Impact of Real-World Outpatient Cancer Rehabilitation Services on Health-Related Quality of Life of Cancer Survivors across 12 Diagnosis Types in the United States.

Compared to adults without cancer, cancer survivors report poorer health-related quality of life (HRQOL), which is associated with negative treatment outcomes and increased healthcare use. Cancer-specialized physical and occupational therapy (PT/OT) could optimize HRQOL; however, the impact among survivors with non-breast malignancies is unknown. This retrospective (2020-2022), observational, study of medical record data of 12 cancer types, examined pre/post-HRQOL among cancer survivors who completed PT/OT. PROMIS® HRQOL measures: Global Health (physical [GPH] and mental [GMH]), Physical Function (PF), and Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities (SRA) were evaluated using linear mixed effect models by cancer type, then compared to the minimal important change (MIC, 2 points). Survivors were 65.44 ± 12.84 years old (range: 19-91), male (54%), with a median of 12 visits. Improvements in GPH were significant (p < 0.05) for all cancer types and all achieved MIC. Improvements in GMH were significant for 11/12 cancer types and 8/12 achieved MIC. Improvements in PF were significant for all cancer types and all achieved the MIC. Improvements in SRA were significant for all cancer types and all groups achieved the MIC. We observed statistically and clinically significant improvements in HRQOL domains for each of the 12 cancer types evaluated.

Geriatric assessment-identified impairments and frailty in adults with cancer younger than 65: An opportunity to optimize oncology care.

INTRODUCTION: Frailty, a state of increased vulnerability to stressors due to aging or treatment-related accelerated aging, is associated with declines in physical, cognitive and/or social functioning, and quality of life for cancer survivors. For survivors aged <65 years, little is known about frailty status and associated impairments to inform intervention. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of frailty and contributing geriatric assessment (GA)-identified impairments in adults aged <65 versus ≥65 years with cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study is a secondary analysis of clinical trial data (NCT04852575). Participants were starting a new line of systemic therapy at a community-based oncology private practice. Before starting treatment, participants completed an online patient-reported GA and the Physical Activity (PA) Vital Sign questionnaire. Frailty score and category were derived from GA using a validated deficit accumulation model: frail (>0.35), pre-frail (0.2-0.35), or robust (0-0.2). PA mins/week were calculated, and participants were coded as either meeting/not-meeting guidelines (≥90 min/week). We used Spearman (ρ) correlation to examine the association between age and frailty score and chi-squared/Fisher's-exact or ANOVA/Kruskal-Wallis statistic to compare frailty and PA outcomes between age groups. RESULTS: Participants (n = 96) were predominantly female (62%), Caucasian (68%), beginning first-line systemic therapy (69%), and 1.75 months post-diagnosis (median). Most had stage III to IV disease (66%). Common cancer types included breast (34%), gastrointestinal (23%), and hematologic (15%). Among participants <65, 46.8% were frail or pre-frail compared to 38.7% of those ≥65. There was no association between age and frailty score (ρ = 0.01, p = 0.91). Between age groups, there was no significant difference in frailty score (p = 0.95), the prevalence of frailty (p = 0.68), number of GA impairments (p = 0.33), or the proportion meeting PA guidelines (p = 0.72). However, older adults had more comorbid conditions (p = 0.03) and younger adults had non-significant but clinically relevant differences in functional ability, falls, and PA level. DISCUSSION: In our cohort, the prevalence of frailty was similar among adults with cancer <65 when compared to those older than 65, however, types of GA impairments differed. These results suggest GA and the associated frailty index could be useful to identify needs for intervention and inform clinical decisions during cancer treatment regardless of age. Additional research is needed to confirm our findings.

