Feasibility and Acceptability of Distress Screening for Family Caregivers at a Cancer Surgery Center.
Kelly M Shaffer, Stephanie Benvengo, Alexandra K Zaleta and 5 others
PMID 30767970WHAT IT FOUND
Family caregivers waiting during cancer surgery completed a 33-item distress screener in 11.3 minutes.
Seventeen of the 28 approached completed the study. They valued the chance to name concerns, but the most requested information was about the patient.
Key findings
01Of 28 caregivers approached, three refused, eight who agreed could not be enrolled, and 17 completed the study; the screener took an average of 11.3 minutes.
02Sixteen caregivers reported at least one concern of moderate or greater severity, and five caregivers requested at least one referral; information requests were most often about the patient’s well-being.
03In interviews, caregivers said the screening made them feel the hospital recognized their role and gave them permission to discuss their own needs.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
This was a small single-site feasibility study of 17 caregivers, so it cannot show how the screening would work at scale. Caregivers were chosen because they were present and had to read and speak English, so the views may not represent all caregivers. Eight caregivers who agreed could not be enrolled because study staff had limited time, which may have missed caregivers available at other times. Interviews were brief, not transcribed, and not analyzed with special qualitative software, so themes may be incomplete. The center served patients having outpatient procedures, often with cancer that had not spread and possible cure or long-term survival, so caregivers in more complex inpatient settings or settings with more advanced cancer may differ. The study looked only at one time point, collected no identifying data, and did not track whether caregivers used information or referrals. Three total distress scores and one depression risk score used average values to fill gaps. The paper reports feasibility and acceptability, not whether the screening improves caregiver distress, service use, or patient care.
Declared interests
The supplied article text does not include a conflicts-of-interest declaration. The publication types list NIH extramural research support.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as proof that caregiver distress screening improves caregivers’ well-being or reduces service use. The study was a small feasibility and acceptability assessment, with no follow-up and no data on whether requested information or referrals were used.