Search

Purpose Exercise can help cancer survivors manage sequela, treatment side effects, improve overall quality of life, and is recommended for most. The purpose of this study was to investigate exercise behavior and factors influencing exercise engagement among cancer survivors at the National Cancer Centre, Singapore (NCCS). Methods This cross-sectional study was inclusive of survivors of all cancer types and stages who were at least 21 years of age and had undergone chemotherapy at the NCCS. Surveys were utilized to assess survivor barriers and facilitators to exercise and to retrospectively assess physical activity and exercise behaviors at 4 cancer-related time periods (pre-diagnosis and post-diagnosis before, during, or after chemotherapy). Results A total of 102 cancer survivors were enrolled; 60% were diagnosed with stage IV cancer. Predominant cancer types included lower gastrointestinal tract (25.5%) and breast cancer (21.6%). Prior to cancer diagnosis, 90.2% of participants reported aerobic activity satisfying NCCN guidelines. Significant reductions in reported exercise, and physical activity, were observed following cancer diagnosis that persisted during chemotherapy. Key exercise facilitators included the desire to remain healthy (86.3%) and to improve sleep and mental well-being (73.5%). Key barriers included side effects of treatment (52.0%). Only 46.1% of survivors reported receiving exercise guidance from healthcare professionals following diagnosis. Conclusion Overall, even among this notably active cohort of Singaporean survivors, opportunities for increased exercise engagement throughout the survivorship continuum remain. Increased education regarding the benefits of exercise to survivors as well as guidance regarding exercise modalities including resistance training is greatly needed as well.

Introduction: Supportive care models considering inclusivity and community services to improve integrated care for cancer survivors are limited. In this case study, we described the implementation of a multidisciplinary care model employing routine distress screening and embedded integrated care pathways to integrate care across disciplines and care sectors, while remaining inclusive of the multi-ethnic and multilingual population in Singapore. We reported implementation outcomes after 18 months of implementation. Description: We reviewed the model’s process indicators from September 2019 to February 2021 at the largest public ambulatory cancer centre. Outcomes assessed included penetration, fidelity to screening protocol, and feasibility in three aspects – inclusiveness of different ethnic and language groups, responsiveness to survivors reporting high distress, and types of community service referrals. Discussion/conclusion: We elucidated opportunities to promote access to community services and inclusivity. Integration of community services from tertiary settings should be systematic through mutually beneficial educational and outreach initiatives, complemented by their inclusion in integrated care pathways to encourage systematic referrals and care coordination. A hybrid approach to service delivery is crucial in ensuring inclusivity while providing flexibility towards external changes such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Future work should explore using telehealth to bolster inclusiveness and advance community care integration.

The recent novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection resulted in a coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic that significantly strained healthcare systems globally. The early wave of patients in Singapore with severe pneumonia requiring intensive care units are gradually being referred for post-critical illness management with our inpatient medical rehabilitation unit. There is growing information regarding the actual rehabilitation process for patients severely affected by coronavirus disease 2019. This case report shares experiences and challenges faced during rehabilitation of severe coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia and post-intensive care syndrome. It also describes the post-discharge rehabilitation program in a setting of strict nationwide safe distancing and stay-home policies.

