Search

Web-based mental health interventions (e-MhIs) show promise for increasing accessibility and acceptability of therapy for cancer patients.This study aimed to elicit health professionals' (HPs) views on optimal models for including e-MhIs within standard cancer care.Cancer HPs who worked in a service where an e-MhI was available to patients, and multi-disciplinary HPs interested in supportive care, were invited to participate via email. In semi-structured phone interviews, participants' views on e-MhIs were elicited. They were then presented with five model vignettes varying in local and centralised staff input, and asked to indicate their preference and views on each. A thematic analysis was applied to the data.Twelve nurses, nine psychologists, seven social workers, and three oncologists participated. Four key themes were identified: looking after patients, relationships and multidisciplinary care, trust, and feasibility, all contributing to a meta-theme of tension. Participants were motivated to ensure optimal patient outcomes and thus needed to trust the intervention content and process. They believed personal relationships increased patient engagement while affording greater work satisfaction for HPs. Most participants preferred a fully integrated model of care involving local HP assessment and design of a tailored therapy incorporating some e-MhI components where appropriate, but recognised this gold standard was likely not feasible given current resources.Co-design with local staff of optimal models of care for the content and process of implementing e-MhIs is required, with due consideration of the patient group, staffing levels, local workflows and HP preferences, to ensure sustainability and optimal patient outcomes.The ADAPT Cluster RCT is registered with the ANZCTR Registration number: ACTRN12617000411347.

Purpose Cancer survivors are at greater risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) than cancer-free controls. Despite evidence-based guidelines recommending CVD risk factor assessment, surveillance and risk-reduction, many people with cancer do not receive adequate CVD care. To address potential barriers and enablers of care, we examined healthcare professionals’ (HCPs) perceptions and experiences of CVD risk assessment and management in people with cancer. Methods We conducted one focus group and 12 individual interviews to examine HCPs’ perceptions and experiences of CVD care in care. We used reflexive thematic analysis to collect and analyse the qualitative data to construct and understand themes. Results Twenty-one HCPs participated (8 oncologists, 5 nurses, 3 general practitioners, 2 dietitians, 1 cardiologist, 1 haematologist and 1 physiotherapist). Majority of HCPs were aware of CVD risk in cancer but were concerned they could not deliver CVD care alone due to system-level barriers including lack of time and training. HCPs also perceived patient-level barriers including socioeconomic disadvantage and fatalistic outlook. Despite barriers, HCPs suggested diverse solutions for improving CVD care in cancer including new models-of-care, clinical pathways, risk assessment/management tools and education. Conclusions The diversity of perceived barriers and suggested solutions identified by HCPs suggests the need for a multilevel approach tailored to context. Future research involving people with cancer is needed to co-design acceptable interventions. Implications for Cancer Survivors Improved understanding of HCP’s perceptions can inform the development of new interventions to deliver CVD care to people with cancer to reduce morbidity and mortality.

Purpose: Cancer survivors are at greater risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) than cancer-free controls. Despite evidence-based guidelines recommending CVD risk factor assessment, surveillance and risk-reduction, many people with cancer do not receive adequate CVD care. To address potential barriers and enablers of care, we examined health care professionals’ (HCP) perceptions and experiences of CVD risk assessment and management in people with cancer. Methods: We conducted one focus group and 12 individual interviews to examine HCPs’ perceptions and experiences of CVD care in care. We used reflexive thematic analysis to collect and analyse the qualitative data to construct and understand themes. Results: 21 HCPs participated (8 oncologists, 5 nurses, 3 general practitioners, 2 dietitians, 1 cardiologist, 1 haematologist and 1 physiotherapist). Majority HCPs were aware of CVD risk in cancer, but were concerned they could not deliver CVD care alone due to system-level barriers including lack of time and training. HCPs also perceived patient-level barriers including socioeconomic disadvantage and fatalistic outlook. Despite barriers, HCPs suggested diverse solutions for improving CVD care in cancer including new models-of-care, clinical pathways, risk assessment/management tools and education. Conclusions: The diversity of perceived barriers and suggested solutions identified by HCPs suggests the need for a multilevel approach tailored to context. Future research involving people with cancer is needed to co-design acceptable interventions. Implications for cancer survivors: Improved understanding of HCP’s perceptions can inform the development of new interventions to deliver CVD care to people with cancer to reduce morbidity and mortality.

