Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Cancer Survivorship
Published in: Journal of Cancer Survivorship 1/2019

01-02-2019 | Care

Evaluation of a survivorship needs assessment planning tool for head and neck cancer survivor-caregiver dyads

Authors: Katherine R. Sterba, Kent Armeson, Jane Zapka, Megan A. Scallion, Tiffany K. Garris, Evan M. Graboyes, Kenneth Ruggiero, Terry A. Day

Published in: Journal of Cancer Survivorship | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The objectives of this study were to test the acceptability and feasibility of a survivorship needs assessment planning (SNAP) tool for head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors and caregivers, evaluate short-term changes in psychosocial outcomes after completing the SNAP session, and develop strategies for system refinement.

Methods

We used a prospective one-group design and mixed methods with HNC survivors and caregivers (N = 25 dyads). Participants completed baseline and 6-week surveys before and after completing a SNAP clinic visit to assess psychosocial outcomes and acceptability. Intervention sessions included tablet-based needs assessments driving tailored care plans. Dyads’ open-ended feedback and clinician interviews (N = 12) evaluated acceptability and feasibility.

Results

SNAP data collection time burden and technology challenges were minimal, and care plans included messages (M = 19), educational materials (M = 13), and referrals (M = 4.5; 86% behavioral medicine, 77% nutrition, 65% physical therapy). Participants reported high satisfaction with the session and care plan, highlighting the key strengths of pulling complex medical information together and the focus on caregiver well-being, with multiple suggestions to facilitate clinic workflow. Depression and unmet needs decreased and survivorship knowledge increased significantly in survivors and caregivers (p < .05) over the 6-week period.

Conclusions

The SNAP tool is an innovative technology-based survivor-centered strategy to assess and manage needs in HNC survivors and caregivers. Results support its acceptability and ability to address dyads’ needs; the tool merits further testing in a clinical trial.

