BACKGROUND This study reports cancer‐treating institutions' capacity to deliver comprehensive psychosocial support services. METHODS Oncology care providers at 60 cancer‐treating institutions completed surveys assessing the capacity of their institutions to provide psychosocial care. Capacity was assessed with the Cancer Psychosocial Care Matrix (CPCM) from the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Scores represented individuals' perceptions of their cancer program's performance with respect to 10 fundamental elements of psychosocial care. RESULTS Among 2134 respondents, 62% reported a mid‐level capacity for ≥5 of 10 CPCM items. In comparison with other types of cancer programs (eg, NCI‐designated, academic, or comprehensive centers), providers at community cancer programs reported a significantly greater capacity with respect to patient‐provider communication, psychosocial needs assessment, and continuity in the delivery of psychosocial care over time. Nurses and primary medical providers reported a significantly lower capacity for linking patients and families with needed psychosocial services within their respective cancer programs. They also reported a significantly higher capacity for conducting follow‐up, re‐evaluations, and adjustments of psychosocial treatment plans. CONCLUSIONS Cancer programs are performing moderately well in terms of communicating to patients the importance of psychosocial care, identifying patient psychosocial needs, and referring patients and families to psychosocial services. They are doing less well with respect to the provision of that care over time. Findings suggest that gaps in psychosocial service capacity are a function of patient, provider, and system characteristics. These results may be useful in formulating strategies to enhance psychosocial care delivery. Cancer 2016;122:1937–45. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

ObjectiveImplementing evidence-based practices requires a multi-faceted approach. Electronic clinical decision support (ECDS) tools may encourage evidence-based practice adoption. However, data regarding the role of mobile ECDS tools in pediatrics is scant. Our objective is to describe the development, distribution, and usage patterns of a smartphone-based ECDS tool within a national practice standardization project.Materials and MethodsWe developed a smartphone-based ECDS tool for use in the American Academy of Pediatrics, Value in Inpatient Pediatrics Network project entitled “Reducing Excessive Variation in the Infant Sepsis Evaluation (REVISE).” The mobile application (app), PedsGuide, was developed using evidence-based recommendations created by an interdisciplinary panel. App workflow and content were aligned with clinical benchmarks; app interface was adjusted after usability heuristic review. Usage patterns were measured using Google Analytics.ResultsOverall, 3805 users across the United States downloaded PedsGuide from December 1, 2016, to July 31, 2017, leading to 14 256 use sessions (average 3.75 sessions per user). Users engaged in 60 442 screen views, including 37 424 (61.8%) screen views that displayed content related to the REVISE clinical practice benchmarks, including hospital admission appropriateness (26.8%), length of hospitalization (14.6%), and diagnostic testing recommendations (17.0%). Median user touch depth was 5 [IQR 5].DiscussionWe observed rapid dissemination and in-depth engagement with PedsGuide, demonstrating feasibility for using smartphone-based ECDS tools within national practice improvement projects.ConclusionsECDS tools may prove valuable in future national practice standardization initiatives. Work should next focus on developing robust analytics to determine ECDS tools’ impact on medical decision making, clinical practice, and health outcomes.

PURPOSE: Literature on moral distress among oncology social workers (OSWs) is sparse. The aim of the current study was to examine the prevalence of moral distress and its domains of influence, and to identify demographic and work-related characteristics associated with moral distress among OSWs. METHODS: Data came from the Oncology Social Work Competencies, Opportunities, Roles, and Expertise survey, conducted from August to September 2020 (during the COVID-19 global pandemic). Data collected included demographic information (eg, age, sex, and race) and work-related characteristics (eg, job position, organization type, work setting, employment status, salary, years in the profession, and OSW-C certification). Moral distress was measured using the Measure of Moral Distress for Healthcare Professionals. Tests of association, including multivariate linear regression, were conducted to achieve the research aims. RESULTS: Total moral distress scores on the Measure of Moral Distress for Healthcare Professionals (range 0-432) for 745 OSWs ranged from 1 to 273, with an average score of 74.0. The three highest indicators of moral distress were observed in the patient or family experience domain. Higher levels of moral distress were associated with younger age, being a direct service provider, provision of inpatient cancer care, and more years in the profession. CONCLUSION: OSWs are experiencing moral distress. Institutional investments in professional education and support of OSWs are needed to mitigate and possibly prevent moral distress experienced by cancer care providers and thus ensure the delivery of quality psychosocial care for patients with cancer and their families.

No abstract

No abstract