LivingWell Cancer Resource Center

Abstract Purpose This article aims to empirically illustrate the socially supportive role of cancer resource centers in their members' lives. Design/methodology/approach The authors employ the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support and the QLQ-C30 to investigate the relationships between social support and respondents' quality of life. The authors also draw on internal cancer resource center data. Findings The results show that the type of classes respondents engage in at the center, frequency of class/activity attendance, and member-to-member social support do not influence respondents' perceived quality of life. However, employee-to-member support does enhance a respondent's quality of life. Research limitations/implications The study suggests that the activity programming at cancer resource centers is a conduit for the socially supportive relationships that form between and among employees and members. Given that the sample site was situated in a high-income, relatively stable suburban locale, the findings may not generalize to all locales. Practical implications The study helps inform medical practitioners about the social supportive benefits that cancer resource centers offer cancer patients. This article discusses a cancer center's Connect-to-Care program, which joins together an oncologist and a cancer center representative at a patient's initial cancer diagnosis. Social implications Oncologists and people living with, or affected by, cancer need to be aware of the healing potential of cancer resource centers. Originality/value This article links the third-place paradigm with public health. Cancer resource centers emerge as third places where people living with cancer may obtain support from center employees, which enhances their quality of life.

Abstract This article illustrates how cancer resource centres transform the lives of people both living with and affected by cancer by creating restorative servicescapes. The authors link attention restoration theory with the servicescape framework to demonstrate empirically that home-like cancer resource centres may offer their members a built setting in which some members undergo restoration from symptoms associated with cancer-related fatigue. Using mediation analysis, the authors demonstrate that some cancer-centre members are attracted to these centres partially because they are able to relieve two types of fatigue from participating in activities and classes – namely, low energy and personal productivity concerns. Fatigue is the leading symptom reported by cancer patients undergoing medical treatment, and thus the ability of cancer resource services to positively influence individual and societal well-being is profound. This work supports the transformative service research paradigm by revealing that not-for-profit ‘third places’ have important public-health implications.

Purpose This article aims to illustrate how service organizations (e.g. cancer resource centers) can create restorative servicescapes. The article addresses whether cancer patients respond favorably to a cancer center's restorative servicescape and explores the reasons they might patronize the center and interact socially with others. Design/methodology/approach This article synthesizes various streams of literature from services marketing, natural psychology, and cancer and medical research. The study defines and develops the framework's categories and advances propositions based on the framework. Findings The model proposes that cancer patients should respond favorably to a cancer center's restorative servicescape. By spending time in the center, people living with cancer may be able to remedy four frequently experienced, negative symptoms associated with fatigue. Research limitations/implications The study explores a not‐for‐profit cancer resource center that offers members an array of participatory activities within a homelike environment. However, it may be difficult for traditional medical facilities to fashion restorative servicescapes. Practical implications The study helps inform medical practitioners about the psychosocial benefits cancer resource centers offer cancer patients. This article provides a discussion regarding a cancer center's development of its Connect‐to‐Care program, based on an oncologist and a cancer center representative joining together to discuss a patient's cancer diagnosis and care. Originality/value This article proposes a theoretical understanding on how the physical and restorative qualities of an environment transform human health. It links the services domain to the health sciences and suggests a means by which cancer patients can “do more with less” by combining medical treatment with cancer resource center patronage.

47 Background: The IOM 2013 Report recommends that supportive oncology care start at cancer diagnosis; the Commission on Cancer (CoC) Standard 3.2 requires distress screening and indicated action. Screening tools are not standardized across institutions and often address only a portion of patients’ supportive oncology needs. Methods: A collaborative of 100+ clinicians, funded by The Coleman Foundation, developed a patient-centric consolidated screening tool based on validated instruments (NCCN Distress, PHQ-4, PROMIS) and IOM and CoC. The screening tool was piloted at 6 practice-improvement cancer centers in the Chicago area (3 academic, 2 safety-net, 1 public). Patients, providers assessing patients’ screening results (assessors), and providers receiving referrals (providers) were surveyed after use of the screening tool. Descriptive statistics were used to assess effectiveness of the tool. Results: Responders included 175 patients, 81 assessors, and 26 referral providers (social workers, chaplains, subspecialists). The majority of patients (160/175, 91%) completed the screening in <10 minutes, across all patients the screening tool averaged 4 ½ minutes. Most assessors (59/77, 76%) spent <5 minutes reviewing screening results. Most patients, assessors, and providers reported the screening tool asked the “right questions”. Assessors reporting partial relevance of some screening questions for 34% (26/77) of patients, uncovered ≥ 1 relevant needs for 96% (25/26) of those patients (p = 0.002). Conclusions: Use of a consolidated supportive oncology screening tool across multiple institutions is feasible, identified unmet patient needs, and was beneficial for assessors and providers. As the tool is adopted by collaborating institutions, variability in supportive oncology screening practices may decline, thus improving patient care. The tool has implications for quality improvements and national dissemination. [Table: see text]

This article describes an intervention for breast cancer survivors called Journal of My Medical Experiences in which participants engaged in reflective writing over six weeks. The 107 participants were encouraged to explore concerns and issues in a safe online environment. About half of the women posted writings to a website once a week or more; others logged on solely to read what others had written. A number of themes emerged as the women explored their feelings. We share some of those.