Interventions to improve screening and appropriate referral of patients with cancer for psychosocial distress: systematic review

Abstract

ObjectivesThe primary aim of the review was to determine the effectiveness of strategies to improve clinician provision of psychosocial distress screening and referral of patients with cancer.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesElectronic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL)) were searched until July 2016.Inclusion criteriaPopulation: adult patients with cancer and clinical staff members. Intervention: any strategy that aimed to improve the rate of routine screening and referral for detected distress of patients with cancer. Comparison: no intervention controls, ‘usual’ practice or alternative interventions. Outcome: (primary) any measure of provision of screening and/or referral for distress, (secondary) psychosocial distress, unintended adverse effects. Design: trials with or without a temporal comparison group, including randomised and non-randomised trials, and uncontrolled pre–post studies.Data extraction and analysisTwo review authors independently extracted data. Heterogeneity across studies precluded quantitative assessment via meta-analysis and so a narrative synthesis of the results is presented.ResultsFive studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies were set in oncology clinics or departments and used multiple implementation strategies. Using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation, the overall rating of the certainty of the body of evidence reported in this review was assessed as very low. Three studies received a methodological quality rating of weak and two studies received a rating of moderate. Only one of the five studies reported a significant improvement in referrals.ConclusionsThe review identified five studies of predominantly poor quality examining the effectiveness of strategies to improve the routine implementation of distress screening and referral for patients with cancer. Future research using robust research designs, including randomised assignment, are needed to identify effective support strategies to maximise the potential for successful implementation of distress screening and referral for patients with cancer.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42015017518.

The effectiveness of music therapy for patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…Importantly, psychological distress may affect some of the normal functions of patients with cancer, including treatment adherence, QoL, self‐healing ability and overall survival (OS), which can markedly increase a patient's need for treatment and impose a heavy burden on caregivers and on the overall social medical system (Bultz & Carlson, ). Therefore, addressing the distress of patients with cancer as soon as possible is a significant health priority (McCarter et al, ).…”

The role of implementation science in improving distress assessment and management in oncology: a commentary on “Screening for psychosocial distress among patients with cancer: implications for clinical practice, healthcare policy, and dissemination to enhance cancer survivorship”

“…Few studies have evaluated this type of approach. A recent systematic review [10] cited by Ehlers et al [2] identified only five trials of interventions aimed at improving the rate of routine screening and referral for detected distress in patients with cancer. The methodological quality of most of these trials was judged to be weak and only one study reported a significant improvement in referral rates.…”

New challenges in psycho‐oncology: Using drug development methodology to improve survivorship and supportive care intervention trials

“…Although a number of professional organisations recommend the routine screening of cancer patients for emotional distress, this is infrequently conducted as many centres lack suitable psychosocial interventions to offer those identified as being in distress . It is therefore essential to improve the evidence base around specific and effective interventions that can later be incorporated into routine cancer care.…”

“…To provide sufficiently rigorous data supporting the benefit of any survivorship intervention, studies should be sized to allow adequate statistical powering and employ methodologies such as randomisation. Unfortunately, the majority of psychosocial/survivorship intervention studies do not adopt these methodologies due to challenges in funding and recruitment …”