The PACT Study: results of a time series study investigating the impact, acceptability and cost of an integrated model for psychosocial screening, care and treatment of patients with urological and head and neck cancers

A. Girgis, Hayley Candler, T. Handley, J. Descallar, V. Hansen, M. Haas, R. Viney, P. Haywood, Douglas Bellamy, A. Proietto, B. Kelly
{"title":"The PACT Study: results of a time series study investigating the impact, acceptability and cost of an integrated model for psychosocial screening, care and treatment of patients with urological and head and neck cancers","authors":"A. Girgis, Hayley Candler, T. Handley, J. Descallar, V. Hansen, M. Haas, R. Viney, P. Haywood, Douglas Bellamy, A. Proietto, B. Kelly","doi":"10.1097/OR9.0000000000000063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background: The significant psychosocial morbidity experienced by cancer patients is often undetected and untreated. Despite international priority given to psychosocial care for cancer patients, implementation of psychosocial programs into routine cancer care is limited. We developed, implemented, and assessed the impact, acceptability, and cost of an integrated, patient-centered Psychosocial Assessment, Care and Treatment (PACT) model of care for cancer patients within a general hospital setting. Methods: A time series research design was implemented to test the PACT model of care, newly introduced in an Australian tertiary hospital. System-level impact on systematic distress screening and management was assessed through audit of the medical records of three cross-sectional samples of 141 patients, at baseline and at 12 and 24 months post-baseline. The impact of the model on patient experience and health care professionals’ (HCPs) knowledge and confidence was assessed via surveys. The acceptability of the intervention was assessed through HCP interviews at 24 months. The cost of the intervention was assessed by PACT staff recording the time spent on care provision, training, and intervention administration, and associated costs were calculated using staff payment rates adjusted for superannuation and leave. Results: Across the 24 months of implementation, formal distress screening increased from 0% at baseline to 29% of patients at 12 months and 31% of patients at 24 months, with an associated decrease in informal screening as formal screening increased. There was no notable change in distress management (ie, development of care plans) across the time period. Baseline patient experience was already high (mean score = 46.85/55) and did not change significantly over the course of the study. In both general and specific areas of addressing patient psychosocial concerns, HCP knowledge and confidence was moderate and remained largely unchanged over the course of the study. HCPs perceived the PACT model as highly beneficial and instrumental in bringing about significant changes to staff's knowledge, practices and awareness of psychosocial issues. The estimated total labor cost (including on-costs) was AUD$119,239 (over the 2 years); with a declining cost over the lifetime of the intervention reflecting the higher initial set-up costs. Conclusions: Although the PACT model was associated with an increase in distress screening, staff workloads, high turnover, and administrative barriers may have restricted the translation into distress management. Future research exploring effective avenues to engage staff at a management level and ensure that staff view distress management as a valuable component of their role may assist to embed strategies into the general hospital culture and lead to more sustainable changes.","PeriodicalId":73915,"journal":{"name":"Journal of psychosocial oncology research and practice","volume":"3 1","pages":"e063"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of psychosocial oncology research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/OR9.0000000000000063","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract Background: The significant psychosocial morbidity experienced by cancer patients is often undetected and untreated. Despite international priority given to psychosocial care for cancer patients, implementation of psychosocial programs into routine cancer care is limited. We developed, implemented, and assessed the impact, acceptability, and cost of an integrated, patient-centered Psychosocial Assessment, Care and Treatment (PACT) model of care for cancer patients within a general hospital setting. Methods: A time series research design was implemented to test the PACT model of care, newly introduced in an Australian tertiary hospital. System-level impact on systematic distress screening and management was assessed through audit of the medical records of three cross-sectional samples of 141 patients, at baseline and at 12 and 24 months post-baseline. The impact of the model on patient experience and health care professionals’ (HCPs) knowledge and confidence was assessed via surveys. The acceptability of the intervention was assessed through HCP interviews at 24 months. The cost of the intervention was assessed by PACT staff recording the time spent on care provision, training, and intervention administration, and associated costs were calculated using staff payment rates adjusted for superannuation and leave. Results: Across the 24 months of implementation, formal distress screening increased from 0% at baseline to 29% of patients at 12 months and 31% of patients at 24 months, with an associated decrease in informal screening as formal screening increased. There was no notable change in distress management (ie, development of care plans) across the time period. Baseline patient experience was already high (mean score = 46.85/55) and did not change significantly over the course of the study. In both general and specific areas of addressing patient psychosocial concerns, HCP knowledge and confidence was moderate and remained largely unchanged over the course of the study. HCPs perceived the PACT model as highly beneficial and instrumental in bringing about significant changes to staff's knowledge, practices and awareness of psychosocial issues. The estimated total labor cost (including on-costs) was AUD$119,239 (over the 2 years); with a declining cost over the lifetime of the intervention reflecting the higher initial set-up costs. Conclusions: Although the PACT model was associated with an increase in distress screening, staff workloads, high turnover, and administrative barriers may have restricted the translation into distress management. Future research exploring effective avenues to engage staff at a management level and ensure that staff view distress management as a valuable component of their role may assist to embed strategies into the general hospital culture and lead to more sustainable changes.
PACT研究:一项时间序列研究的结果,调查了泌尿科和头颈癌患者心理社会筛查、护理和治疗综合模式的影响、可接受性和成本
摘要背景:癌症患者所经历的显著的心理社会发病率通常未被发现和治疗。尽管国际上优先重视癌症患者的心理社会护理,但在癌症常规护理中实施心理社会方案的情况有限。我们开发、实施并评估了以患者为中心的综合性癌症患者心理社会评估、护理和治疗(PACT)模式的影响、可接受性和成本。方法:采用时间序列研究设计,对澳大利亚一家三级医院新引入的PACT护理模式进行测试。通过对141名患者的三个横断面样本的医疗记录进行审计,评估了系统层面对系统痛苦筛查和管理的影响,这些样本分别位于基线和12岁和24岁 基线后数月。通过调查评估了该模型对患者体验以及医疗保健专业人员(HCP)知识和信心的影响。干预的可接受性通过24岁的HCP访谈进行评估 月。干预成本由PACT工作人员评估,记录在护理、培训和干预管理上花费的时间,相关成本使用根据养老金和休假调整的员工支付率计算。结果:24 实施数月后,正式的痛苦筛查从基线时的0%增加到12岁时的29% 月,31%的患者在24岁时 月,随着正式筛查的增加,非正式筛查的相关减少。在这段时间内,痛苦管理(即制定护理计划)没有显著变化。基线患者体验已经很高(平均得分=46.85/55),并且在研究过程中没有显著变化。在解决患者心理社会问题的一般和特定领域,HCP的知识和信心是适度的,在研究过程中基本保持不变。HCP认为PACT模式非常有益,有助于员工对心理社会问题的知识、实践和意识发生重大变化。预计总人工成本(包括间接成本)为119239澳元(超过2 年);其中在干预的寿命期间成本下降反映了较高的初始设置成本。结论:尽管PACT模型与遇险筛查的增加有关,但工作人员的工作量、高流动性和行政障碍可能限制了转化为遇险管理。未来的研究探索有效途径,让工作人员参与管理层,并确保工作人员将痛苦管理视为其角色的一个宝贵组成部分,这可能有助于将战略融入综合医院文化,并带来更可持续的变革。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信