To improve psychosocial care for oncology inpatients, we implemented screening for distress by means of distress thermometer (DT) at the Comprehensive Cancer Centre Zurich in 2011. Since then, several screening barriers have been reported regarding the application of the DT. This study aimed to evaluate the distress screening process between 2012 and 2016 to identify barriers preventing sustainability.

In this sequential explanatory mixed methods study, we synthesized the results of 2 quantitative retrospective descriptive studies and 1 qualitative focus group study. To compare and analyze the data, we used thematic triangulation.

Nurses screened 32% (N = 7034) of all newly admitted inpatients with the DT, and 47% of the screenings showed a distress level ≥5. Of these cases, 9.7% were referred to psycho-oncological services and 44.7% to social services. In 15.7% of these cases, nurses generated a psychosocial nursing diagnosis. In focus group interviews, nurses attributed the low screening rate to the following barriers: adaptation to patients’ individual needs, patient-related barriers and resistance, timing, communication challenges, established referral practice, and lack of integration in the nursing process.

To improve distress screening performance, the screening process should be tailored to patients’ needs and to nurses’ working conditions (e.g., timing, knowledge, and setting-specific factors). To gain more evidence on distress management as a basis for practical improvements, further evaluations of distress screening are required.

Management of patient distress is a critical task in cancer nursing and cancer practice. Here we describe two examples of how an electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) measurement system implemented into routine oncology care can practically aid clinical and research tasks related to distress management.

Tablet personal computers were used to routinely complete a standardized ePRO review of systems surveys at point of care during every encounter in the Duke Oncology outpatient clinics. Two cases of use implementation are explored: (1) triaging distressed patients for optimal care, and (2) psychosocial program evaluation research.

Between 2009 and 2011, the ePRO system was used to collect information during 17,338 Duke Oncology patient encounters. The system was used to monitor patients for psychosocial distress employing an electronic clinical decision support algorithm, with 1,952 (11.3%) referrals generated for supportive services. The system was utilized to examine the efficacy of a psychosocial care intervention documenting statistically significant improvements in distress, despair, fatigue, and quality of life (QOL) in 50 breast cancer patients.

ePRO solutions can guide best practice management of cancer patient distress. Nurses play a key role in implementation and utilization.