An initiative to implement a triage and referral system to make exercise and rehabilitation referrals standard of care in oncology.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines suggest that patients should be referred to exercise while undergoing cancer treatment. Oncology clinicians report being supportive of exercise referrals but not having the time to make referrals. Toward the goal of making exercise referrals standard of care, we implemented and evaluated a novel clinical workflow. METHODS: For this QI project, a rehabilitation navigator was inserted in chemotherapy infusion clinics. Patients were offered a validated electronic triage survey. Exercise or rehabilitation recommendations were communicated to patients during a brief counseling visit by the rehabilitation navigator. The implementation approach was guided by the EPIS framework. Acceptability and feasibility were assessed. RESULTS: Initial meetings with nursing and cancer center leadership ensured buy-in (exploration). The education of medical assistants contributed to the adoption of the triage process (preparation). Audit and feedback ensured leadership was aware of medical assistants' performance (implementation). 100% of medical assistants participated in implementing the triage tool. A total of 587 patients visited the infusion clinics during the 6-month period when this QI project was conducted. Of these, 501 (85.3%) were offered the triage survey and 391 (78%) completed the survey (acceptability). A total of 176 (45%) of triaged patients accepted a referral to exercise or rehabilitation interventions (feasibility). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a validated triage tool by medical assistants and brief counseling by a rehabilitation navigator resulted in 45% of infusion patients accepting a referral to exercise or rehabilitation. The triage process showed promise for making exercise referrals standard of care for patients undergoing cancer treatment.

In-Clinic versus Hybrid Cancer Rehabilitation Service Delivery during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Outcome Comparison Study.

Diminished health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is common among cancer survivors but often amendable to rehabilitation. However, few access real-world rehabilitation services. Hybrid delivery modes (using a combination of in-clinic and synchronous telehealth visits) became popular during the COVID-19 pandemic and offer a promising solution to improve access beyond the pandemic. However, it is unclear if hybrid delivery has the same impact on patient-reported outcomes and experiences as standard, in-clinic-only delivery. To fill this gap, we performed a retrospective, observational, comparative outcomes study of real-world electronic medical record (EMR) data collected by a national outpatient rehabilitation provider in 2020-2021. Of the cases meeting the inclusion criteria (N = 2611), 60 were seen to via hybrid delivery. The outcomes evaluated pre and post-rehabilitation included PROMIS® global physical health (GPH), global mental health (GMH), physical function (PF), and the ability to participate in social roles and activities (SRA). The patient experience outcomes included the Net Promoter Survey (NPS®) and the Select Medical Patient-Reported Experience Measure (SM-PREM). A linear and logistic regression was used to examine the between-group differences in the PROMIS and SM-PREM scores while controlling for covariates. The hybrid and in-clinic-only cases improved similarly in all PROMIS outcomes (all p < 0.05). The association between the delivery mode and the likelihood of achieving the minimal important change in the PROMIS outcomes was non-significant (all p > 0.05). No between-group differences were observed in the NPS or SM-PREM scores (all p > 0.05). Although more research is needed, this real-world evidence suggests that hybrid rehabilitation care may be equally beneficial for and acceptable to cancer survivors and supports calls to expand access to and reimbursement for telerehabilitation.

Understanding Patient Experience with Outpatient Cancer Rehabilitation Care.

BACKGROUND: Understanding patient experience is key to optimize access and quality of outpatient cancer rehabilitation (physical or occupational therapy, PT/OT) services. METHODS: We performed a retrospective mixed-method analysis of rehabilitation medical record data to better understand patient experience and aspects of care that influenced experience. From the medical record, we extracted case characteristics, patient experience data (Net Promoter Survey®, NPS) and patient-reported outcome (PRO) data. We categorized cases as 'promoters' (i.e., highly likely to recommend rehabilitation) or 'detractors', then calculated NPS score (-100 [worst] to 100 [best]). We identified key themes from NPS free-text comments using inductive content analysis, then used Pearson [r] or Spearman [ρ] correlation to explore relationships between NPS, characteristics, and PRO improvement. RESULTS: Patients (n = 383) were 60.51 ± 12.02 years old, predominantly women with breast cancer (69.2%), and attended 14.23 ± 12.37 visits. Most were 'promoters' (92%); NPS score was 91.4. Patients described two experiences (themes) that influenced their likelihood to recommend rehabilitation: (1) feeling comfortable with the process and (2) observable improvement in health/functioning, and described attributes of clinic staff, environment and clinical care that influenced themes. Likelihood to recommend rehabilitation was associated with achieving the minimal clinical important difference on a PRO (ρ = 0.21, p < 0.001) and cancer type (ρ = 0.10, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients who received specialized cancer PT/OT were highly likely to recommend rehabilitation. Feeling comfortable with the rehabilitation process and making observable improvements in health and/or functioning influenced likelihood to recommend. Rehabilitation providers should leverage the findings of this study optimize access to and quality of cancer rehab services.

