Poster Presentation Clinical Oncology Society of Australia Annual Scientific Meeting 2024

A systematic review of the implementation of geriatric assessment in cancer care (#467)

Mmakgomo Raesima 1 2 , Tshepo Rasekaba 1 3 , Christopher Steer 1 4 5 , Irene Blackberry 1 3
  1. John Richards Centre for Rural Ageing Research, La Trobe Rural Health School, La Trobe University, Albury-Wodonga, Victoria 3690, Australia
  2. Deaprtment of Public Health , Ministry of Health, Gaborone, South East District, Botswana
  3. Care Economy Research Institute, La Trobe University, Albury-Wodonga, Victoria 3690, Australia
  4. Border Medical Oncology and Haematology, Albury-Wodonga, NSW 2640, Australia
  5. School of Clinical Medicine, Rural Clinical Campus, University of New South Wales, Albury, NSW 2640, Australia

Aim: Geriatric Assessment (GA) in older adults with cancer is part of recommended best practice guidelines, yet implementation is variable. This systematic review aims to evaluate the evidence on implementing GA in cancer care, including outcomes, and to identify and analyse barriers and enablers of GA implementation using the Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework. Preference for i-PARIHS draws from its wide use as a structured approach to understanding and addressing the complex factors that influence successful implementation, i.e. the evidence, the context in which evidence is applied, the role of facilitation and innovation introduced. This abstract focuses on the qualitative narratives of GA implementation

 

Methods: We conducted a systematic search of eight databases including MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus and JBI targeting studies on implementation of GA in outpatient oncology settings from 2015 to July 2024. Studies were restricted to English language and older persons aged ≥65 years. We will extract narratives about implementation of GA and undertake deductive thematic analysis and meta-synthesis using the i-PARIHS domains; a structured approach to crystalise implementation success factors if any.

 

Results: The systematic review is currently underway and anticipated completion is mid-September 2024.  The search strategy identified 245 studies. The next phases are as follows: (1), title and abstract screening for relevance, (2) full text article retrieval and eligibility criteria assessment, (3) full text article review and data extraction and (4) analysis and synthesis of the evidence.

 

Conclusion: While this review is underway, it is anticipated that findings will provide insights into the extent to which GA is implemented in cancer care, highlighting both the barriers and enablers to its adoption. Understanding what affects implementation outcomes can be valuable for creating and carrying out strategies that seek to alter key determinants.

  1. Mohile, S. G., Velarde, C., Hurria, A., Magnuson, A., Lowenstein, L., Pandya, C., ... & Dale, W. (2015). Geriatric assessment-guided care processes for older adults: A Delphi consensus of geriatric oncology experts. *Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, 13*(9), 1120-1130. https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2015.0125
  2. Dale, W. (2022). Why is geriatric assessment so infrequently used in oncology practices? The ongoing issue of nonadherence to this standard of care for older adults with cancer. *JCO Oncology Practice, 18*(6), 475-477. https://doi.org/10.1200/OP.22.00016
  3. Gajra, A., Jeune-Smith, Y., Fortier, S., et al. (2022). The use and knowledge of validated geriatric assessment instruments among US community oncologists. *JCO Oncology Practice, 18*(6), e1081-e1090. https://doi.org/10.1200/OP.21.00633
  4. Dale, W., Williams, G. R., MacKenzie, A. R., et al. (2021). How is geriatric assessment used in clinical practice for older adults with cancer? A survey of cancer providers by the American Society of Clinical Oncology. *JCO Oncology Practice, 17*(6), 336-344. https://doi.org/10.1200/OP.20.00636
  5. Dale, W., Klepin, H. D., Williams, G. R., Alibhai, S. M., Bergerot, C., Brintzenhofeszoc, K., ... & Mohile, S. G. (2023). Practical assessment and management of vulnerabilities in older patients receiving systemic cancer therapy: ASCO guideline update. *Journal of Clinical Oncology, 41*(26), 4293-4312. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.23.00648
  6. McKenzie, G. A., Bullock, A. F., Greenley, S. L., Lind, M. J., Johnson, M. J., & Pearson, M. (2021). Implementation of geriatric assessment in oncology settings: A systematic realist review. *Journal of Geriatric Oncology, 12*(1), 22-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgo.2020.08.010
  7. Gladman, J. R., Conroy, S. P., Ranhoff, A. H., & Gordon, A. L. (2016). New horizons in the implementation and research of comprehensive geriatric assessment: Knowing, doing and the ‘know-do’ gap. *Age and Ageing, 45*(2), 194-200. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afv197
  8. Conroy, S. P., Bardsley, M., Smith, P., Neuburger, J., Keeble, E., Arora, S., ... & Parker, S. (2019). Comprehensive geriatric assessment for frail older people in acute hospitals: The HoW-CGA mixed-methods study. *Health Services and Delivery Research, 7*(25). https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr07250
  9. Nilsen, P. (2020). Making sense of implementation theories, models, and frameworks. *Implementation Science 3.0*, 53-79. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52910-4_4
  10. Nilsen, P., & Bernhardsson, S. (2019). Context matters in implementation science: A scoping review of determinant frameworks that describe contextual determinants for implementation outcomes. *BMC Health Services Research, 19*, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4420-7
  11. Harvey, G., Kitson, A., & Harvey, G. (2015). *Implementing evidence-based practice in healthcare*. Taylor & Francis.