Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31030278›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2020

A cross-sectional audit of current practices and areas for improvement of distress screening and management in Australian cancer services: is there a will and a way to improve?

Elizabeth A Fradgley, Emma Byrnes, Kristen McCarter, Nicole Rankin, Ben Britton, Kerrie Clover, Gregory Carter, Douglas Bellamy, Chris L Paul

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Distress screening and supportive care referrals used by telephone-based health services: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Elizabeth A FradgleyUniversity of Newcastle Priority Research Centre for Cancer Research, Innovation and Translation, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia. Elizabeth.fradgley@newcastle.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3535-2885
Emma ByrnesHunter New England Population Health, Longworth Ave., Wallsend, New South Wales, Australia.
Kristen McCarterUniversity of Newcastle Priority Research Centre for Cancer Research, Innovation and Translation, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Nicole RankinCancer Council New South Wales, 153 Dowling St., Woolloomooloo, New South Wales, Australia.
Ben BrittonSchool of Medicine & Public Health, University Drive, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Kerrie CloverPsycho-Oncology Service, Calvary Mater Newcastle, Locked Bag 10, Hunter Regional Mail Centre, New South Wales, Australia.
Gregory CarterUniversity of Newcastle Priority Research Centre for Brain and Mental Health Research, Locked Bag 7, Hunter Regional Mail Centre, New South Wales, Australia.
Douglas BellamyWalcha Multipurpose Service, 11S Middle Street, Walcha, New South Wales, Australia.
Chris L PaulUniversity of Newcastle Priority Research Centre for Cancer Research, Innovation and Translation, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

Hunter Cancer Research Alliance Not applicableNational Health and Medical Research Council Career Development FellowshipUniversity of Newcastle Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour Not applicable
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is unknown how many distressed patients receive the additional supportive care recommended by Australian evidence-based distress management guidelines. The study identifies the (1) distress screening practices of Australian cancer services; (2) barriers to improving practices; and (3) implementation strategies which are acceptable to service representatives interested in improving screening practices.

methodClinic leads from 220 cancer services were asked to nominate an individual involved in daily patient care to complete a cross-sectional survey on behalf of the service. Questions related to service characteristics; screening and management processes; and implementation barriers. Respondents indicated which implementation strategies were suitable for their health service.

resultsA total of 122 representatives participated from 83 services (51%). The majority of respondents were specialist nurses or unit managers (60%). Approximately 38% of representatives' services never or rarely screen; 52% who screen do so for all patients; 55% use clinical interviewing only; and 34% follow referral protocols. The most common perceived barriers were resources to action screening results (74%); lack of time (67%); and lack of staff training (66%). Approximately 65% of representatives were interested in improving practices. Of the 8 implementation strategies, workshops (85%) and educational materials (69%) were commonly selected. Over half (59%) indicated a multicomponent implementation program was preferable.

conclusionsAlthough critical gaps across all guideline components were reported, there is a broad support for screening and willingness to improve. Potential improvements include additional services to manage problems identified by screening, more staff time for screening, additional staff training, and use of patient-report measures.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningAdultAustraliaCancer Care FacilitiesClinical AuditCross-Sectional StudiesDelivery of Health CareFemaleGuideline AdherenceHumansMaleNeoplasmsPractice Patterns, Physicians'Psychological DistressQuality ImprovementReferral and ConsultationBackgroundCancerImplementationPsychological distressPsycho-oncology

Identifiers

PMID31030278

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.