Explore the vast range of titles available.

Technology‐aided remote interventions for poorly controlled symptoms may improve cancer symptom outcomes. In a randomized controlled trial, the efficacy of an automated symptom management system was tested to determine if it reduced chemotherapy‐related symptoms. Prospectively, 358 patients beginning chemotherapy were randomized to the Symptom Care at Home (SCH) intervention (n = 180) or enhanced usual care (UC) (n = 178). Participants called the automated monitoring system daily reporting severity of 11 symptoms. SCH participants received automated self‐management coaching and nurse practitioner (NP) telephone follow‐up for poorly controlled symptoms. NPs used a guideline‐based decision support system. Primary endpoints were symptom severity across all symptoms, and the number of severe, moderate, mild, and no symptom days. A secondary endpoint was individual symptom severity. Mixed effects linear modeling and negative binominal regressions were used to compare SCH with UC. SCH participants had significantly less symptom severity across all symptoms (P < 0.001). On average, the relative symptom burden reduction for SCH participants was 3.59 severity points (P < 0.001), roughly 43% of UC. With a very rapid treatment benefit, SCH participants had significant reductions in severe (67% less) and moderate (39% less) symptom days compared with UC (both P < 0.001). All individual symptoms, except diarrhea, were significantly lower for SCH participants (P < 0.05). Symptom Care at Home dramatically improved symptom outcomes. These results demonstrate that symptoms can be improved through automated home monitoring and follow‐up to intensify care for poorly controlled symptoms. We tested an automated system to decrease symptom burden during chemotherapy. Results are reported for a randomized controlled trial of Symptom Care at Home, an automated symptom monitoring and management system that included automated self‐management coaching coupled with oncology provider alerts about poorly controlled symptoms at home. Study‐based nurse practitioners provided telephone follow‐up utilizing a symptom care decision support system to intensify symptom care. The trial results clearly demonstrate that the intervention significantly improves symptom outcomes.

Purpose Monitoring patient-reported symptoms is necessary to adjust and improve supportive care during chemotherapy. Continuing advances in computerized approaches to symptom monitoring can enhance communication about unrelieved symptoms between patients and oncology providers and may facilitate intensified symptom treatment. Methods An automated IT-based telephone monitoring system was developed to enable oncology providers to receive and act on alert reports from patients about unrelieved symptoms during chemotherapy treatment. Daily, 250 participants (randomized to treatment or attentional control) were asked to call the automated system to report presence, severity, and distress for common chemotherapy-related symptoms (1–10 scale if present). For the treatment group, symptoms exceeding preset thresholds for moderate-to-severe intensity levels generated emailed alert reports to both the patient’s oncologist and oncology nurse. Results Patients reported high satisfaction and ease of use of the automated system. Over 80 % of providers reported usefulness of the symptom alert reports. Ten monitored symptoms resulted in, on average, nine moderate-to-severe intensity alerts per patient over 45 study days. However, providers rarely contacted patients after receiving alerts. There were no significant differences in change of symptom severity between the two groups (mean difference = 0.06, p  = 0.58). Conclusion Despite patients’ use of a daily symptom monitoring system and providers’ receipt of information about unrelieved symptoms of moderate-to-severe intensity, oncology physicians and nurses did not contact patients to intensify symptom treatment nor did symptoms improve. Further research is indicated to determine if oncology providers initiated follow-up to intensify symptom treatment, whether symptom outcomes would improve.

Purpose Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are increasing among young adults (YAs) aged 18–39. This study compared quality of life (QOL) between YA and older adult CRC survivors in the ColoCare Study. Methods Participants were grouped by age (years) as follows: 18–39 (YA), 40–49, 50–64, and 65 + . Functional QOL (physical, social, role, emotional, cognitive) and global QOL were assessed with the EORTC-QLQ-C30 at enrollment, 3, 6, and 12 months. Average scores were compared between groups over time using longitudinal mixed-effect modeling. Proportions with clinically meaningful QOL impairment were calculated using age-relevant thresholds and compared between groups over time using logistic regression with mixed effects. Results Participants ( N  = 1590) were n  = 81 YAs, n  = 196 aged 40–49, n  = 627 aged 50–64, and n  = 686 aged 65 + . Average physical function was better among YAs than participants aged 50–64 ( p  = 0.010) and 65 + ( p  < 0.001), and average social function was worse among YAs than aged 65 + ( p  = 0.046). Relative to YAs, all age groups were less likely to report clinically meaningful social dysfunction (aged 40–49 OR = 0.13, 95%CI = 0.06–0.29; aged 50–64 OR = 0.10, 95%CI = 0.05–0.21; aged 65 + OR = 0.07, 95%CI = 0.04–0.15) and role dysfunction (aged 40–49 OR = 0.36, 95%CI = 0.18–0.75; aged 50–64 OR = 0.41, 95%CI = 0.22–0.78; aged 65 + OR = 0.32, 95%CI = 0.17–0.61). Participants aged 40–49 were also less likely to report physical dysfunction (OR = 0.42, 95%CI = 0.19–0.93). Conclusion YA CRC survivors reported better physical and worse social function compared to older CRC survivors, and YA CRC survivors were more likely to report clinically meaningful social, role, and physical disfunction. Future work should further investigate QOL using age-relevant benchmarks to inform best practices for CRC survivorship care. Trial registration NCT02328677, registered December 2014.

To describe research mentorship strategies needed to strengthen oncology nursing science and ensure that a cadre of nurse scientists are available to carry out the research mission of the Oncology Nursing Society (ONS).PROBLEM STATEMENTTo describe research mentorship strategies needed to strengthen oncology nursing science and ensure that a cadre of nurse scientists are available to carry out the research mission of the Oncology Nursing Society (ONS).Multimethod consensus-building approach by content experts of the ONS Research Mentorship Task Force and approval by the ONS Board of Directors was employed.DESIGNMultimethod consensus-building approach by content experts of the ONS Research Mentorship Task Force and approval by the ONS Board of Directors was employed.Expert opinion, surveys, notes from an all-day research mentorship retreat, and literature review were used.DATA SOURCESExpert opinion, surveys, notes from an all-day research mentorship retreat, and literature review were used.Content analysis was used to synthesize notes from the research mentorship retreat.ANALYSISContent analysis was used to synthesize notes from the research mentorship retreat.Various strategies were identified to strengthen the pipeline of oncology nurse scientists and promote development across the career trajectory.FINDINGSVarious strategies were identified to strengthen the pipeline of oncology nurse scientists and promote development across the career trajectory.Mentorship is essential to advance the growth and impact of oncology nursing science and requires support throughout the career trajectory.IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICEMentorship is essential to advance the growth and impact of oncology nursing science and requires support throughout the career trajectory.

PROBLEM STATEMENT: To describe research mentorship strategies needed to strengthen oncology nursing science and ensure that a cadre of nurse scientists are available to carry outthe research mission of the Oncology Nursing Society (ONS). DESIGN: Multimethod consensus-building approach by content experts of the ONS Research Mentorship Task Force and approval by the ONS Board of Directors was employed. DATA SOURCES: Expert opinion, surveys, notes from an all-day research mentorship retreat, and literature review were used. ANALYSIS: Content analysis was used to synthesize notes from the research mentorship retreat. FINDINGS: Various strategies were identified to strengthen the pipeline of oncology nurse scientists and promote development across the career trajectory. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Mentorship is essential to advance the growth and impact of oncology nursing science and requires support throughoutthe career trajectory.