Surgery and Patient Support Services

1989 ◽  
pp. 261-265
Author(s):  
Robert L. DeWitty
2000 ◽  
Vol 18 (15) ◽  
pp. 2902-2907 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth A. Barnes ◽  
John Hanson ◽  
Catherine M. Neumann ◽  
Cheryl L. Nekolaichuk ◽  
Eduardo Bruera

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the satisfaction and information needs of primary care physicians (PCPs) regarding communication with radiation oncologists (ROs), with respect to patients who receive palliative radiotherapy (RT). A selected objective was to evaluate the agreement between PCPs’ expectations and the content of the RO letter sent after completion of RT. PCPs’ knowledge of the role of palliative RT and their awareness of available patient support services were also determined. METHODS: The PCPs of patients discharged from the Cross Cancer Institute after receiving palliative RT were surveyed using a mail-out questionnaire. Questions regarding communication, RT knowledge, and awareness of support services were asked. The corresponding RO letter was reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 148 PCPs were identified and were mailed questionnaires, with 114 (77%) responding. Overall, 80% (87 of 109) of PCPs found the RO letter to be useful in patient management. However, there was poor (< 53%) agreement between PCPs’ expectations and the actual content of the RO letter. Knowledge of the indications and effectiveness of palliative RT was limited, with PCPs obtaining a median score of 4 of a possible 8. Only 27% (31 of 114) of PCPs were aware of all five of the patient support services listed. CONCLUSION: Results show that although the majority of PCPs found the RO letter useful, they believed that the letter lacked important information while containing unnecessary details. Communication between PCPs and ROs needs improvement, especially considering that PCPs seem to have limited knowledge of palliative RT.


2021 ◽  
pp. 93-106
Author(s):  
Rajshekhar Chakraborty ◽  
Navneet S. Majhail ◽  
Jame Abraham

AbstractPatient support and psychosocial services are an important aspect of cancer care. Comprehensive cancer centers need to provide a spectrum of these services to provide high-quality and holistic care to cancer patients. Provision of these services begins from the time of diagnosis, continues through cancer treatment, and then subsequently transitions to survivorship or end-of-life phase. Examples of these services include psychological assessment and management, patient navigation, care coordination, genetic counseling, and complementary medicine. Survivorship care is an important aspect of patients’ experience during their cancer journey and beyond. This chapter discusses key psychosocial and supportive care services that are recommended for cancer centers that strive to provide comprehensive cancer care to their patients.


BJGP Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. bjgpopen19X101669 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raymond O'Connor ◽  
Jane O'Doherty ◽  
Michael O'Mahony ◽  
Eimear Spain

BackgroundIn May 2018, the Irish Constitution was changed following a referendum allowing termination of pregnancy by abortion. It is envisaged that the majority of terminations will be by medical abortion and will take place in general practice before 12 weeks gestation.AimTo elicit attitudes and level of preparedness of Irish GPs to provide medical abortion services.Design & settingCross-sectional study of 222 GPs who were associated with the University of Limerick Graduate Entry Medical School (GEMS) and GP training programme.MethodAn anonymous online questionnaire was distributed via email. Reminders were sent 2 and 4 weeks later.ResultsThe response rate was 57.2% (n = 127/222). Of the responders, 105 (82.7%) had no training in this area, with only 4 (3.1%) indicating that they had sufficient training. Nearly all responders (n = 119, 93.7%) were willing to share abortion information with patients. Just under half of responders (n = 61, 48.0%) would be willing to prescribe abortion pills, with 47 (37.0%) unwilling to do so. Only 53 (41.7%) responders believed that provision of abortion services should be part of general practice, with 52 (40.9%) saying that it should not. As to whether doctors should be entitled to a conscientious objection but should also be obliged to refer the patient, 92 (72.4%) responders agreed. Over two-thirds of responders (n = 89, 70.1%) felt that necessary patient support services are not currently available.ConclusionThere is a lack of training and a considerable level of unwillingness to participate in this process among Irish GPs. There is also a perceived lack of patient support services for women experiencing unwanted pregnancy. It is incumbent upon state and professional bodies to address these issues.


2000 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
BA Hagan ◽  
RW Comer ◽  
HR Laswell ◽  
JL Konzelman ◽  
WW Herman

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-44
Author(s):  
Deane L. Wolcott ◽  
Robert J. Wolosin ◽  
John S. Macdonald

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. e229-e237 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Russell Hoverman ◽  
Marcus A. Neubauer ◽  
Melissa Jameson ◽  
Jad E. Hayes ◽  
Kathryn J. Eagye ◽  
...  

Purpose: Reform of cancer care delivery seeks to control costs while improving quality. Texas Oncology collaborated with Aetna to conduct a payer-sponsored program that used evidence-based treatment pathways, a disease management call center, and an introduction to advance care planning to improve patient care and reduce total costs. Methods: From June 1, 2013, to May 31, 2016, 746 Medicare Advantage patients with nine common cancer diagnoses were enrolled. Patients electing for patient support services were telephoned by oncology nurses who assessed symptoms and quality of life and introduced advance care planning. Shared cost savings were determined by comparing the costs of drugs, hospitalization, and emergency room use for 509 eligible patients in the study group with a matched cohort of 900 Medicare Advantage patients treated by non–Texas Oncology providers. Physician adherence to treatment pathways and performance and quality metrics were evaluated. Results: During the 3 years of the study, the cumulative cost savings were $3,033,248, and savings continued to increase each year. Drug cost savings per patient per treatment month were $1,874 (95% CI, $1,373 to $2,376; P < .001) after adjusting for age, diagnosis, and study year. Solid tumors contributed most of the savings; hematologic cancers showed little savings. For years 1, 2, and 3, adherence to treatment pathways was 81%, 84%, and 90%, patient satisfaction with patient support services was 94%, 93%, and 94%, and hospice enrollment was 55%, 57%, and 64%, respectively. Conclusion: A practice-based program supported by a payer sponsor can reduce costs while maintaining high adherence to treatment pathways and patient satisfaction in older patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document