Issue addressed Digital health technologies can potentially reduce health disparities in cancer care. However, the benefits of digital health technology depend partly on users' digital health literacy, that is, "capabilities and resources required for individuals to use and benefit from digital health resources," which combines health and digital literacy. We examined issues for digital health technology implementation in cancer care regarding digital health literacy, via stakeholder consultation. Methods Consumers, health care professionals, researchers, developers, nongovernment and government/policy stakeholders (N = 51) participated in focus groups/interviews discussing barriers, enablers, needs and opportunities for digital health implementation in cancer care. Researchers applied framework analysis to identify themes of digital health literacy in the context of disparity and inclusion. Results Limited digital and traditional health literacy were identified as barriers to digital technology engagement, with a range of difficulties identified for older, younger and socio-economically or geographically disadvantaged groups. Digital health technology was a potential enabler of health care access and literacy, affording opportunities to increase reach and engagement. Education combined with targeted design and implementation were identified means of addressing health and digital literacy to effectively implement digital health in cancer care. Conclusions Implementing digital health in cancer care must address the variability of digital health literacy in recipients, including groups living with disadvantage and older and younger people, in order to be effective. SO WHAT?: If cancer outcome disparity is to be reduced via digital health technologies, they must be implemented strategically to address digital health literacy needs. Health policy should reflect this approach.

Purpose Few digital psycho-oncology programs have been adopted into routine practice; how these programs are used after trial completion remains unexplored. To address this, the present study transitioned our evidence-based 6-module CBT-based program, Finding My Way, into open access (OA) after completion of the RCT, and compared uptake, usage, and psychosocial outcomes to the earlier RCT. Methods Recruitment was passive, via promotion through (1) media and social media releases, (2) public lectures, (3) radio interviews and podcasts, and (4) clinician-initiated referral. Measures included number of enrolled users, number of modules completed, and pre- and optional post-measures of distress and quality of life (QOL). Results Uptake was lower in OA (n = 120; 63% of RCT). Usage was markedly lower: 1.5 modules were completed on average (vs 3.7 in RCT), and only 13% completed a ‘therapeutic dose’ of 4 + modules (vs. 50% in RCT). Research attrition was high; n = 13 completed post-measures. OA users were more sociodemographically and clinically diverse than RCT users, had higher baseline distress (OA Mpre = 36.7, SD = 26.5; RCT Mpre = 26.5, SD = 21.7), and reported larger pre-post reductions than their RCT counterparts (OA Mpost = 23.9, SD = 20.7; RCT Mpost = 21.2, SD = 21.2). Moderate improvements in mental QOL occurred during OA (Mpre = 37.3, SD = 12.6; Mpost = 44.5, SD = 12.1), broadly replicating RCT findings. Conclusion Findings that OA users were more medically and sociodemographically diverse and distressed at baseline than their RCT counterparts, and — despite having lower usage of the program — achieved larger changes from baseline to post-program, will help to shape future intervention design, tailoring, and dissemination.

Background Opportunities for cancer survivors' employment can both reflect and perpetuate health inequities, as employment is an important social determinant of health. Socio-economic and geographic disadvantage is associated with greater difficulty finding work, but little is known about work needs of Australian cancer survivors living with disadvantage. Objective This study examined survivor and health-care professional (HCP) perspectives on barriers experienced by Australian cancer survivors experiencing disadvantage when attempting to remain at or return to work. Method Focus groups and individual interviews were held with cancer survivors (N = 15) and oncology and primary HCPs (N = 41), focusing on communities at risk of disadvantage. Participants were asked about employment barriers and facilitators in general and in the context of disadvantage. Themes were identified using framework analysis. Results Geographic and socio-economic disadvantage resulted in specific individual- and system-level barriers. These related to distance from treatment and support services and limited availability and suitability of work for survivors living with geographic disadvantage, and limited availability, security, and flexibility of work and previous unemployment for survivors living with socio-economic disadvantage. Identified needs included system-level changes such as public and workplace-level education, legislative and policy changes, and better access to resources. Conclusions Cancer survivors living with disadvantage experience limited access to flexible employment opportunities and resources, further perpetuating their disadvantage. Promotion of health equity for cancer survivors living with disadvantage requires systemic changes to support attempts to remain at/return to work. Patient or public contribution This study included cancer survivors and HCPs as investigators, authors and participants.

