scholarly journals Pathways and Barriers to Careers in Academic Clinical Cancer Prevention: a Qualitative Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa Y. Kok ◽  
Janelle C. Chavez ◽  
Pompeyo R. Quesada ◽  
Oluwapelumi T. Adegoke ◽  
Shine Chang
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Prevention ◽  
Role Models ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Career Exploration ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Opportunities To Learn ◽  
National Surveys ◽  
Clinical Cancer ◽  
Career Options

AbstractNational surveys document steady declines over time in interest in academic medicine and cancer prevention careers (Am J Prev Med 54(3):444–8, 2018). Through interviews with 16 academic cancer prevention physicians at one comprehensive cancer center, this study identifies motivations and barriers to physician careers in academic cancer prevention and proposes recommendations to increase recruitment. Participants reported that cancer prevention was vague to them early in training, impairing career exploration. Further, without role models and opportunities to learn about cancer prevention, many were ignorant of career options. Many had incorrect views about cancer prevention practice being mainly within the scope of primary care physicians, and some reported colleagues viewing the rigor of cancer prevention skeptically. However, all described notable experiences—in classes, with mentors, on research projects, or from encounters with patients, motivating them to pursue academic clinical cancer prevention regardless of challenges. Clearly, a lack of both information and guidance towards careers in clinical cancer prevention has been critical barriers to robust recruitment of physicians to the field and must be addressed urgently. Helping physicians earlier during training to both understand the value of prevention and cultivate their interests in it, particularly for clinical cancer prevention, would have widespread benefits.

Quality improvement outcomes in an academic practice participating in ASCO’s Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (34_suppl) ◽  
pp. 206-206
Author(s):  
Mary Anne Fenton
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Quality Control ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Symptom Control ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Academic Practice ◽  
Improvement Interventions

206 Background: The ASCO QOPI is an instrument for community and academic practices to assess quality and adherence to guidelines in areas of treatment planning and goals, chemotherapy consent documentation, smoking cessation, symptom control, palliative care, and disease specific measures. Following data submission QOPI summary reports for the submitting practice and QOPI aggregate are available for review and comparison. Methods: The academic practice of Rhode Island Hospital Comprehensive Cancer Center has participated in QOPI since the fall of 2008. QOPI measure summary reports for our practice and comparison to the Academic Aggregate are reviewed by our physicians after each round of chart abstraction, measures are identified for improvement. Interventions include education on practice improvement and development of policy and procedures for implementation by our Quality Control Officer in compliance with hospital policies. Results: Presented is a summary of quality improvement interventions implemented. Additional areas of quality improvement have been identified based on QOPI data, and improvement plans are ongoing including treatment summaries for patient and primary care physicians, tools to assess patient emotional well being, documentation of family history and referral for genetic assessment. Conclusions: QOPI provides a platform for collection, analysis and comparison of quality measures. For the measures of formulating a pain plan the intervention was a reminder to document the plan. For the measure hospice enrollment, a reflection on our hospice enrollment has lead to an increase in referral to palliative care. The ASCO QOPI program is a tool for quality improvement, our Quality Control Officer was essential in implementation of our improvement projects. [Table: see text]

An interdisciplinary model for predicting patients at high risk for readmission amongst solid tumor oncology patients in a comprehensive cancer center.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 190-190
Author(s):  
Arvind Shinde ◽  
Ruth Nolen ◽  
Marjorie Jen Hein ◽  
Eduardo Siccion ◽  
Laura E. Crocitto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Cancer Progression ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Hospice Care ◽  
Interdisciplinary Team ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Targeted Interventions ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Increased Risk

190 Background: Increasing emphasis is being placed on reducing hospital readmission (readm) rates. Reduction of hospital readm remains a challenge, especially among the oncology population. Identifying patients (pts) at increased risk can assist with developing targeted interventions. Methods: From 1/1/11 to 12/31/12, an interdisciplinary team consisting of medical oncologists, hospitalist physician and NP, QI specialist, and case manager prospectively reviewed the medical oncology inpatient census on a biweekly basis to identify pts at risk for readm. Pts with any of the following conditions were considered at high risk for readm: significant pain, wounds, intestinal obstruction, refractory neutropenia despite GCSF, elderly/frail, unstable housing, patient/family non-compliance, rapid cancer progression, refusal of appropriate hospice care, and stalled care plans. These criteria were based upon previous years’ anecdotal experience. Interdisciplinary interventions to address these conditions were identified and initiated. Results: 272 pts were assessed during these sessions. Each session took on average 60 minutes. 69 pts (25%) were deemed to have at least one high risk factor. Chart review revealed that 6 died in the hospital and 13 were discharged to hospice. No pts on hospice were readmitted. Of the remaining 50 high risk pts, 14 (28%) and 25 (50%) pts were readmitted within 14 days and 30 days, respectively. Conclusions: This interdisciplinary team model seems to have a fair predictive value in identifying pts at higher risk for readmission. However, it is time and labor intensive. Enrollment of appropriate high risk pts in hospice mitigates this risk. Given the current emphasis on decreasing readm and the increased cost/penalties associated with readm, the next step will be to pilot cost-effective interventions for pts with these high risk factors. Potential interventions which we have instituted include follow-up calls, social service referrals, intensive family/pt education, clinic appointments within 3 days of discharge, greater coordination with primary care physicians, and more effective hospice discussions. Supported by CA 62505.

Utilizing social media for cancer prevention.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e13076-e13076
Author(s):  
Ana Maria Lopez ◽  
Jennyffer Morales ◽  
Garrett Harding ◽  
Donna Branson
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cancer Prevention ◽  
Health Care Access ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Prevention Education ◽  
Care Access ◽  
Mountain West ◽  
Screening Behaviors

e13076 Background: Cancer prevention and cancer screening behaviors are challenging to support. A myriad of variables including improved knowledge, language access, and health care access serve as facilitators for cancer screening behaviors. Utah is a vast state that is remarkably sparsely populated with more than 96% of the state defined as either rural (< 100 persons per square mile) or frontier (< 7 persons per square mile). Huntsman Cancer Institute is the only academic health center in the Mountain West and serves as the only NCI Comprehensive Cancer Center in the region. Methods: Access to the internet and to social media helps to bridge geography and support engagement. Facebook Live and Twitter Chats were used to deliver content. Language, Spanish, access was considered. Social media was also utilized to connect interested populations with in-person cancer prevention education events. Results: We will present our outreach results by intervention. Conclusions: Our work has successfully engaged rural and Latino populations in cancer prevention activities through social media.

Enhancing cancer survivorship through improved provider communication, care coordination, and professional education.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 104-104
Author(s):  
John M. Daly ◽  
Alan G. Howald ◽  
Kelly Ann Filchner ◽  
Bonnie J. Miller ◽  
Leanne Lyons ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Care Coordination ◽  
Professional Education ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Pilot Phase

104 Background: Care coordination among oncology and primary care physicians (PCPs) is an essential element of survivorship care. Providers at an NCI-designated comprehensive cancer center noted gaps in coordinating care with PCPs. We sought to develop a program that enhances communication and education between provider groups to ensure a seamless continuum of care thereby improving overall survivorship care. Methods: The Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC) Care Connect program was created to comprehensively connect PCPs in the regional service area with cancer center providers. Program participation requirements for PCP’s include attendance at 2 of 4 targeted professional education programs and participation in quality measures for breast, cervical, and colon cancer screening. Formalized processes to efficiently move patients between oncologists and PCP’s were established. Communication gaps were addressed by providing electronic access via a secure physician portal, access to FCCC disease navigation services, and establishment of designated referral navigators to coordinate clinical needs between provider groups. Results: FCCC initiated the Care Connect program with 5 PCP practices. During a 3 month pilot phase, FCCC directed 19 patients to Care Connect PCP’s to manage ongoing clinical needs and implement survivorship plans. Eight-six percent of referrals were classified as non-urgent. Median time from referral to PCP appointment was 16 days, 24% below regional average. One CME education program was conducted during the pilot phase. Of the attendees, 91% reported an intent to change current practice by implementing a new procedure, discussing new information or seek additional information. Attendees identified potential care barriers which will be included in future program development. Post-education, one practice referred 3 patients to the lung cancer screening program. Conclusions: A formal program that aligns PCPs and oncologists is an effective initiative to improve communication and awareness of cancer patient survivorship needs in oncology and primary care settings.

Evaluation of the National Cancer Program and Proposed Reforms

1993 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel S. Epstein
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Prevention ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Basic Research ◽  
Incidence Rates ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Society ◽  
Financial Interests

A statement by 68 prominent national experts in cancer prevention, carcinogenesis, epidemiology, and public health, released at a February 4, 1992, press conference in Washington, D.C., charged that the National Cancer Institute (NCI) has misled and confused the public by repeated claims of winning the war against cancer. In fact, age-standardized incidence rates have escalated to epidemic proportions over recent decades, while the ability to treat and cure most cancers has not materially improved. Furthermore, the NCI has minimized evidence for increasing cancer rates, which are largely attributed to smoking, trivializing the importance of occupational carcinogens as non-smoking attributable causes of lung and other cancers, and to diet per se, in spite of tenuous and inconsistent evidence and ignoring the important role of carcinogenic dietary contaminants. Reflecting this near exclusionary blame-the-victim theory of cancer causation, with lockstep support from the American Cancer Society and industry, the NCI discounts the role of avoidable involuntary exposures to industrial carcinogens in air, water, food, the home, and the workplace. The NCI has also failed to provide any scientific guidance to Congress and regulatory agencies on fundament principles of carcinogenesis and epidemiology, and on the critical needs to reduce avoidable exposures to environmental and occupational carcinogens. Analysis of the $2 billion NCI budget, in spite of fiscal and semantic manipulation, reveals minimal allocations for research on primary cancer prevention, and for occupational cancer, which receives only $19 million annually, 1 percent of NCI's total budget. Problems of professional mindsets in the NCI leadership, fixation on diagnosis, treatment, and basic research, much of questionable relevance, and the neglect of cancer prevention, are exemplified by the composition of the National Cancer Advisory Board. Contrary to the explicit mandate of the National Cancer Act, the Board is devoid of members authoritative in occupational and environmental carcinogenesis. These problems are further compounded by institutionalized conflicts of interest reflected in the composition of past executive President's Cancer Panels, and of the current Board of Overseers of the Sloan-Kettering Memorial Cancer Center, the NCI's prototype comprehensive cancer center, with their closely interlocking financial interests with the cancer drug and other industries. Drastic reforms of NCI policies and priorities are long overdue. Implementation of such reforms is, however, unlikely in the absence of further support from industrial medicine professionals, besides action by Congress and concerned citizen groups.

Abstract B17: A novel cancer prevention management strategy at the Comprehensive Cancer Center Freiburg (CCCF), Germany

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jens A. Leifert ◽  
Cornelia Schulz ◽  
Andreas Jaehne ◽  
Mirjam Elze ◽  
James Balmford ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Prevention ◽  
Management Strategy ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center

The Power of Partnership: Extending Comprehensive Cancer Center Expertise in Clinical Cancer Genetics to Community Breast Care Centers

2006 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah J. MacDonald ◽  
Sharon Sand ◽  
Frederic Kass ◽  
Kathleen R. Blazer ◽  
Jane Congleton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Genetics ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Clinical Cancer ◽  
Breast Care
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document