Lessons Learned: Management of Breast Cancer Patients throughout the COVID-19 Pandemic

168 Background: Cancer self-management (SM) is individuals’ engagement in tasks related to the medical, physical, spiritual, and emotional management of cancer. Reports of SM interventions often focus on efficacy and do not detail processes of development and evaluation. We delineate our creation of a patient-oriented and informed cancer SM intervention, Managing Cancer Care: A Personal Guide (MCC), and share lessons learned to improve intervention efficacy and fidelity. Methods: We developed and evaluated MCC in 5 stages: needs assessment interviews (n=25); development of MCC; focus group (n=6); pilot testing with metastatic breast cancer patients (n=23); and population testing with non-metastatic breast cancer patients (n=110). We performed content analysis on qualitative data and used descriptive statistics to analyze module ratings and frequency of use in the pilot and population tests. Results: We identified cancer SM practices, preferences, facilitators, and barriers, and designed MCC based on interview data, related literature, and SM theory. The MCC prototypeconsisted of 7 magazine-style modules designed to be user-friendly, concise, and personalized. Although well-received, we made substantial changes based on focus group data, with additional revisions after the pilot test. Module ratings and frequency of use differed between pilot and population samples. Among metastatic patients, median ratings (1-10, low/high) for MCC as a whole on both content and format were 8 (range 2-10). The most popular module was Care Options, which tied with Managing Transitions as most frequently used. Among non-metastatic patients, median ratings were 8 (range 1-10) and 9 (range 2-10) on content and format, with the Managing Your Symptoms module being most popular and most frequently used. Conclusions: Data from our metastatic and non-metastatic samples suggest differing SM priorities. Lessons learned in creating patient-oriented cancer SM interventions include acknowledging that there are no “one size fits all” solutions, resisting assumptions about reception of potentially emotional content, maintaining flexibility, and negotiating the tension between research and real world settings.

Download Full-text

Use of telemedicine in the delivery of survivorship care plans among breast cancer survivors: Lessons learned at Kaiser Permanente East Bay.

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2017.35.5_suppl.77 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 35 (5_suppl) ◽

pp. 77-77 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Pamela Kim Washington ◽

Heather Tews ◽

Dan-Thanh Nguyen ◽

Leeina Wade ◽

Trang Phan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Lessons Learned ◽

Survivorship Care Plans ◽

Survivorship Care ◽

Breast Cancer Patients ◽

Kaiser Permanente ◽

Care Plans ◽

Follow Up Care

77 Background: Beginning in 2015, the National Accreditation Program for Breast Centers (NAPBC) requires accredited facilities to provide Survivorship Care Plans (SCP) to breast cancer patients treated with curative intent. Here we describe lessons learned with the use of telemedicine in the delivery of SCPs at Kaiser Permanente East Bay. Methods: SCP implementation followed a two-step process: patients who are diagnosed and complete treatment in 2016 are given a SCP at their last surgical or medical oncology appointment (YTD, n=8); 2) patients diagnosed in 2015 who completed treatment in 2015-2016 were contacted by a physician assistant and offered an appointment by telephone or in-person to deliver the care plan (n=152). Both clinic and telemedicine appointments consist of a detailed review of treatment received, post-treatment follow-up care, discussion of health education resources, and provision of referrals as appropriate. Patients also have the opportunity to ask questions about treatment and follow-up care. Results: Among patients diagnosed in 2015 who were offered a TAV or in-person visit, 44.0% preferred a telephone appointment. Actual appointment duration ranged from 10 to 30 minutes. Lack of co-payment and fees associated with transportation as well as loss of income due to taking time off work were the primary factors cited choosing telemedicine over in-person clinic appointments. Interestingly, no differences in member satisfaction scores for in-person vs. telephone visits were observed. Conclusions: Findings suggest telemedicine may be effective in the delivery of SCPs. Similar to rural settings, use of telemedicine in urban settings has a unique capacity to increase service to breast cancer patients.

Download Full-text