Addressing distress in head and neck cancer patients: A quality improvement project.

Abstract

43 Background: To better address the emotional needs of cancer patients by improving mental health care in Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) Medical oncology at Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH, through implementing an evidence-based process for identifying and managing psychological distress. Methods: Using quality improvement methods, mental health care in HNC Medical Oncology was evaluated and revised November 2010 through April 2012. In January 2011, a two-component intervention was put into routine care including 1) the validated National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) distress thermometer (DT) and 2) a treatment decision algorithm. A licensed nursing assistant administered the DT and providers reviewed results as part of the clinical exam. Heightened distress was defined as a score of ≥ 4. Screening processes were improved through Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles. Results: Prior to January 2011, identification of distress was based on provider’s clinical assessment. Of 104 patients seen between November 2010 and January 2011, 25% (26) were diagnosed with psychological problems. Cause-effect diagraming suggested that lack of a formalized process for distress assessment contributed to missed diagnoses. Providers were unfamiliar with mental health resources. As reported in Psycho-Oncology 21(Suppl. 1): 51(2012) after implementing process changes, bi-weekly distress screening rates rose from 0% to 38% between January and July 2011. With additional PDSA cycles, these rates increased to 74% between October 2011 and April 2012. Similar to proposed benchmarks, 84% (47) of newly diagnosed patients (56) were assessed for distress. Furthermore, of 138 unique patients seen, 71% (98) were screened for distress and 47% (46) of these had heightened distress. Providers addressed the needs of all those identified. Improvement was attributed to the empowerment of staff and participation of senior leadership. Barriers included a heavy reliance on the presence of trained staff. Conclusions: Quality improvement methods can be applied to the cancer setting in order to create systems of care, which more reliably identify and address distress. Teams, however, must be invested in the work and receive support from senior leadership.