The influence of telehealth-based cancer rehabilitation interventions on disability: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To characterize delivery features and explore effectiveness of telehealth-based cancer rehabilitation interventions that address disability in adult cancer survivors. METHODS: A systematic review of electronic databases (CINAHL Plus, Cochrane Library: Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, National Health Service's Health Technology Assessment, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) was conducted in December 2019 and updated in April 2021. RESULTS: Searches identified 3,499 unique studies. Sixty-eight studies met inclusion criteria. There were 81 unique interventions across included studies. Interventions were primarily delivered post-treatment and lasted an average of 16.5 weeks (SD = 13.1). They were most frequently delivered using telephone calls (59%), administered delivered by nursing professionals (35%), and delivered in a one-on-one format (88%). Risk of bias of included studies was primarily moderate to high. Included studies captured 55 measures of disability. Only 54% of reported outcomes had data that allowed calculation of effect sizes ranging -3.58 to 15.66. CONCLUSIONS: The analyses suggest small effects of telehealth-based cancer interventions on disability, though the heterogeneity seen in the measurement of disability makes it hard to draw firm conclusions. Further research using more diverse samples, common measures of disability, and pragmatic study designs is needed to advance telehealth in cancer rehabilitation. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Telehealth-based cancer rehabilitation interventions have the potential to increase access to care designed to reduce disability across the cancer care continuum.

The Role of Exercise Self-Efficacy in Exercise Participation Among Women With Persistent Fatigue After Breast Cancer: A Mixed-Methods Study.

OBJECTIVE: Survivors of breast cancer with persistent cancer-related fatigue (CRF) report less exercise participation compared with survivors of breast cancer without CRF. Although CRF predicts other domains of self-efficacy among survivors, the effect of CRF on exercise self-efficacy (ESE)-an important predictor of exercise participation-has not been quantified. This study examined the relationship between CRF, ESE, and exercise participation and explored the lived experience of engaging in exercise among survivors of breast cancer with persistent CRF. METHODS: Fifty-eight survivors of breast cancer (3.7 [SD = 2.4] years after primary treatment) self-reported CRF, ESE, and exercise participation (hours of moderate-intensity exercise per week). Regression and mediation analyses were conducted. Survivors who reported clinically significant CRF and weekly exercise were purposively sampled for 1-on-1 interviews (N = 11). Thematic analysis was performed across participants and within higher versus lower ESE subsets. RESULTS: Greater CRF predicted lower ESE (ß = -0.32) and less exercise participation (ß = -0.08). ESE mediated the relationship between CRF and exercise participation (ß = -0.05, 95% CI = -0.09 to -0.02). Qualitative data showed that survivors of breast cancer with higher ESE perceived exercise as a strategy to manage fatigue, described self-motivation and commitment to exercise, and had multiple sources of support. In contrast, survivors with lower ESE described less initiative to manage fatigue through exercise, greater difficulty staying committed to exercise, and less support. CONCLUSIONS: Survivors of breast cancer with persistent CRF may experience decreased ESE, which negatively influences exercise participation. Clinicians should screen for or discuss confidence as it relates to exercise and consider tailoring standardized exercise recommendations for this population to optimize ESE. This may facilitate more sustainable exercise participation and improve outcomes. IMPACT: This study highlights the behavioral underpinnings of CRF as a barrier to exercise. Individualized exercise tailored to optimize ESE may facilitate sustainable exercise participation among survivors of breast cancer with CRF. Strategies for clinicians to address ESE are described and future research is suggested. LAY SUMMARY: Women with fatigue after breast cancer treatment may have lower confidence about their ability to engage in exercise. Individually tailoring exercise to build confidence as it relates to exercise may result in more consistent exercise and better health-related outcomes.

Community-based outpatient cancer rehabilitation services for women with gynecologic cancer: acceptability and impact on patient-reported outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Women with gynecologic cancers often experience functional impairments impacting quality of life. Physical and occupational therapy (PT/OT) treat functional impairment; however, the acceptability and impact of these services for women with gynecologic cancer are unknown. METHODS: We reviewed rehabilitation charts of women with gynecologic cancer who received PT/OT (i.e., patients) in 2019 and completed patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) selected by their therapist at intake (pre) and discharge (post). We calculated descriptive statistics for patient, rehabilitation, and acceptability (0-10) data. For PROM data, we used paired samples t-tests to evaluate pre-post change, and then calculated effect size (Hedge's g) and the proportion who achieved a minimal detectable change (MDC). RESULTS: PT/OT patients (N = 84) were 64.63 ± 11.04 years old with predominant diagnoses of ovarian (41.7%) or endometrial (32.1%) cancer. They attended a median of 13 sessions (IQR = 8.0-19.0). Sessions were predominantly PT (86%) vs. OT (14%). Median acceptability was 10 (IQR = 9.8-10.0). Pre-post improvement was observed for each of the 17 PROMs used by therapists. Significant improvement (p < .05) was observed for four PROMs: the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (M∆ = 2.93 ± 2.31, g = 1.47, 71% achieved MDC), the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (M∆ = 12.88 ± 12.31, g = 0.61, 60% achieved MDC), the Lymphedema Life Impact Scale (M∆ = 20.50 ± 20.61, g = 1.18, 58% achieved MDC), and the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (M∆ = 6.55 ± 9.69, g = 0.33, 7% achieved MDC). CONCLUSION: PT/OT was acceptable and improved patient-reported outcomes for women with gynecologic cancers. Future research is needed to establish gynecologic-specific guidelines for referral and PT/OT practice.

Community-based outpatient rehabilitation for the treatment of breast cancer-related upper extremity disability: an evaluation of practice-based evidence.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact and acceptability of outpatient physical or occupational therapy (PT/OT) for breast cancer survivors (BCS) with varying levels of upper extremity disability (UED). METHODS: We retrospectively extracted patient and therapy characteristics, UED measured by quick-disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (QuickDASH, 0-100 pts.), and patient-rated acceptability (1-item, 0-10 pts) from rehabilitation charts of BCS who completed cancer-specialized PT/OT provided by a single national institution in 2019. We summarized characteristics and acceptability using descriptive statistics, then used established parameters to group BCS by baseline UED severity: high- (QuickDASH > 31.5), moderate- (QuickDASH = 18.5-31.5), or low-UED (QuickDASH = 13-18.5). To evaluate within-group pre-to-post QuickDASH change, we used paired samples t test (p < 0.01), then calculated the proportion who achieved the minimally clinical important difference (MCID, 15.9 points). To compare between-groups difference in QuickDASH improvement, we used Kruskal-Wallis test and Chi-squared test. RESULTS: Patients (N = 417) were 59.89 ± 12.06 years old, 99% female, and attended approximately 10 PT/OT sessions (IQR = 6.0-16.0). Most had high baseline UED (62%), followed by moderate (25%) or low UED (13%). For each severity group, mean pre-to-post change in QuickDASH was significant: high-UED (M∆ = 25.13 ± 20.33, d = 1.24, p < 0.01), moderate-UED (M∆ = 11.36 ± 11.9, d = 0.95, p < 0.01), and low-UED (M∆ = 4.84 ± 9.15, d = 0.53, p < 0.01). Most with high UED achieved the MCID (n = 176, 68.2%). In the moderate- and low-UED groups 44% (n = 46) and 4% (n = 2) achieved the MCID, respectively. Acceptability was high (n = 167, Median = 10). CONCLUSION: Outpatient cancer rehabilitation is associated with significant improvement in UED for BCS and was acceptable to patients regardless of UED severity at baseline.

