Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Aug 6;33(9):760.
doi: 10.1007/s00520-025-09816-9.

Triage tools to inform the prioritisation of physical health services following a diagnosis of cancer: a scoping review

Georgia L White  1 , Lauren C Capozzi  2 , Corey Linton  1 , Adrian Wright  1 , Tamara Jones  3   4 , Hattie H Wright  1   5 , Kate A Bolam  6   7 , Elizabeth A Johnston  8   9 , Briana K Clifford  10 , Keegan Bean  1 , Stephanie Brown  1 , Sarah Kolesaric  1 , Mary A Kennedy  11 , Bryan A Chan  1   12 , Grace L Rose  13   14
Affiliations

Triage tools to inform the prioritisation of physical health services following a diagnosis of cancer: a scoping review

Georgia L White et al. Support Care Cancer. .

Abstract

Purpose: Many people face multiple cancer- and treatment-related sequalae. Triage and referral to physical health services can manage such consequences, but a comprehensive understanding of available triage tools is lacking. This review (i) identifies tools used to triage to physical health services, (ii) maps tool characteristics and application outcomes and (iii) summarises existing gaps.

Methods: A systematic search was conducted (three databases, April 2024). Articles were included if they used a tool to triage to physical health services. Tools were classified by triaged disciplines (i.e., diet, exercise, physical rehabilitation, multidisciplinary) and screened physical impairments (e.g., malnutrition). Tool characteristics (e.g., triage method) and application outcomes (i.e., reach, triage rates) were extracted.

Results: Of 23,369 records retrieved, 67 studies were included. Studies comprised 78 instances of tool use (64 unique tools), where n = 33 triaged to dietetics (42%), n = 6 exercise (8%), n = 11 physical rehabilitation (14%), and n = 28 a combination of health disciplines (36%). Mean age was 65 years. Most tools were used during-treatment (45%), in hospital settings (62%), measured malnutrition/physical function (60%) and used single cut-off scores (68%). Reach and triage rates varied, with exercise (reach = 89%) and diet (triage = 63%) rates highest.

Conclusion: Many physical health triage tools exist, most solely for dietetics, with heterogeneous characteristics and application outcomes. Updated tools are needed for triage to exercise/physical rehabilitation, multiple age cohorts across the cancer continuum, and that potentially use multiple cut-off scores. Cancer care professionals can use this compendium to identify which tool characteristics best suit their healthcare setting, for optimal outcomes.

Keywords: Health services; Needs assessment; Oncology; Physical rehabilitation; Supportive care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval: Not applicable for systematic scoping review. Consent to participate: Not applicable for systematic scoping review. Consent to publish: Not applicable for systematic scoping review. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA diagram
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Bray F, Laversanne M, Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Soerjomataram I, et al (2024) Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 74:229–63. 10.3322/caac.21834 - PubMed
    1. Scotté F, Taylor A, Davies A (2023) Supportive Care: The “Keystone” of Modern Oncology Practice. Cancers (Basel) 15(Suppl 15):3860. 10.3390/cancers15153860 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chan RJ, Knowles R, Ashbury FD, Bowen J, Chan A, Chin M et al (2024) Supportive care 2030 movement: towards unifying ambitions for global excellence in supportive cancer care—an international Delphi study. eClinicalMedicine 76:102825. 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102825 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Smith SR, Zheng JY, Silver J, Haig AJ, Cheville A (2020) Cancer rehabilitation as an essential component of quality care and survivorship from an international perspective. Disabil Rehabil 42:8–13. 10.1080/09638288.2018.1514662 - PubMed
    1. Paterson C, Toohey K, Bacon R, Kavanagh PS, Roberts C (2023) What are the unmet supportive care needs of people affected by cancer: an umbrella systematic review. Semin Oncol Nurs 39:151353. 10.1016/j.soncn.2022.151353 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources