Fax: (011) 62956673
How feasible is implementation of distress screening by cancer clinicians in routine clinical care?
Article first published online: 6 JUN 2012
Copyright © 2012 American Cancer Society
Volume 118, Issue 24, pages 6260–6269, 15 December 2012
How to Cite
Mitchell, A. J., Lord, K., Slattery, J., Grainger, L. and Symonds, P. (2012), How feasible is implementation of distress screening by cancer clinicians in routine clinical care?. Cancer, 118: 6260–6269. doi: 10.1002/cncr.27648
- Issue published online: 3 DEC 2012
- Article first published online: 6 JUN 2012
- Manuscript Accepted: 19 MAR 2012
- Manuscript Revised: 8 MAR 2012
- Manuscript Received: 27 JAN 2012
There is considerable uncertainty regarding the acceptability of routine distress screening.
In an unfunded implementation study, the authors asked 50 clinicians (chemotherapy nurses and treatment radiographers/radiation technologists) to implement a screening program for distress as part of routine care and to record their feedback after each clinical encounter. In total, 379 patients were screened using a simple paper-and-pencil versions of distress thermometer and the emotion thermometer (ET).
Across all screening applications, clinicians believed that screening was useful during 43% of assessments and was not useful during 35.9% of assessments, and they were unsure or neutral in 21.1% of assessments. The application of the screening program assisted staff in changing their clinical opinion after 41.9% of assessments, and clinicians believed that the screening program helped with communication in >50% of assessments. However, 37.5% believed that screening was impractical for routine use, and more chemotherapy nurses than radiographers rated the screening program as “not useful.” On multivariate analysis, 3 variables were associated with high staff satisfaction with screening, namely, receipt of prior training, talking with the patient about psychosocial issues, and improved detection of psychological problems. A favorable perception of screening also was linked to a change in clinical opinion.
Opinions of cancer clinicians regarding routine distress screening were mixed: Approximately 33% considered screening not useful/impractical, whereas >50%n believed promoted good communication and/or helped with recognition. Clinicians who were more positive about screening gained greater benefits from screening in terms of communication and recognition. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.