Search

BackgroundThe emotional health of adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors is compromised both during and after cancer treatment. Targeted programs designed to support AYAs’ ability to cope with stress in the years following treatment completion are lacking. Mind-body programs may ameliorate the negative psychological and emotional effects of stress and assist AYAs with managing the psychosocial challenges of early survivorship. ObjectiveOur randomized waitlist-control trial aims to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a virtual group program (Bounce Back) to promote stress management and resiliency among posttreatment AYAs. MethodsBounce Back is a stress management and resiliency program delivered via videoconference by a trained mental health clinician. Sessions were adapted from an evidence-based mind-body program (Stress Management and Resiliency Training - Relaxation Response Resiliency Program [SMART-3RP]) grounded in relaxation response elicitation, mindfulness, cognitive behavioral therapy, and positive psychology. Seventy-two AYAs (diagnosed with cancer between ages 14 years and 29 years and had completed cancer treatment within the last 5 years) were randomly assigned to the Bounce Back program or waitlist-control group and completed assessments at baseline, 3 months postbaseline, and 6 months postbaseline. The primary aim of the study is to determine the feasibility and acceptability of the Bounce Back program. Descriptive statistics, including means, frequencies, and ranges supplemented by qualitative exit interview feedback will be used to characterize the sample and to summarize feasibility and acceptability. The exploratory aims are to evaluate the preliminary effects of the program on stress coping and psychosocial outcome measures (ie, anxiety, depression) collected across the 3 time points. ResultsThis study was funded by the National Cancer Institute in July 2017. Study procedures were approved by the Dana-Farber Harvard Cancer Center Institutional Review Board in October 2018 (Protocol 18-428). The randomized trial was conducted from July 2019 to March 2021. Quantitative data collection is complete, and qualitative exit interview data collection is ongoing. Results are expected to be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at local, national, or international meetings in the coming years. ConclusionsFew evidence-based programs exist that tackle the key transitional issues faced by AYA cancer survivors. Future analyses will help us determine the feasibility and acceptability of the Bounce Back program and its impact on AYA stress coping and psychological well-being. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03768336; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03768336 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/34033

Objective Parents of children with learning/attentional disabilities (LAD) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are at elevated risk for chronic stress. Types of stress and treatment needs differ between these parent groups. We adapted our evidence-based mind–body intervention (SMART-3RP) for parents of children with LAD and ASD, delivered via videoconferencing. Preliminary results from our two wait-list randomized pilot trials suggest the programs were feasible and efficacious. To gain an in-depth understanding of acceptability, the purpose of this secondary analysis from the RCTs is to (1) explore feedback regarding the virtual SMART-3RP and (2) compare feedback across LAD and ASD parents. Methods Participants were randomized to immediate or delayed SMART-3RP (separate groups for LAD and ASD) and completed a feedback questionnaire post-intervention ( N = 33 LAD, N = 37 ASD; 93% female, 93% white, Mage = 45.52, SD = 6.50). Results Participants reported the intervention had the right number of sessions (69%), session duration (83%), and amount of structure (83%). They felt comfortable during sessions (89%) and found mind–body skills helpful (89%). There were no significant differences between parent groups other than a trend for more ASD parents reporting sessions were too long (22% ASD vs. 6% LAD, X 2 = 5.67, p =0.06). Qualitative themes were similar across parents and included that video delivery had some technical challenges but enabled participation; group support and mind–body skills were helpful; and further SMART-3RP sessions or therapy is needed. Conclusion LAD and ASD parents found a synchronous video-based mind–body resiliency program acceptable. Technology limitations notwithstanding, online delivery was very satisfactory and overcame obstacles to participation.

Background There is heterogeneity in conceptualizations of resiliency, and there is, to date, no established theoretically driven resiliency assessment measure that aligns with a targeted resiliency intervention. We operationalize resiliency as one’s ability to maintain adaptive functioning in response to the ongoing, chronic stress of daily living, and we use a novel resiliency measure that assesses the target components of an evidence based resiliency intervention. We present our resiliency theory, treatment model, and corresponding assessment measure (Current Experience Scale; CES). Methods To establish the psychometric properties of the CES, we report the factor structure and internal consistency reliability (N = 273). Among participants in our resiliency intervention (N = 151), we explored construct validity in terms of associations with theoretical model constructs, a validated resiliency measure, and sensitivity to change from before to after the intervention. Results Results indicated that a 23-item, 6-factor solution was a good fit to the data (RMSEA = .08, CFI = .97; TLI =.96) and internal consistency was good (α = .81 to .95). The CES showed correlations in the expected direction with resiliency model constructs (all p ’s

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in unprecedented stress and uncertainty, particularly among vulnerable populations such as healthcare workers who are facing a multitude of current and looming economic and psychosocial stressors. As clinician-scientists delivering mind-body interventions in our hospital, we suggest applying evidence-based mind-body techniques that promote resiliency and adaptive coping during these difficult times. Interventions that package a variety of mind-body skills into one cohesive program, such as the Stress Management and Resiliency Training – Relaxation Response Resiliency Program (SMART-3RP), offer promise for meeting the variety of stress management needs (e.g., health concerns, isolation) present during the COVID-19 pandemic. From our work with frontline healthcare clinicians and other caregiver populations, we offer recommendations for adapting the delivery, modality, and content of mind-body practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and suggest key skills for promoting resiliency and buffering against the future stressors that lie ahead for everyone.

