Follow-Up after Cancer Treatment—Evidence Gaps and Trends in Survivorship Care

Author(s):  
Beverley Lim Høeg ◽  
Pernille Envold Bidstrup ◽  
Susanne Oksbjerg Dalton ◽  
Lena Saltbæk
2018 ◽  
Vol 99 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole L Stout ◽  
Julie K Silver ◽  
Catherine M Alfano ◽  
Kirsten K Ness ◽  
Laura S Gilchrist

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (30_suppl) ◽  
pp. 183-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrienne Marie Vazquez ◽  
Chinny Trivedi ◽  
Annette Amoros

183 Background: The University of Miami has a formal Survivorship Program based on the Commission on Cancer (CoC) requirements. CoC requires accredited institutions to deliver survivorship care plans (SCP) to patients who fit analytic criteria. There is a lack of research on the patient experience as it pertains to survivorship care. Methods: Using a Likert-type scale, dual language survey (English and Spanish), patients were asked 6 questions about the Survivorship Clinic visit ranging from scheduling feasibility to information received during the visit and any opinions to improve the visit for future patients. Patients were given two weeks to complete the survey through a secure, HIPAA compliant online source (REDCap). Those who did not reply were called on the phone by a registered nurse to obtain a statistically significant sample size. Results: Of the 236 patients that were contacted, 45 responded (Breast 38.3%, Gastrointestinal 12.8%, Prostate 10.6%, Gynecologic 8.5%, Lymphoma 6.4%, Lung 6.4%, Sarcoma 4.3%, Other 12.8%). Our results found that 95.7% of patients would recommend this visit to anyone who has completed cancer treatment. Also, 59.6% of patients found the SCP to be most helpful, followed by Survivorship Provider input (38.3%) and then American Cancer Society Healthy living tips (36.2%). As a note, it was mentioned in free text that 11.1% would have preferred a similar visit at the beginning of treatment, at the completion of treatment and/or incremental follow up. Of those surveyed, 88.9% were referred to nutrition, 44.4% to exercise physiology and 27.8% to psychology/psychiatry. Conclusions: Of the patients surveyed 95.7% were satisfied with the survivorship visit. Our conclusion based on survey results shows that institutions should continue to provide formal survivorship care as per CoC requirements. Future directions should look at expanding services to patients at diagnosis and throughout the continuum of treatment and follow up. As survivorship programs grow, practices should consider increasing resources to accommodate the identified needs of patients at the beginning and end of cancer treatment.


2018 ◽  
Vol 110 (12) ◽  
pp. 1300-1310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald M Kline ◽  
Neeraj K Arora ◽  
Cathy J Bradley ◽  
Eden R Brauer ◽  
Darci L Graves ◽  
...  

Abstract The National Cancer Policy Forum of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine sponsored a workshop on July 24 and 25, 2017 on Long-Term Survivorship after Cancer Treatment. The workshop brought together diverse stakeholders (patients, advocates, academicians, clinicians, research funders, and policymakers) to review progress and ongoing challenges since the Institute of Medicine (IOM)’s seminal report on the subject of adult cancer survivors published in 2006. This commentary profiles the content of the meeting sessions and concludes with recommendations that stem from the workshop discussions. Although there has been progress over the past decade, many of the recommendations from the 2006 report have not been fully implemented. Obstacles related to the routine delivery of standardized physical and psychosocial care services to cancer survivors are substantial, with important gaps in care for patients and caregivers. Innovative care models for cancer survivors have emerged, and changes in accreditation requirements such as the Commission on Cancer’s (CoC) requirement for survivorship care planning have put cancer survivorship on the radar. The Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation’s Oncology Care Model (OCM), which requires psychosocial services and the creation of survivorship care plans for its beneficiary participants, has placed increased emphasis on this service. The OCM, in conjunction with the CoC requirement, is encouraging electronic health record vendors to incorporate survivorship care planning functionality into updated versions of their products. As new models of care emerge, coordination and communication among survivors and their clinicians will be required to implement patient- and community-centered strategies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document