37 Background: Accessible Cancer Care to Enable Support for Cancer Survivors (ACCESS) is a multidisciplinary survivorship care model launched at the National Cancer Centre Singapore (NCCS) in 2019. ACCESS employs routine distress and problem screening to triage cancer patients with varying care needs and complexities for tailored care. Here, we described the study design to evaluate ACCESS, and reported the baseline characteristics of our study cohort to characterize the profile of prospective target recipients of the new care model. Methods: A cluster randomized controlled trial was initiated to assess the effectiveness of ACCESS on quality of life and symptom burden, with each cluster unit defined at the oncologist level. Clusters were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive ACCESS or usual care. Eligible patients were ≥21 years, newly diagnosed with breast or gynecological cancer, and receiving follow-up care in NCCS. Patients were followed up for one year and patient-reported outcomes were collected every three months using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and Rotterdam Symptom Checklist. Results: By May 2021, 91 patients and 89 patients in the usual care and ACCESS arm were recruited, respectively. Both groups (usual care vs. ACCESS) had comparable mean age (56.2±10.9 vs. 56.2±10.7, P = 0.998) and racial composition (P = 0.760). Employment status was similar in both arms (48.4% vs. 56.2% employed, P = 0.293) and most patients were covered by health insurance (89.8% vs. 88.1%, P = 0.920). At baseline, patients in both arms had comparable mean quality of life scores (65.1±19.8 vs. 66.9±17.6, P = 0.51) and reported high physical, role, emotional, cognitive, and social functioning levels (all mean scores > 70). No statistically significant differences in physical symptom and psychological distress levels were observed. Prevalent symptoms reported included fatigue (82.4% vs. 71.9%), pain (68.1% vs. 55.1%), and insomnia (57.1% vs. 55.1%). Almost half of the cohort reported financial difficulties (45.1% vs. 46.1%). Conclusions: Comparable baseline characteristics suggested the absence of systematic differences in care needs and demand among patients cared by different oncologists. Despite high functioning statuses at baseline, participants reported impaired quality of life with active physical and financial problems. These results support our hypothesis that routine screening would be valuable to identify such problems promptly for management via standardized care pathways. Results from this ongoing trial will determine the effectiveness of ACCESS on quality of life and functional recovery through treatment and survivorship. Clinical trial information: NCT04014309.

34 Background: Accessible Cancer Care to Enable Support for Cancer Survivors (ACCESS) is a multidisciplinary survivorship care model launched at the National Cancer Centre Singapore, the largest ambulatory cancer centre serving 70% of adult cancer patients in the public sector. ACCESS employs routine distress screening to triage patients with varying care needs and complexities. This study aims to examine the feasibility, delivery, and acceptance of ACCESS in providing appropriate service referrals to cancer patients in clinical settings. Methods: As part of an ongoing evaluation, we evaluated ACCESS for a 6-month implementation period between September 2019 and February 2020. Feasibility was assessed by proportions of (1) eligible breast and gynecological cancer patients who completed the locally adapted Distress Thermometer (DT) screening tool, (2) highly distressed patients, and (3) highly distressed patients requiring multidisciplinary meetings (MDM). Delivery was characterized by the mode and number of supportive care team (SCT) reviews required. Acceptance rates of SCT reviews by distressed patients and the uptake rate of service referrals recommended by the SCT were tabulated. Results: ACCESS screened 1074/1471 (73.0%) of all eligible patients within the 6-month period and identified 239/1074 (22.3%) as highly distressed for follow-up with the SCT. Eventually, 84.5% agreed to SCT review, with approximately one-fourth (26.7%) requiring MDM reviews. The majority (62.4%) of all distressed patients were identified at their first DT completion, whereas 19.8% and 7.4% were identified at their second and third completions respectively. The most common modes of follow-up were phone reviews (49.9%) and face-to-face in clinic waiting areas (48.6%). The SCT recommended 80 referrals to distressed patients for the following services: psychosocial (27.2%), cancer rehabilitation (5.9%), and home hospice (5.0%). The acceptance rates of the referrals for psychosocial, rehabilitation, and hospice services were 43.6%, 75.0%, and 80.0% respectively. Conclusions: ACCESS is a feasible model for triaging Asian cancer patients based on distress levels, and identifying complex patients requiring care personalization through MDM. The poorer acceptance rate of psychosocial services highlights patients’ preference for interventions targeting physical than psychosocial issues. Future studies should explore whether the uptake of psychosocial services is higher in the post-COVID era.

A 31-year-old man with no medical history was crushed between 2 vehicles. He sustained an open book pelvic fracture complicated by multiple fractures involving bilateral sacral ala, acetabula, superior and inferior pubic rami, and left subtrochanteric femur. He underwent pelvic external fixation, le