Implications for Cancer Survivors

Technology-enabled care planning may be a productive way to assess and address HNC dyads’ dynamic needs after treatment.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Miller MC, Shuman AG, American H, Survivorship NSsCo. Survivorship in head and neck cancer: a primer. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;142(10):1002–8.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Ringash J. Survivorship and quality of life in head and neck cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(29):3322–7.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Longacre ML, Ridge JA, Burtness BA, Galloway TJ, Fang CY. Psychological functioning of caregivers for head and neck cancer patients. Oral Oncol. 2012;48(1):18–25.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Penner JL, McClement S, Lobchuk M, Daeninck P. Family members’ experiences caring for patients with advanced head and neck cancer receiving tube feeding: a descriptive phenomenological study. J Pain Symptom Manag. 2012;44(4):563–71.CrossRef
5.
Sterba KR, Zapka J, Cranos C, Laursen A, Day T. Quality-of-life in head and neck cancer patient-caregiver dyads: a systematic review. Cancer Nurs. 2016;39(3):238–50.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Birken SA, Ellis SD, Walker JS, DiMartino LD, Check DK, Gerstel AA, et al. Guidelines for the use of survivorship care plans: a systematic quality appraisal using the AGREE II instrument. Implement Sci. 2015;10:63.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
7.
Mayer DK, Birken SA, Check DK, Chen RC. Summing it up: an integrative review of studies of cancer survivorship care plans (2006-2013). Cancer. 2015;121(7):978–96.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Institute of Medicine. Implementing cancer survivorship care planning workshop summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2007.
9.
Stricker CT, Jacobs LA, Palmer SC. Survivorship care plans: an argument for evidence over common sense. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1392–3.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Ganz PA, Casillas J, Hahn EE. Ensuring quality care for cancer survivors: implementing the survivorship care plan. Semin Oncol Nurs. 2008;24(3):208–17.PubMedCrossRef
11.
12.
Cohen EE, LaMonte SJ, Erb NL, Beckman KL, Sadeghi N, Hutcheson KA, et al. American Cancer Society head and neck cancer survivorship care guideline. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66(3):203–39.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Nekhlyudov L, Lacchetti C, Davis NB, Garvey TQ, Goldstein DP, Nunnink JC, et al. Head and neck cancer survivorship care guideline: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline endorsement of the American Cancer Society guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(14):1606–21.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Chen SC, Lai YH, Liao CT, Huang BS, Lin CY, Fan KH, et al. Unmet supportive care needs and characteristics of family caregivers of patients with oral cancer after surgery. Psychooncology. 2014;23(5):569–77.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Basch E. Patient-reported outcomes - harnessing patients' voices to improve clinical care. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(2):105–8.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Basch E, Deal AM, Kris MG, Scher HI, Hudis CA, Sabbatini P, et al. Symptom monitoring with patient-reported outcomes during routine cancer treatment: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(6):557–65.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Snyder CF, Aaronson NK, Choucair AK, Elliott TE, Greenhalgh J, Halyard MY, et al. Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: a review of the options and considerations. Qual Life Res. 2012;21(8):1305–14.PubMedCrossRef
18.
de Bree R, Verdonck-de Leeuw IM, Keizer AL, Houffelaar A, Leemans CR. Touch screen computer-assisted health-related quality of life and distress data collection in head and neck cancer patients. Clin Otolaryngol. 2008;33(2):138–42.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Sterba KR, Zapka J, LaPelle N, Garris TK, Buchanan A, Scallion M, et al. Development of a survivorship needs assessment planning tool for head and neck cancer survivors and their caregivers: a preliminary study. J Cancer Surviv. 2017;11(6):822–32.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
20.
Murphy BA, Deng J. Advances in supportive care for late effects of head and neck cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(29):3314–21.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Constantinescu G, Kuffel K, King B, Hodgetts W, Rieger J. Usability testing of an mHealth device for swallowing therapy in head and neck cancer survivors. Health Informatics J. 2018:1460458218766574.
22.
Constantinescu G, Loewen I, King B, Brodt C, Hodgetts W, Rieger J. Designing a mobile health app for patients with dysphagia following head and neck cancer: a qualitative study. JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol. 2017;4(1):e3.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
23.
Sosa A, Heineman N, Thomas K, Tang K, Feinstein M, Martin MY, et al. Improving patient health engagement with mobile texting: a pilot study in the head and neck postoperative setting. Head Neck. 2017;39(5):988–95.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
24.
Cnossen IC, van Uden-Kraan CF, Eerenstein SE, et al. An online self-care education program to support patients after total laryngectomy: feasibility and satisfaction. Support Care Cancer. 2016;24(3):1261–8.PubMedCrossRef
25.
van den Brink JL, Moorman PW, de Boer MF, Hop WCJ, Pruyn JFA, Verwoerd CDA, et al. Impact on quality of life of a telemedicine system supporting head and neck cancer patients: a controlled trial during the postoperative period at home. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007;14(2):198–205.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
26.
van den Brink JL, Moorman PW, de Boer MF, Pruyn JF, Verwoerd CD, van Bemmel JH. Involving the patient: a prospective study on use, appreciation and effectiveness of an information system in head and neck cancer care. Int J Med Inform. 2005;74(10):839–49.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Slev VN, Mistiaen P, Pasman HR, Verdonck-de Leeuw IM, van Uden-Kraan CF, Francke AL. Effects of eHealth for patients and informal caregivers confronted with cancer: a meta-review. Int J Med Inform. 2016;87:54–67.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–81.PubMedCrossRef
29.
30.
Hodgkinson K, Butow P, Hobbs KM, Hunt GE, Lo SK, Wain G. Assessing unmet supportive care needs in partners of cancer survivors: the development and evaluation of the Cancer Survivors’ Partners unmet needs measure (CaSPUN). Psychooncology. 2007;16(9):805–13.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Hodgkinson K, Butow P, Hunt GE, Pendlebury S, Hobbs KM, Lo SK, et al. The development and evaluation of a measure to assess cancer survivors’ unmet supportive care needs: the CaSUN (Cancer Survivors’ Unmet Needs measure). Psychooncology. 2007;16(9):796–804.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Cleeland CS, Mendoza TR, Wang XS, Chou C, Harle MT, Morrissey M, et al. Assessing symptom distress in cancer patients: the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory. Cancer. 2000;89(7):1634–46.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Rosenthal DI, Mendoza TR, Chambers MS, Asper JA, Gning I, Kies MS, et al. Measuring head and neck cancer symptom burden: the development and validation of the M. D. Anderson symptom inventory, head and neck module. Head Neck. 2007;29(10):923–31.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Parry C, Beckjord E, Moser RP, Vieux SN, Padgett LS, Hesse BW. It takes a (virtual) village: crowdsourcing measurement consensus to advance survivorship care planning. Transl Behav Med. 2014;5(1):53–9.PubMedCentralCrossRef
