What happens after distress screening? Patterns of supportive care service utilization among oncology patients identified through a systematic screening protocol

Rachel Funk, Cassidy Cisneros, Rush C. Williams, Jeffrey Kendall, Heidi A. Hamann

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: While distress screening is important for identifying unmet needs of cancer patients, less is known about referral and uptake of supportive care services among distressed patients. The current analysis examined screen-based rates of referral to supportive care and explored demographic and clinical correlates of referral uptake. Methods: We tracked distress screens completed by a varied group of cancer patients receiving outpatient care at a National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer center during a 1-month period. Electronic medical record review was used to examine the rates of supportive care referral and uptake among distressed patients. Results: Out of 644 unique screens, 195 (30 %) patients reported significant distress; distressed patients were more likely to be non-white (odds ratio (OR) = 1.71, p <0.01), prescribed psychiatric medication (OR = 1.92, p <0.00), and have no previous contact with the cancer center’s supportive care staff (OR = 1.62, p = 0.01). Thirty-four of these patients pre-emptively declined supportive care contact; thus, 161 were referred for supportive care. Among the 99 patients who received initial assessments by a team member, only 19 (19 %) requested and completed at least one follow-up appointment. Conclusions: Findings from this analysis support earlier work demonstrating significant supportive care needs in cancer patients. However, it challenges the assumption that screening will result in increased uptake of supportive care services beyond initial assessment. Further work should focus on facilitating engagement and reducing barriers for patients with continuing post-assessment supportive care needs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2861-2868
Number of pages8
JournalSupportive Care in Cancer
Volume24
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2016

Fingerprint

Referral and Consultation
Odds Ratio
Neoplasms
National Cancer Institute (U.S.)
Electronic Health Records
Ambulatory Care
Psychiatry
Appointments and Schedules
Demography

Keywords

  • Cancer
  • Distress screening
  • Psychooncology
  • Supportive care

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology

Cite this

What happens after distress screening? Patterns of supportive care service utilization among oncology patients identified through a systematic screening protocol. / Funk, Rachel; Cisneros, Cassidy; Williams, Rush C.; Kendall, Jeffrey; Hamann, Heidi A.

In: Supportive Care in Cancer, Vol. 24, No. 7, 01.07.2016, p. 2861-2868.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{42098fb805b04aac8a670817feac1ef6,
title = "What happens after distress screening? Patterns of supportive care service utilization among oncology patients identified through a systematic screening protocol",
abstract = "Purpose: While distress screening is important for identifying unmet needs of cancer patients, less is known about referral and uptake of supportive care services among distressed patients. The current analysis examined screen-based rates of referral to supportive care and explored demographic and clinical correlates of referral uptake. Methods: We tracked distress screens completed by a varied group of cancer patients receiving outpatient care at a National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer center during a 1-month period. Electronic medical record review was used to examine the rates of supportive care referral and uptake among distressed patients. Results: Out of 644 unique screens, 195 (30 {\%}) patients reported significant distress; distressed patients were more likely to be non-white (odds ratio (OR) = 1.71, p <0.01), prescribed psychiatric medication (OR = 1.92, p <0.00), and have no previous contact with the cancer center’s supportive care staff (OR = 1.62, p = 0.01). Thirty-four of these patients pre-emptively declined supportive care contact; thus, 161 were referred for supportive care. Among the 99 patients who received initial assessments by a team member, only 19 (19 {\%}) requested and completed at least one follow-up appointment. Conclusions: Findings from this analysis support earlier work demonstrating significant supportive care needs in cancer patients. However, it challenges the assumption that screening will result in increased uptake of supportive care services beyond initial assessment. Further work should focus on facilitating engagement and reducing barriers for patients with continuing post-assessment supportive care needs.",
keywords = "Cancer, Distress screening, Psychooncology, Supportive care",
author = "Rachel Funk and Cassidy Cisneros and Williams, {Rush C.} and Jeffrey Kendall and Hamann, {Heidi A.}",
year = "2016",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00520-016-3099-0",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "2861--2868",
journal = "Supportive Care in Cancer",
issn = "0941-4355",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What happens after distress screening? Patterns of supportive care service utilization among oncology patients identified through a systematic screening protocol

AU - Funk, Rachel

AU - Cisneros, Cassidy

AU - Williams, Rush C.

AU - Kendall, Jeffrey

AU - Hamann, Heidi A.

PY - 2016/7/1

Y1 - 2016/7/1

N2 - Purpose: While distress screening is important for identifying unmet needs of cancer patients, less is known about referral and uptake of supportive care services among distressed patients. The current analysis examined screen-based rates of referral to supportive care and explored demographic and clinical correlates of referral uptake. Methods: We tracked distress screens completed by a varied group of cancer patients receiving outpatient care at a National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer center during a 1-month period. Electronic medical record review was used to examine the rates of supportive care referral and uptake among distressed patients. Results: Out of 644 unique screens, 195 (30 %) patients reported significant distress; distressed patients were more likely to be non-white (odds ratio (OR) = 1.71, p <0.01), prescribed psychiatric medication (OR = 1.92, p <0.00), and have no previous contact with the cancer center’s supportive care staff (OR = 1.62, p = 0.01). Thirty-four of these patients pre-emptively declined supportive care contact; thus, 161 were referred for supportive care. Among the 99 patients who received initial assessments by a team member, only 19 (19 %) requested and completed at least one follow-up appointment. Conclusions: Findings from this analysis support earlier work demonstrating significant supportive care needs in cancer patients. However, it challenges the assumption that screening will result in increased uptake of supportive care services beyond initial assessment. Further work should focus on facilitating engagement and reducing barriers for patients with continuing post-assessment supportive care needs.

AB - Purpose: While distress screening is important for identifying unmet needs of cancer patients, less is known about referral and uptake of supportive care services among distressed patients. The current analysis examined screen-based rates of referral to supportive care and explored demographic and clinical correlates of referral uptake. Methods: We tracked distress screens completed by a varied group of cancer patients receiving outpatient care at a National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer center during a 1-month period. Electronic medical record review was used to examine the rates of supportive care referral and uptake among distressed patients. Results: Out of 644 unique screens, 195 (30 %) patients reported significant distress; distressed patients were more likely to be non-white (odds ratio (OR) = 1.71, p <0.01), prescribed psychiatric medication (OR = 1.92, p <0.00), and have no previous contact with the cancer center’s supportive care staff (OR = 1.62, p = 0.01). Thirty-four of these patients pre-emptively declined supportive care contact; thus, 161 were referred for supportive care. Among the 99 patients who received initial assessments by a team member, only 19 (19 %) requested and completed at least one follow-up appointment. Conclusions: Findings from this analysis support earlier work demonstrating significant supportive care needs in cancer patients. However, it challenges the assumption that screening will result in increased uptake of supportive care services beyond initial assessment. Further work should focus on facilitating engagement and reducing barriers for patients with continuing post-assessment supportive care needs.

KW - Cancer

KW - Distress screening

KW - Psychooncology

KW - Supportive care

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84971013872&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84971013872&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00520-016-3099-0

DO - 10.1007/s00520-016-3099-0

M3 - Article

C2 - 26838023

AN - SCOPUS:84971013872

VL - 24

SP - 2861

EP - 2868

JO - Supportive Care in Cancer

JF - Supportive Care in Cancer

SN - 0941-4355

IS - 7

ER -