Friendships have important influences on children's well-being and future adjustment, and interpersonal forgiveness has been suggested as a crucial means for children to maintain friendships. However, existing measures of preadolescent children's forgiveness are restricted by developmental limitations to reporting emotional responses via questionnaire and inconsistent interpretations of the term “forgive.” This paper describes development and testing of concurrent and discriminant validity of a pictorial measure of children's emotional forgiveness, the Children's Forgiveness Card Set (CFCS). In Study 1, 148 Australian children aged 8–13 years (M = 10.54, SD = 1.35) responded to a hypothetical transgression in which apology was manipulated and completed the CFCS and extant measures of forgiveness and socially desirable responding. Following an exploratory factor analysis to clarify the structure of the CFCS, the CFCS correlated moderately with other forgiveness measures and did not correlate with socially desirable responding. Apology predicted CFCS responding among older children. In Study 2 an exploratory factor analysis broadly replicated the structure of the CFCS among a sample of N = 198 North American children aged 5–14 years (M = 9.39 years, SD = 1.67). We also fitted an exploratory bi-factor model to the Study 2 data which clarified which cards best measured general forgiveness, or positive or hostile aspects of responding to transgressions. Apology once again predicted the CFCS, this time regardless of age. The CFCS appears a potentially valid measure of children's emotional forgiveness. Potential applications and differences between explicit and latent forgiveness in children are discussed.

Purpose: This multicentre randomised controlled trial examined the efficacy of Finding My Way (FMW), a 6-week/6-module online self-guided psychotherapeutic intervention for newly diagnosed curatively treated cancer survivors, in reducing cancer-related distress and improving quality of life compared to an online attention control. Methods: Participants were randomised on a 1:1 ratio using a gender-stratified block design to intervention (n = 94) or attention control (n = 97), and were blinded to condition. Assessments were completed at baseline (T0), post-intervention (T1), 3 months (T2), and 6 months (T3) post-intervention. Mixed model repeated measures analyses examined differences between groups for cancer-specific distress (primary outcome) and general distress, quality of life (QoL), coping, and health service utilisation (secondary outcomes). Results: While both groups reported reduced cancer-specific and general distress over time, between-group differences were not significant. Intervention participants reported lower total health service utilisation and supportive care utilisation post-intervention than controls (total HS use: between-group mean difference = − 1.07 (− 1.85 to − 0.28); supportive care use: between-group mean difference = − 0.64 (− 1.21 to − 0.06)) and significantly higher emotional functioning at 3 months (between-group mean difference = 7.04 (0.15 to 13.9)). At 6 months, the supportive care utilisation finding reversed (between-group mean difference = 0.78 points (0.19 to 1.37). Across remaining QoL and coping outcomes, no significant group differences emerged. Conclusions: While both groups experienced reductions in distress, between-group differences were not significant. This contrasts with the significantly improved emotional functioning observed in FMW participants at 3 months and the short-term reductions in health service utilisation. Long-term increases in supportive care service utilisation suggest FMW only met needs while being actively used. Trial registration: ACTRN12613000001796; http://www.ANZCTR.org.au/ACTRN12613000001796.aspx.

Objectives: To summarise the evidence-base of psychological interventions for women with metastatic breast cancer, by mode of delivery (group, individual, or low-intensity interventions). To synthesise data regarding core intervention-elements (eg, intervention duration) and context factors (trial setting, uptake and adherence, and demographic characteristics). Methods: Four databases were searched (inception-May 2016): MEDLINE (OvidSP), PsycINFO (OvidSP), CINAHL (EBSCO), and SCOPUS; reference lists were examined for additional publications. Grey literature was excluded. Outcome data were extracted for survival, distress, quality of life, coping, sleep, fatigue, and/or pain and summarised through narrative synthesis. Results: Fifteen randomised clinical trials (RCTs), reported across 23 articles, met inclusion criteria: 7 groups, 4 individuals, and 4 low-intensity interventions. Overall, interventions improved distress (8/13 RCTs), coping (4/5 RCTs), and pain (4/5 RCTs). No evidence of survival benefit was found. For remaining outcomes, evidence was either insufficient, or too mixed to draw conclusions. Group programs had the strongest evidence-base for efficacy; individual and low-intensity therapy had insufficient evidence to form conclusions. Group interventions had longest intervention durations and lowest uptake and adherence; low-intensity interventions had shortest durations and highest uptake and adherence. Disparities in uptake, adherence, and reach were evident, with the demographic profile of participants polarised to young, Caucasian, English-speaking, partnered women. Conclusions: There remains a paucity of psychological interventions for women with metastatic breast cancer. Those that exist have an inconsistent evidence-base across the range of patient-reported outcomes. Further research is needed to evaluate accessible delivery formats that ensure efficacy as well as uptake.