35.
36.
Pilkonis PA, Choi SW, Reise SP, Stover AM, Riley WT, Cella D, et al. Item banks for measuring emotional distress from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS(R)): depression, anxiety, and anger. Assessment. 2011;18(3):263–83.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
37.
Pilkonis PA, Yu L, Dodds NE, Johnston KL, Maihoefer CC, Lawrence SM. Validation of the depression item bank from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) in a three-month observational study. J Psychiatr Res. 2014;56:112–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
38.
Palmer SC, Stricker CT, DeMichele AM, et al. The use of a patient-reported outcome questionnaire to assess cancer survivorship concerns and psychosocial outcomes among recent survivors. Support Care Cancer. 2017;25(8):2405–12.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Rocque GB, Wisinski KB, Buhr KA, Froeschner JL, Jones N, Donohue S, et al. Development and evaluation of a survey to assess survivor knowledge change after survivorship care plans: WiSDOM-B (Wisconsin Survey of cancer DiagnOsis and Management in Breast cancer). J Cancer Educ. 2014;29(2):270–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
40.
Olagunju TOR, Liu Y, Liang LJ, et al. Disparities in the survivorship experience among Latina survivors of breast cancer. Cancer. 2018;124(11):2373–80.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Bodenmann G. Dyadic coping - a systemic-transactional conceptualization of stress and coping among couples: theory and empirical findings. Eur Rev Appl Psychol. 1997;47:137–40.
42.
Bedard M, Molloy DW, Squire L, Dubois S, Lever JA, O'Donnell M. The Zarit Burden Interview: a new short version and screening version. Gerontologist. 2001;41(5):652–7.PubMedCrossRef
43.
44.
Sterba KR, DeVellis RF, Lewis MA, Baucom DH, Jordan JM, DeVellis B. Developing and testing a measure of dyadic efficacy for married women with rheumatoid arthritis and their spouses. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57(2):294–302.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Abernethy AP, Ahmad A, Zafar SY, Wheeler JL, Reese JB, Lyerly HK. Electronic patient-reported data capture as a foundation of rapid learning cancer care. Med Care. 2010;48(6 Suppl):S32–8.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Bantum EO, Albright CL, White KK, et al. Surviving and thriving with cancer using a web-based health behavior change intervention: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(2):e54.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Vickers AJ, Salz T, Basch E, Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR, Tighe F, et al. Electronic patient self-assessment and management (SAM): a novel framework for cancer survivorship. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010;10:34.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
48.
Revenson TA, Kayser K, Bodenmann G. Couples coping with stress: emerging perspectives on dyadic coping. Washington DC: American Psychological Association; 2005.CrossRef
49.
Duman-Lubberding S, van Uden-Kraan CF, Jansen F, Witte BI, van der Velden LA, Lacko M, et al. Feasibility of an eHealth application “OncoKompas” to improve personalized survivorship cancer care. Support Care Cancer. 2016;24(5):2163–71.PubMedCrossRef
50.
van der Hout A, van Uden-Kraan CF, Witte BI, et al. Efficacy, cost-utility and reach of an eHealth self-management application ‘Oncokompas’ that helps cancer survivors to obtain optimal supportive care: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2017;18(1):228.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
51.
Glasgow RE, Fisher L, Strycker LA, Hessler D, Toobert DJ, King DK, et al. Minimal intervention needed for change: definition, use, and value for improving health and health research. Transl Behav Med. 2014;4(1):26–33.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Nguyen NA, Ringash J. Head and neck cancer survivorship care: a review of the current guidelines and remaining unmet needs. Curr Treat Options in Oncol. 2018;19(8):44.CrossRef
53.
Ringash J, Bernstein LJ, Devins G, Dunphy C, Giuliani M, Martino R, et al. Head and neck cancer survivorship: learning the needs, meeting the needs. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2018;28(1):64–74.PubMedCrossRef
54.
So WK, Chan RJ, Chan DN, et al. Quality-of-life among head and neck cancer survivors at one year after treatment--a systematic review. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48(15):2391–408.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Jabbour J, Milross C, Sundaresan P, Ebrahimi A, Shepherd HL, Dhillon HM, et al. Education and support needs in patients with head and neck cancer: a multi-institutional survey. Cancer. 2017;123(11):1949–57.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Jensen RE, Rothrock NE, DeWitt EM, et al. The role of technical advances in the adoption and integration of patient-reported outcomes in clinical care. Med Care. 2015;53(2):153–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
57.
Wu AW, White SM, Blackford AL, et al. Improving an electronic system for measuring PROs in routine oncology practice. J Cancer Surviv. 2016;10(3):573–82.PubMedCrossRef
58.
Grunfeld E, Earle CC. The interface between primary and oncology specialty care: treatment through survivorship. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2010;2010(40):25–30.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
59.
Taplin SH, Rodgers AB. Toward improving the quality of cancer care: addressing the interfaces of primary and oncology-related subspecialty care. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2010;2010(40):3–10.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
60.
Hewitt ME, Greenfield S, Stovall E. From cancer patient to cancer survivor: lost in translation. Washington DC: The National Academies Press; 2006.
61.
National Alliance of Caregiving, in partnershop with the National Cancer Institute and the Cancer Support Community. Cancer caregiving in the United States: An intense, episodic, and challenging care experience. 2016.
Metadata
Title
Evaluation of a survivorship needs assessment planning tool for head and neck cancer survivor-caregiver dyads
Authors
Katherine R. Sterba
Kent Armeson
Jane Zapka
Megan A. Scallion
Tiffany K. Garris
Evan M. Graboyes
Kenneth Ruggiero
Terry A. Day
Publication date
01-02-2019
Publisher
Springer US
Keyword
Care
Published in
Journal of Cancer Survivorship / Issue 1/2019
Print ISSN: 1932-2259
Electronic ISSN: 1932-2267
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-019-0732-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Journal of Cancer Survivorship 1/2019 Go to the issue

Review

Unpacking the layers: a meta-ethnography of cancer survivors’ loneliness

OriginalPaper

Chinese translation of a measure of symptom burden, functional limitations, lifestyle, and health care–seeking skills in breast cancer survivors: the Cancer Survivor Profile

Review

Living with and beyond cancer with comorbid illness: a qualitative systematic review and evidence synthesis

OriginalPaper

Integrating self-management into daily life following primary treatment: head and neck cancer survivors’ perspectives

OriginalPaper

Financial toxicity is more than costs of care: the relationship between employment and financial toxicity in long-term cancer survivors

Reviews

A systematic review of the feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy of online supportive care interventions targeting men with a history of prostate cancer
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits