Persistent brain fog is common in adults with Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC), in whom it causes distress and in many cases interferes with performance of instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) and return-to-work. There are no interventions with rigorous evidence of efficacy for this new, often disabling condition. The purpose of this pilot is to evaluate the efficacy, on a preliminary basis, of a new intervention for this condition termed Constraint-Induced Cognitive therapy (CICT). CICT combines features of two established therapeutic approaches: cognitive speed of processing training (SOPT) developed by the laboratory of K. Ball and the Transfer Package and task-oriented training components of Constraint-Induced Movement therapy developed by the laboratory of E. Taub and G. Uswatte.

Participants were > 3 months after recovery from acute COVID symptoms and had substantial brain fog and impairment in IADL. Participants were randomized to CICT immediately or after a 3-month delay. CICT involved 36 hours of outpatient therapy distributed over 4-6 weeks. Sessions had three components: (a) videogamelike training designed to improve how quickly participants process sensory input (SOPT), (b) training on IADLs following shaping principles, and (c) a set of behavioral techniques designed to transfer gains from the treatment setting to daily life, i.e., the Transfer Package. The Transfer Package included (a) negotiating a behavioral contract with participants and one or more family members about the responsibilities of the participants, family members, and treatment team; (b) assigning homework during and after the treatment period; (c) monitoring participants’ out-of-session behavior; (d) supporting problem-solving by participants and family members about barriers to performance of IADL; and (e) making follow-up phone calls. IADL performance, brain fog severity, and cognitive impairment were assessed using validated, trans-diagnostic measures before and after treatment and three months afterwards in the immediate-CICT group and on parallel occasions in the delayed-CICT group (aka waitlist controls).

To date, five were enrolled in the immediate-CICT group; four were enrolled in the wait-list group. All had mild cognitive impairment, except for one with moderate impairment in the immediate-CICT group. Immediate-CICT participants, on average, had large reductions in brain fog severity on the Mental Clutter Scale (MCS, range = 0 to 10 points, mean change = -3.7, SD = 2.0); wait-list participants had small increases (mean change = 1.0, SD = 1.4). Notably, all five in the immediate-CICT group had clinically meaningful improvements (i.e., changes > 2 points) in performance of IADL outside the treatment setting as measured by the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) Performance scale; only one did in the wait-list group. The advantage for the immediate-CICT group was very large on both the MCS and COPM (d’s = 1.7, p’s < .05). In follow-up, immediate-CICT group gains were retained or built-upon.

These preliminary findings warrant confirmation by a large-scale randomized controlled trial. To date, CICT shows high promise as an efficacious therapy for brain fog due to PASC. CICT participants had large, meaningful improvements in IADL performance outside the treatment setting, in addition to large reductions in brain fog severity.

Financial toxicity is of increasing concern in the United States. The Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) is a validated measure; however, it has not been widely utilized among low-income patients and may not fully capture financial toxicity in this population. Furthermore, the relationships between financial toxicity, quality of life (QOL), and patient well-being are poorly understood. We describe the experience of financial toxicity among low-income adults receiving cancer care. We hypothesized that higher financial toxicity would be associated with less income and lower quality of life. Qualitative interviews focused on the financial impact of cancer treatment.

This study was conducted at a cancer clinic in Central Texas. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected in Fall and Spring 2018, respectively. The quantitative sample (N = 115) was dichotomized by annual income (<$15,000 vs. >$15,000). Outcomes included financial toxicity (COST), quality of life (FACT-G), and patient well-being (PROMIS measures: Anxiety, Depression, Fatigue, Pain Interference, and Physical Function). Associations between quality of life, patient well-being, and financial toxicity were evaluated using linear regression. Sequential qualitative interviews were conducted with a subsample of 12 participants.

Patients with <$15k had significantly lower levels of QOL and patient well-being such as depression and anxiety compared to patients with >$15k across multiple measures. A multivariate linear regression found QOL (Β = 0.17, 95% CI = 0.05, 0.29, p = 0.008) and insurance status (Β = −3.79, 95% CI = −7.42, −0.16, p = 0.04), but not income, were significantly associated with financial toxicity. Three qualitative themes regarding patient's access to cancer care were identified: obtaining healthcare coverage, maintaining financial stability, and receiving social support.

Low-income patients with cancer face unique access barriers and are at risk for forgoing treatment or increased symptom burdens. Comprehensive assessment and financial navigation may improve access to care, symptom management, and reduce strain on social support systems.

To assess the sexual and reproductive health (SRH) needs of women admitted to a psychiatric intensive care unit (PICU), and acceptability of delivering specialist SRH assessments and interventions in this setting. Within a quality improvement framework, staff were trained, a clinical protocol developed and clinical interventions made accessible.

Thirty per cent of women were identified as having unmet SRH needs and proceeded to a specialist appointment, representing a 2.5-fold increase in unmet need detection. Forty-two per cent of women were assessed, representing a 3.5-fold increase in uptake. Twenty-one per cent of women initiated SRH interventions, of which 14% had all their SRH needs met. Staff, patients and carers highlighted the acceptability and importance of SRH care, if interventions were appropriately timed and patients’ individual risk profiles were considered. Barriers to access included lack of routine enquiry, illness acuity and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

SRH needs for PICU admissions are greater than previously realised. Providing a nurse-led SRH assessment is acceptable, feasible and beneficial for PICU patients.

To assess the sexual and reproductive health (SRH) needs of women admitted to a psychiatric intensive care unit (PICU), and acceptability of delivering specialist SRH assessments/interventions in this setting. Secondary aims were to explore the barriers to access and the feasibility of providing SRH assessments and interventions in the PICU.

A retrospective analysis of fifteen months’ activity data found that only 25 SRH referrals had been made across 205 PICU admissions. This low referral rate of 12% likely reflected pathway barriers and was unlikely to represent the actual clinical need in female PICU patients. A bi-monthly SRH in-reach clinic and a nurse led SRH referral pathway were implemented on the PICU over a seven-month period. Within a quality improvement framework, a staff training needs assessment was performed, training delivered, a protocol developed, staff attitudes explored, and patient and carer engagement sought.

A quality improvement approach streamlined SRH assessments on the PICU and resulted in 42% of women being assessed and a 3.5-fold increase in uptake. At least 30% of the women in the PICU had unmet SRH needs identified and proceeded to a specialist appointment. This amounts to a minimum 2.5-fold increase in SRH unmet need detection.

The most common SRH needs were complex gynaecological issues (such as period problems, pelvic pain, vaginal discharge), STI advice/testing and contraception advice/options. 21% of women initiated SRH interventions, and 14% completed all the interventions required for their needs. The most common interventions were in the areas of contraception advice/family planning and STI advice/testing.

Staff confidence on assessing SRH topics was identified as a barrier to access with a positive shift noted after bespoke SRH training was implemented and a protocol introduced: on a scale of 0-10 (with 10 being high), 81.3% of staff rated their confidence 8 or above in relation to discussing contraception/sexually transmitted infections (pre-training: 25.0%), and 93.8% in relation to discussing risky behaviours (pre-training: 18.8%). All 11 patient and carer participants felt it was important to have a forum to talk about SRH and 8 (72.7%) agreed it was important in the PICU.

Results identify that SRH needs for PICU admissions are greater than previously realised. Staff highlighted the acceptability and importance of SRH care, if interventions are appropriately timed and the patient's individual risk profile considered. Providing a nurse led referral pathway for an SRH in-reach clinic is acceptable, feasible and beneficial for PICU patients.