Abstract Background For adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients aged 18 to 39 years, health insurance literacy is crucial for an effective use of the health care system. AYAs often face high out-of-pocket costs or have unmet health care needs due to costs. Improving health insurance literacy could help AYAs obtain appropriate and affordable health care. This protocol illustrates a randomized controlled trial testing a virtual health insurance education intervention among AYA patients. Methods This is a two-arm multisite randomized controlled trial. A total of 80 AYAs diagnosed with cancer in the Mountain West region will be allocated to either usual navigation care or tailored health insurance education intervention with a patient navigator that includes usual care. All participants will complete a baseline and follow-up survey 5 months apart. The primary outcomes are feasibility (number enrolled and number of sessions completed) and acceptability (5-point scale on survey measuring satisfaction of the intervention). The secondary outcomes are preliminary efficacy measured by the Health Insurance Literacy Measure and the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity. Discussion This trial makes a timely contribution to test the feasibility and acceptability of a virtual AYA-centered health insurance education program. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04448678. Registered on June 26, 2020

Introduction Cancer clinical trials represent the “gold standard” for advancing novel cancer therapies. Optimizing trial participation is critical to ensuring the generalizability of findings across patients, yet trial enrollment rates, particularly among minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations, remain suboptimal. Methods We conducted in-depth interviews with oncologists at a large academic medical center to explore their (1) attitudes and perceived barriers to offering clinical trials to minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged patients, and (2) recommendations for improving the enrollment of minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged patients in cancer clinical trials. Results Of 23 medical oncologists approached, 17 enrolled (74% response rate; mean age = 47; female = 42%; White = 67%). Content analysis revealed several barriers to enrollment: (1) ethical dilemmas; (2) ambivalence about trial risks and benefits; and (3) concern about patient well-being. Concerns about the legitimacy of informed consent, perceived lack of equipoise, and fear of personal bias influenced clinicians’ decisions to recommend trials during treatment discussions. Concerns about creating an imbalance between trial risks and benefits among patients with high-level needs, including patients with literacy, psychiatric, and other socioeconomic vulnerabilities, impacted clinicians’ enthusiasm to engage in trial discussions. Clinicians identified patient, provider, and system-level solutions to address challenges, including increasing patient and clinician support as well as involving external personnel to support trial enrollment. Conclusion Findings reveal multi-level barriers to offering cancer clinical trials to underrepresented patients. Targeted solutions, including system level changes to support clinicians, patient financial support, and implementation of clinical trial navigation programs were recommended to help reduce access barriers and increase enrollment of underrepresented patients into cancer clinical trials.

Abstract Background By 2040, one out of three older adults in the USA are expected to belong to a racial/ethnic minority group. This population has an increased risk of mental and physical disability with significant barriers to access care. Community-based organizations (CBOs) often provide programming to serve minority and immigrant elders. Limited resources and other barriers such as lack of trained staff make it difficult to implement evidence-based interventions (EBIs) in CBOs for long-term adoption. Yet little is known about what factors can facilitate adoption of EBIs in CBOs serving minority elders. Methods Positive-Minds–Strong Bodies (PM-SB), an evidence-based intervention offered in four languages, aims to reduce mental and physical disability for minority and immigrant elders through the efforts of community health workers and exercise trainers. The intervention consists of cognitive behavior therapy and exercise training sessions delivered over 6 months. During a recent clinical trial of this intervention, we elicited feedback from CBO staff to determine how best to facilitate the implementation and long-term sustainability of PM-SB within their agencies. We surveyed 30 CBO staff members, held four focus groups, and conducted 20 in-depth interviews to examine staff perspectives and to reveal factors or changes needed to facilitate long-term adoption in prospective CBOs. Results Participants reported that staff motivation and implementation could be improved through the following changes: increasing patient compensation for treatment sessions, decreasing levels of organizational accountability, and reducing staff demands embedded in the intervention. Although most staff perceived that PM-SB improved their agency’s ability to address the health and well-being of elders, capacity-building strategies such as a “train-the-trainer” initiative were identified as priorities to address staff turnover for sustainability. Adapting the intervention to get financial reimbursement also emerged as vital. Conclusions Augmenting financial incentives, streamlining procedures, and simplifying staff accountability were suggested strategies for facilitating the transition from a disability prevention clinical trial in minority and immigrant elders to a scalable implementation in routine services at CBOs. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02317432 .

