# Implementing Integrative Psychosocial Care for Siblings and Caregivers of Youth with Cancer

## TL;DR

This paper shows how to develop and sustain psychosocial care for siblings and caregivers of children with cancer using interdisciplinary collaboration and short-term funding.

## Contribution

A model for implementing integrative psychosocial care for siblings and caregivers of youth with cancer using interdisciplinary collaboration and short-term funding.

## Key findings

- Integrative care programs provided 331 encounters for siblings and caregivers during a two-year pilot.
- Qualitative feedback highlighted the value of virtual services in reaching geographically dispersed families.
- Positive outcomes led to sustained operational funding for the programs.

## Abstract

What are the main findings?
Integrative care for siblings and caregivers of youth with cancer can be developed and implemented with interdisciplinary collaboration.Short-term funding can be leveraged to support development and implementation of integrative care for siblings and caregivers of youth with cancer.

Integrative care for siblings and caregivers of youth with cancer can be developed and implemented with interdisciplinary collaboration.

Short-term funding can be leveraged to support development and implementation of integrative care for siblings and caregivers of youth with cancer.

What is the implication of the main finding?
Demonstrating utilization of and positive family feedback for integrative psychosocial care for siblings and caregivers of youth with cancer may support sustained operational funding of services for these important yet often underserved family members.

Demonstrating utilization of and positive family feedback for integrative psychosocial care for siblings and caregivers of youth with cancer may support sustained operational funding of services for these important yet often underserved family members.

Background/Objectives: Psychosocial care for siblings and caregivers of youth with cancer (SCYC) is a critical yet under-implemented component of comprehensive pediatric oncology care, as outlined by the Standards for Psychosocial Care for Children with Cancer and Their Families. Despite evidence supporting psychosocial interventions, such as integrative care interventions, as effective for stress mitigation and coping, barriers to implementation include revenue-generating funding models and siloed psychosocial disciplines, which hinder accessibility for adult caregivers within pediatric institutions and geographically dispersed families. This manuscript describes the relevant extant literature as well as a model for leveraging short-term funding opportunities and interdisciplinary collaboration to develop integrative care programs for these underserved groups. Methods: Philanthropic funding supported part-time child life specialist and creative arts therapist deployment to develop and implement integrative virtual group programs, as well as interdisciplinary integrative programs, to serve SCYC. Attendance, engagement, and qualitative feedback were used for program iteration and supported the transition to institutional funding. Results: Integrative programs provided 331 caregiver and sibling encounters during the two-year pilot. Qualitative feedback from caregivers highlighted the value of virtual services in reaching geographically dispersed families and addressing feelings of isolation among SCYC at the universal and targeted levels of care. Communication about these key outcomes led to operational funding and sustained integrated care programs. Conclusions: This manuscript illustrates a successful model of leveraging philanthropic funding to support the development of integrative care programs to serve SCYC. Future research should focus on refining the clinical and financial feasibility of such models and assessing their impact on family well-being.