frustration with lack of access to DHI but appreciation for alternative sources of information. Hispanic Americans critiqued information received from providers and drug inserts, some suggesting that a positive attitude and trust in God also contributed to getting well. European American participants evaluated various DHI websites, looking to providers for help in applying information to their personal situation. As the development and use of DHI continue, parallel efforts to increase access to DHI among economically disadvantaged and minority older adults are critical to prevent further disfranchisement.

Clinical Decision Support for Symptom Management in Lung Cancer Patients: A Group RCT.

CONTEXT: Clinical guidelines are available to enhance symptom management during cancer treatment but often are not used in the practice setting. Clinical decision support can facilitate the implementation and adherence to clinical guidelines. and improve the quality of cancer care. OBJECTIVES: Clinical decision support offers an innovative approach to integrate guideline-based symptom management into oncology care. This study evaluated the effect of clinical decision support-based recommendations on clinical management of symptoms and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) among outpatients with lung cancer. METHODS: Twenty providers and 179 patients were allotted in group randomization to attention control (AC) or Symptom Assessment and Management Intervention (SAMI) arms. SAMI entailed patient-report of symptoms and delivery of recommendations to manage pain, fatigue, dyspnea, depression, and anxiety; AC entailed symptom reporting prior to the visit. Outcomes were collected at baseline, two, four and six-months. Adherence to recommendations was assessed through masked chart review. HR-QOL was measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung questionnaire. Descriptive statistics with linear and logistic regression accounting for the clustering structure of the design and a modified chi-square test were used for analyses. RESULTS: Median age of patients was 63 years, 58% female, 88% white, and 32% ≤high school education. Significant differences in clinical management were evident in SAMI vs. AC for all target symptoms that passed threshold. Patients in SAMI were more likely to receive sustained-release opioids for constant pain, adjuvant medications for neuropathic pain, opioids for dyspnea, stimulants for fatigue and mental health referrals for anxiety. However, there were no statistically significant differences in HR-QOL at any time point. CONCLUSION: SAMI improved clinical management for all target symptoms but did not improve patient outcomes. A larger study is warranted to evaluate effectiveness.

Update to 2019-2022 ONS Research Agenda: Rapid Review to Address Structural Racism and Health Inequities.

PURPOSE: The Oncology Nursing Society (ONS) formed a team to develop a necessary expansion of the 2019-2022 ONS Research Agenda, with a focus on racism and cancer care disparities. METHODS: A multimethod consensus-building approach was used to develop and refine the research priorities. A panel of oncology nurse scientists and equity scholars with expertise in health disparities conducted a rapid review of the literature, consulted with experts and oncology nurses, and reviewed priorities from funding agencies. RESULTS: Critical gaps in the literature were identified and used to develop priority areas for oncology nursing research, practice, and workforce development. SYNTHESIS: This is the first article in a two-part series that discusses structural racism and health inequities within oncology nursing. In this article, three priority areas for oncology nursing research are presented; in the second article, strategies to improve cancer disparities and equity and diversity in the oncology workforce are described. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Research priorities are presented to inform future research that will provide methods and tools to increase health equity and reduce structural racism in oncology nursing practice, research, education, policy, and advocacy.

Update to 2019-2022 ONS Research Agenda: Rapid Review to Promote Equity in Oncology Healthcare Access and Workforce Development.

PURPOSE: The Oncology Nursing Society (ONS) tasked a rapid response research team (RRRT) to develop priorities to increase diversity, equity, and inclusivity in oncology clinical care and workforce development. METHODS: An RRRT of experts in health disparities conducted a rapid review of the literature, consulted with oncology nurse leaders and disparities researchers, and reviewed priorities from funding agencies. RESULTS: Significant gaps in the current oncology disparities literature were identified and used to inform priority areas for future research practice and workforce development in oncology nursing. SYNTHESIS: This is the second article in a two-part series that presents findings on structural racism and health inequities in oncology nursing. In the first article, three priority areas for oncology nursing research were presented. In this article, strategies to improve diversity, equity, and inclusivity in clinical practice and the oncology workforce are described. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Recommendations are presented to inform research, clinical, administrative, and academic oncology nursing settings on increasing diversity, equity, and inclusivity and deconstructing structural racism.