Introduction: Cancer patients who smoke report more stress and psychological distress than patients who do not smoke. It is unclear how these emotional symptoms may modify smoking behavior in cancer patients. We examined the influence of a smoking cessation intervention for cancer patients on stress and distress, and the effects of these symptoms on smoking abstinence. Methods: Mixed-methods secondary analysis of data from the Smokefree Support Study, a two-site randomized controlled trial examining the efficacy of Intensive (IT; n = 153) vs. Standard Treatment (ST; n = 150) for smoking cessation in newly diagnosed cancer patients. Stress coping, perceived stress, distress, and anxiety were self-reported at baseline, 3, and 6 months. Abstinence was biochemically-confirmed at 6 months. A subset of patients (n = 72) completed qualitative exit-interviews. Results: Patients were on average, 58 years old, 56% female, and smoked a median of 10 cigarettes/day. There were no significant treatment group × time interactions or main effects of treatment group on stress or distress measures (p’s > 0.05), however there were significant main effects of time suggesting symptom improvements on each measure in both study groups (p’s

Purpose Survivors of childhood cancer may experience financial burden as a result of health care costs, particularly because these patients often require long-term medical care. We sought to evaluate the prevalence of financial burden and identify associations between a higher percentage of income spent on out-of-pocket medical costs (≥ 10% of annual income) and issues related to financial burden (jeopardizing care or changing lifestyle) among survivors of childhood cancer and a sibling comparison group. Methods Between May 2011 and April 2012, we surveyed an age-stratified, random sample of survivors of childhood cancer and a sibling comparison group who were enrolled in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. Participants reported their household income, out-of-pocket medical costs, and issues related to financial burden (questions were adapted from national surveys on financial burden). Logistic regression identified associations between participant characteristics, a higher percentage of income spent on out-of-pocket medical costs, and financial burden, adjusting for potential confounders. Results Among 580 survivors of childhood cancer and 173 siblings, survivors of childhood cancer were more likely to have out-of-pocket medical costs ≥ 10% of annual income (10.0% v 2.9%; P < .001). Characteristics of the survivors of childhood cancer that were associated with a higher percentage of income spent on out-of-pocket costs included hospitalization in the past year (odds ratio [OR], 2.3; 95% CI, 1.1 to 4.9) and household income < $50,000 (OR, 5.5; 95% CI, 2.4 to 12.8). Among survivors of childhood cancer, a higher percentage of income spent on out-of-pocket medical costs was significantly associated with problems paying medical bills (OR, 8.9; 95% CI, 4.4 to 18.0); deferring care for a medical problem (OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.6 to 5.9); skipping a test, treatment, or follow-up (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1 to 4.0); and thoughts of filing for bankruptcy (OR, 6.6; 95% CI, 3.0 to 14.3). Conclusion Survivors of childhood cancer are more likely to report spending a higher percentage of their income on out-of-pocket medical costs, which may influence their health-seeking behavior and potentially affect health outcomes. Our findings highlight the need to address financial burden in this population with long-term health care needs.

Purpose: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) established provisions intended to increase access to affordable health insurance and thus increase access to medical care and long-term surveillance for populations with pre-existing conditions. However, childhood cancer survivors' coverage priorities and familiarity with the ACA are unknown., Methods: Between May 2011 and April 2012, we surveyed a randomly selected, age-stratified sample of 698 survivors and 210 siblings from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study., Results: Overall, 89.8% of survivors and 92.1% of siblings were insured. Many features of insurance coverage that survivors considered "very important" are addressed by the ACA, including increased availability of primary care (94.6%), no waiting period before coverage initiation (79.0%), and affordable premiums (88.1%). Survivors were more likely than siblings to deem primary care physician coverage and choice, protections from costs due to pre-existing conditions, and no start-up period as "very important" (P < .05 for all). Only 27.3% of survivors and 26.2% of siblings reported familiarity with the ACA (12.1% of uninsured v 29.0% of insured survivors; odds ratio, 2.86; 95% CI, 1.28 to 6.36). Only 21.3% of survivors and 18.9% of siblings believed the ACA would make it more likely that they would get quality coverage. Survivors' and siblings' concerns about the ACA included increased costs, decreased access to and quality of care, and negative impact on employers and employees., Conclusion: Although survivors' coverage preferences match many ACA provisions, survivors, particularly uninsured survivors, were not familiar with the ACA. Education and assistance, perhaps through cancer survivor navigation, are critically needed to ensure that survivors access coverage and benefits., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)