It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Patients with cancer have many psychosocial needs, some of which may be addressed by implementation of a screening tool. However, it is unknown what ultimately happens (i.e., the “care cascade”) to patients following these interventions. The objective of this study was to evaluate the care cascade for patients following the implementation of a psychosocial needs screening tool. This was a prospective cohort study conducted at a university hospital radiation oncology clinic. Participants who were 18 years or older and presenting for their initial radiation oncology appointment were asked to complete a screening survey. From December 2019 to January 2021, 242 patients completed the survey. 70% of patients were seen for consideration of definitive therapy. 62% of patients checked “yes” to at least one item, most commonly supportive/palliative care (33%), exercise/PT (26%) and advance care planning (26%). Among definitive patients, the most common were supportive/palliative care (33%) and exercise/PT (26%). Among palliative patients, the most common were supportive/palliative care (42%) and advance care planning (32%). Participants were followed for 6 months after taking the survey. 74% of patients with a positive screening survey were contacted by a social worker and/or had a new referral placed with 47% of those patients ultimately attending a new appointment. Screening tools are commonly implemented to quickly identify needs in oncology patients. This study tracked patients following this type of intervention to determine what proportion of patients ultimately received care related to the identified need. Despite the majority of patients being referred to a relevant provider, fewer than half ultimately attended appointments. The combination of a screening tool with social work triage may be an effective way to distribute resources and properly route patients to supportive care providers.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Department of Pediatrics, Dallas, USA (GRID:grid.267313.2) (ISNI:0000 0000 9482 7121); Children’s Health, Children’s Medical Center, Dallas, USA (GRID:grid.414196.f) (ISNI:0000 0004 0393 8416)
2 Oregon Health and Science University, Department of Radiation Medicine, Portland, USA (GRID:grid.5288.7) (ISNI:0000 0000 9758 5690)
3 Oregon Health and Science University, Department of Radiation Medicine, Portland, USA (GRID:grid.5288.7) (ISNI:0000 0000 9758 5690); Kaiser Permanente, Department of Radiation Oncology, Portland, USA (GRID:grid.280062.e) (ISNI:0000 0000 9957 7758)