scholarly journals Effects of patient navigation on satisfaction with cancer care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 1369-1382 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen J. Wells ◽  
Kevin Campbell ◽  
Ambuj Kumar ◽  
Tatianna Clark ◽  
Pascal Jean-Pierre
2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18088-e18088
Author(s):  
Pascal Jean-Pierre

e18088 Background: Patient navigation (PN) is a model of health care coordination designed to ameliorate health disparities by reducing barriers to achieving optimal health outcomes. Systematic reviews that evaluate whether PN is associated with higher patient satisfaction with cancer care are lacking. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to synthesize evidence of comparative studies evaluating the effectiveness of PN programs to improve satisfaction with cancer-related care. We included studies reported in English that: 1) evaluated a PN intervention designed to increase satisfaction with cancer care; and 2) involved a randomized controlled trial (RCT) or observational design. We abstracted data from studies using standardized forms, and evaluated these studies for methodological quality. Data were summarized qualitatively and synthesized under a random effects model. Results: The initial search yielded 831 citations, of which 3 RCTs and 6 observational studies met inclusion criteria. These nine studies involving 4,200 surveyed patients revealed either a neutral or positive effect in patient satisfaction in the majority of studies of PN and cancer-related care. However, only 5 studies (1 RCT and 4 observational) had adequate datato include in the meta-analysis. Methodological quality of eight of the included studies ranged from weak to moderate to strong, with half rated as weak. Findings of the RCT showed a statistically significant increase in satisfaction with cancer care involving PN [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 2.30; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.79, 2.80, p < .001]. Pooled results from non-RCTs showed no significant association between PN and satisfaction with cancer-related care (SMD = 0.39; 95% CI: -0.02, 0.80, p = .06). Conclusions: More systematic reviews are needed to characterize the relationship between PN and satisfaction with cancer-related care across the cancer care continuum and across different types of cancer.


2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chloé Gervès-Pinquié ◽  
Anne Girault ◽  
Serena Phillips ◽  
Sarah Raskin ◽  
Mandi Pratt-Chapman

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6536-6536
Author(s):  
Sherri Sheinfeld Gorin ◽  
David Haggstrom ◽  
Kathleen Fairfield ◽  
Paul Han ◽  
Paul Krebs ◽  
...  

6536 Background: To our knowledge, no systematic review of empirical papers describing cancer care coordination interventions has yet been conducted. The aim of this presentation is to describe the methods and findings from a systematic review and meta-analysis of all empirical papers describing cancer care coordination published between 1990-2012. Methods: Of 1241 abstracts collected from a search of PubMed and EMBASE, 108 studies were retrieved and reviewed; 49 were included in the systematic review. Each study had US or Canadian adult or child participants; each paper had comparison or control groups, measures, samples, and/or interventions. Two researchers independently applied a standardized search strategy, coding scheme, and on-line coding program to each study. Eight RCT’s met additional criteria for meta-analysis; a random effects estimation model was used for data analysis. Results: Among the 49 articles included in our systematic review, those that included implicit or explicit definitions of cancer care coordination described four components: (1) roles and models for communication and transfer of care between primary care physicians and oncologists during active treatment and survivorship; (2) care navigation through designated personnel or telecommunication processes among care team members; (3) treatment summaries and survivorship care plans; and (4) multidisciplinary communication accompanying patient and practice management within the framework of the Chronic Care Model (N=14). We found a medium-sized effect of cancer care coordination on care usage outcomes among the randomized clinical trials (e.g., reduced Emergency Department visits; g = 0.37 [95% CI = 0.29 - 0.44], I2= .000. Fail-safe N = 86). Conclusions: The findings from this current systematic review and meta-analysis will contribute to the evidence base on strategies that can improve the coordination of cancer care, particularly for patients with multiple chronic conditions, and thereby advance the goals of health care reform in the US.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jolanda C. van Hoeve ◽  
Robin W.M. Vernooij ◽  
Michelle Fiander ◽  
Peter Nieboer ◽  
Sabine Siesling ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Pathways are frequently used to improve care for cancer patients. However, there is little evidence about the effects of pathways used in oncological care. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis aiming to identify, and synthesise existing literature on the effects of pathways in oncological care. Methods: All patients diagnosed with cancer in primary and secondary/tertiary care whose treatment can be characterized as the strategy “care pathways” are included in this review. A systematic search in seven databases was conducted to gather evidence. Studies were screened by two independent reviewers. Study outcomes regarding patients, professionals and system level were extracted from each study. Results: Out of 13,847 search results, we selected 158 articles eligible for full text assessment. 150 studies were excluded and the remaining eight studies represented 4,786 patients. Most studies were conducted in secondary/tertiary care. Length of Stay (LOS) was the most common used indicator, and was reported in five studies. Meta-analysis based on subgroups showed an overall shorter LOS regarding gastric cancer (Weighted Mean Difference (WMD)): -2.75, CI: -4.67–-0.83) and gynaecological cancer (WMD: -1.58, CI: -2.10–-1.05). Costs were reported in six studies and most studies reported lower costs for pathway groups. Conclusions: Despite the differences between the included studies, we were able to present an evidence base for cancer care pathways performed in secondary/tertiary care regarding the positive effects of LOS in favour of cancer care pathways. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42017057592


2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiao‐Han Jiang ◽  
Xi‐Jie Chen ◽  
Qin‐Qin Xie ◽  
Yong‐Shen Feng ◽  
Shi Chen ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document