scholarly journals From foundation to inspiration: implementing screening for distress (6th Vital Sign) for optimal cancer care—international leadership perspectives on program development

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. e051
Author(s):  
Barry D. Bultz ◽  
Linda Watson ◽  
Matthew Loscalzo ◽  
Brian Kelly ◽  
James Zabora
2021 ◽  
pp. 801-805
Author(s):  
Barry D. Bultz ◽  
Matthew J. Loscalzo ◽  
Alex J. Mitchell ◽  
Jimmie C. Holland

Multiple studies have demonstrated that cancer patients are likely to encounter complex biopsychosocial distress at time of diagnosis and during treatment, recurrence, and end-of life care. Since the branding of distress as the sixth vital sign, there has been widespread attention to seeing comprehensive biopsychosocial screening and monitoring patient distress as an essential standard of best practice. To date, this standard has been widely accepted globally, endorsed, and now required for institutional cancer care accreditation. This chapter builds on the previous edition of Psycho-Oncology, where Jimmie Holland, considered the founder of psycho-oncology, strongly supported the inclusion of distress screening as a standard of cancer care and made a case for distress being named the sixth vital sign. The implementation of screening for distress as part of patient-reported outcomes would facilitate the timely and appropriate referral for optimal care inclusive of the need for psychosocial support. In addition to the implications for higher-quality and precision supportive care, this chapter will discuss the economic benefits to the institution by implementing standardized distress screening.


2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. e513-e526 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madeline Li ◽  
Alyssa Macedo ◽  
Sean Crawford ◽  
Sabira Bagha ◽  
Yvonne W. Leung ◽  
...  

Purpose: Systematic screening for distress in oncology clinics has gained increasing acceptance as a means to improve cancer care, but its implementation poses enormous challenges. We describe the development and implementation of the Distress Assessment and Response Tool (DART) program in a large urban comprehensive cancer center. Method: DART is an electronic screening tool used to detect physical and emotional distress and practical concerns and is linked to triaged interprofessional collaborative care pathways. The implementation of DART depended on clinician education, technological innovation, transparent communication, and an evaluation framework based on principles of change management and quality improvement. Results: There have been 364,378 DART surveys completed since 2010, with a sustained screening rate of > 70% for the past 3 years. High staff satisfaction, increased perception of teamwork, greater clinical attention to the psychosocial needs of patients, patient-clinician communication, and patient satisfaction with care were demonstrated without a resultant increase in referrals to specialized psychosocial services. DART is now a standard of care for all patients attending the cancer center and a quality performance indicator for the organization. Conclusion: Key factors in the success of DART implementation were the adoption of a programmatic approach, strong institutional commitment, and a primary focus on clinic-based response. We have demonstrated that large-scale routine screening for distress in a cancer center is achievable and has the potential to enhance the cancer care experience for both patients and staff.


2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 727-738 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bejoy C Thomas ◽  
Vasudevanpillai NandaMohan ◽  
Madhavan K Nair ◽  
John W Robinson ◽  
Manoj Pandey

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 180-185
Author(s):  
Jacynthe Rivest ◽  
Véronique Desbaumes Jodoin ◽  
Irène Leboeuf ◽  
Nathalie Folch ◽  
Joé Martineau ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry D. Bultz ◽  
Linda E. Carlson

2013 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. 1249-1261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry D. Bultz ◽  
Amy Waller ◽  
Jodi Cullum ◽  
Paula Jones ◽  
Johan Halland ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie-Claude Blais ◽  
Alexandre St-Hilaire ◽  
Lise Fillion ◽  
Marie De Serres ◽  
Annie Tremblay

AbstractObjective:Implementation of routine Screening for Distress constitutes a major change in cancer care, with the aim of achieving person-centered care.Method:Using a cross-sectional descriptive design within a University Tertiary Care Hospital setting, 911 patients from all cancer sites were screened at the time of their first meeting with a nurse navigator who administered a paper questionnaire that included: the Distress Thermometer (DT), the Canadian Problem Checklist (CPC), and the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS).Results:Results showed a mean score of 3.9 on the DT. Fears/worries, coping with the disease, and sleep were the most common problems reported on the CPC. Tiredness was the most prevalent symptom on the ESAS. A final regression model that included anxiety, the total number of problems on the CPC, well-being, and tiredness accounted for almost 50% of the variance of distress. A cutoff score of 5 on the DT together with a cutoff of 5 on the ESAS items represents the best combination of specificity and sensitivity to orient patients on the basis of their reported distress.Significance of results:These descriptive data will provide valuable feedback to answer practical questions for the purpose of effectively implementing and managing routine screening in cancer care.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document