This study qualitatively explored barriers and facilitators of adherence to an online psychological intervention for cancer-related distress. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 adults with cancer, randomised to receive either a 6-week intervention (n = 8) or attention control (n = 5) as part of a larger RCT. Transcripts were coded for themes and subthemes, and recruitment ceased when saturation of themes occurred. Adherence overall was high: six participants completed all six modules, three completed five modules, two completed four modules, one completed one module, and one did not access the program. The total numbers of barriers (n = 19) and facilitators (n = 17) identified were equivalent and were categorised into five overarching themes: illness factors, psychological factors, personal factors, intervention factors and computer factors. However, the prevalence with which themes were discussed differed: illness factors (specifically cancer treatment side effects) were the main reported barrier to adherence; intervention factors (email reminders, program satisfaction, ease of use, program content) were the most common facilitators. While some factors were cited as both facilitating and barring adherence, and therefore reflective of personal preferences and circumstances, a number of recommendations were derived regarding (i) the best timing for online interventions and (ii) the need for multi-platform programs.

Despite high distress and unmet informational and psychosocial needs, and recommendations for development of advanced breast cancer (ABC)-specific resources, there remains a paucity of appropriate, accessible psychological interventions. This survey study examined internet use and preferences of women with ABC, to gauge feasibility of providing an ABC-specific internet intervention. Most participants (83%) used the internet daily. Results indicated most women with ABC would find an ABC-specific internet intervention helpful, and that it would address gaps in current internet resources, including provision of strategies to manage treatment side-effects and fear of cancer progression.

While online interventions are increasingly explored as an alternative to therapist-based interventions for cancer-related distress, limitations to efficacy potentially include low uptake and adherence. Few predictors of uptake or adherence to online interventions have been consistently identified, particularly in individuals with cancer. This study examined rates and predictors of uptake and adherence to Finding My Way, a RCT of an online intervention versus an information-only online control for cancer-related distress. Participants were adults with cancer treated with curative intent. Adherence was assessed by login frequency, duration and activity level; analyses examined demographic, medical and psychological predictors of uptake and adherence. The study enrolled 191 adults (aged 26–94 years) undergoing active treatment for cancer of any type. Uptake was highest for females and for individuals with ovarian (80%) and breast cancer (49.8%), and lowest for those with melanoma (26.5%). Adherence was predicted by older age and control-group allocation. Baseline distress levels did not predict adherence. High adherers to the full intervention had better emotion regulation and quality of life than low adherers. Uptake of online intervention varies according to age, gender and cancer type. While uptake was higher amongst younger individuals, once enrolled, older individuals were more likely to adhere to online interventions for cancer-related distress.

Background A cancer diagnosis elicits greater distress than any other medical diagnosis, and yet very few studies have evaluated the efficacy of structured online self-help therapeutic programs to alleviate this distress. This study aims to assess the efficacy over time of an internet Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (iCBT) intervention (‘Finding My Way’) in improving distress, coping and quality of life for individuals with a recent diagnosis of early stage cancer of any type. Methods/Design The study is a multi-site Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) seeking to enrol 188 participants who will be randomised to either the Finding My Way Intervention or an attention-control condition. Both conditions are delivered online; with 6 modules released once per week, and an additional booster module released one month after program-completion. Participants complete online questionnaires on 4 occasions: at baseline (immediately prior to accessing the modules); post-treatment (immediately after program-completion); then three and six months later. Primary outcomes are general distress and cancer-specific distress, with secondary outcomes including Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL), coping, health service utilisation, intervention adherence, and user satisfaction. A range of baseline measures will be assessed as potential moderators of outcomes. Eligible participants are individuals recently diagnosed with any type of cancer, being treated with curative intent, aged over 18 years with sufficient English language literacy, internet access and an active email account and phone number. Participants are blinded to treatment group allocation. Randomisation is computer generated and stratified by gender. Discussion Compared to the few prior published studies, Finding My Way will be the first adequately powered trial to offer an iCBT intervention to curatively treated patients of heterogeneous cancer types in the immediate post-diagnosis/treatment period. If found efficacious, Finding My Way will assist with overcoming common barriers to face-to-face therapy in a cost-effective and accessible way, thus helping to reduce distress after cancer diagnosis and consequently decrease the cancer burden for individuals and the health system. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12613000001796 16.10.13