e13537 Background: Although a diagnosis of cancer is widely accepted as resulting in significant levels of distress, distress itself cannot be considered benign and screening for distress is considered a… Click to show full abstract
e13537 Background: Although a diagnosis of cancer is widely accepted as resulting in significant levels of distress, distress itself cannot be considered benign and screening for distress is considered a best practice metric for patients receiving oncological care. Endorsed by NCCN, the Distress Thermometer (DT) considers a cutoff score of 4 or greater to identify patient with clinically relevant levels of distress. We hypothesized that the COVID-19 pandemic would manifest with higher levels of stress and anxiety in most persons by compounding the distress experienced by patients with a diagnosis of cancer. Methods: Patients with a new diagnosis of cancer underwent distress screening with the DT prior to a clinical appointment at a NCI-designated academic cancer center. Patients who scored 4 or higher were discussed at an Interprofessional Supportive Medicine patient conference or referred to oncology social work for appropriate evaluation and therapeutic care. By mid-March 2020, the SKCC catchment area was under a public health emergency with limited access to non-essential healthcare; therefore, we present data from 1/1-3/15/20 (pre-pandemic), 3/16-6/7/20 (pandemic peak with 2000+ daily cases in late April and peak daily deaths 300+ in May), and 6/8-8/30/20 (daily cases generally less than 700 except for occasional levels of 1000-in July and daily deaths less than 40 daily). Results: In the pre-pandemic time period, 60% of patients assessed reported a score of 4 or higher. During the subsequent periods—the first pandemic peak and the first post-pandemic period—the incidence of an elevated distress screen (4 or higher) was relatively stable at about 30%. Conclusions: Contrary to expectations, the DT screen identified less patient distress during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic. Our results may be due to multiple factors—changes in processes and procedures to prioritize DT screening as pandemic risk became more apparent; an increased use of telemedicine; and the compounding of new, non-cancer related stressors resulting in the greater resiliency noted in disaster psychology. For example, during the first pandemic peak when the majority of patients were seen via telemedicine, the opportunity afforded by telemedicine for safety and decreased risk for COVID-19 infection may have reduced the overall distress experience. In addition, the compounding of stressors—the diagnosis of cancer, the risk of the pandemic, and its economic and financial stressors—may have influenced distress perception. Future work incorporating multiple distress assessment points may help better understand the impact of the layers of stress experienced by persons with cancer.[Table: see text]
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.