Usability, acceptability, and implementation strategies for the Exercise in Cancer Evaluation and Decision Support (EXCEEDS) algorithm: a Delphi study.

INTRODUCTION: Oncology guidelines recommend participation in cancer rehabilitation or exercise services (CR/ES) to optimize survivorship. Yet, connecting the right survivor, with the right CR/ES, at the right time remains a challenge. The Exercise in Cancer Evaluation and Decision Support (EXCEEDS) algorithm was developed to enhance CR/ES clinical decision-making and facilitate access to CR/ES. We used Delphi methodology to evaluate usability, acceptability, and determine pragmatic implementation priorities. METHODS: Participants completed three online questionnaires including (1) simulated case vignettes, (2) 4-item acceptability questionnaire (0-5 pts), and (3) series of items to rank algorithm implementation priorities (potential users, platforms, strategies). To evaluate usability, we used Chi-squared test to compare frequency of accurate pre-exercise medical clearance and CR/ES triage recommendations for case vignettes when using EXCEEDS vs. without. We calculated mean acceptability and inter-rater agreement overall and in 4 domains. We used the Eisenhower Prioritization Method to evaluate implementation priorities. RESULTS: Participants (N = 133) mostly represented the fields of rehabilitation (69%), oncology (25%), or exercise science (17%). When using EXCEEDS (vs. without), their recommendations were more likely to be guideline concordant for medical clearance (83.4% vs. 66.5%, X2 = 26.61, p < .0001) and CR/ES triage (60.9% vs. 51.1%, X2 = 73.79, p < .0001). Mean acceptability was M = 3.90 ± 0.47; inter-rater agreement was high for 3 of 4 domains. Implementation priorities include 1 potential user group, 2 platform types, and 9 implementation strategies. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the EXCEEDS algorithm can be a pragmatic and acceptable clinical decision support tool for CR/ES recommendations. Future research is needed to evaluate algorithm usability and acceptability in real-world clinical pathways.

Improving Inpatient Tobacco Treatment Measures: Outcomes Through Standardized Treatment, Care Coordination, and Electronic Health Record Optimization.

INTRODUCTION: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention states that tobacco use is the largest and most preventable cause of disease and mortality in the United States. The Joint Commission implemented inpatient tobacco treatment measures (TTMs) in 2012 to encourage healthcare systems to create processes that help patients quit tobacco use through evidence-based care. METHODS: A tobacco cessation care delivery system was implemented at James A. Haley Veterans' Hospital and Clinics, which included: standardized pathways within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) electronic health record system to improve nicotine replacement therapy ordering; evidence-based tobacco cessation counseling; and improved care coordination for tobacco cessation treatment through the use of technological innovation. RESULTS: Outcomes were obtained from the VHA quality metric reporting system known as Strategic Analytics for Improvement and Learning (SAIL). TOB-2 and TOB-3 (two Joint Commission inpatient TTMs) equivalent to tob20 and tob40 within SAIL improved by greater than 300% after implementation at James A. Haley Veterans' Hospital and Clinics. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a tobacco cessation care system at James A. Haley Veterans' Hospital and Clinics enhanced interdisciplinary coordination of tobacco cessation care and resulted in improvements of The Joint Commission inpatient TTMs by greater than threefold.