scholarly journals What are the current barriers to effective cancer care coordination? A qualitative study

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Walsh ◽  
James D Harrison ◽  
Jane M Young ◽  
Phyllis N Butow ◽  
Michael J Solomon ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e13509-e13509
Author(s):  
Dominique Tremblay ◽  
Nassera Touati ◽  
Susan Usher ◽  
Johanne Cournoyer

e13509 Background: Quality cancer care relies on each profession keeping up with advances and best practices and spreading these across a complex multi-team system1. It requires enabling multiple providers and people living with cancer to bridge the distance between them and complement each other's contributions. The proximity framework2 provides a valuable way to understand conditions that increase the likelihood of knowledge sharing, innovation and collaboration. Methods: A qualitative study design of the Quebec Cancer Network was undertaken, with data collected from interviews with policymakers, managers, providers and users (N=22), observation of national and local level meetings (N=28) and document review. Interpretive Description using content analysis sought to identify actions that created proximity dimensions and the perceived influence these had on the development and spread of new approaches. Results: Deliberate actions taken within the network created different dimensions of proximity that impacted teamwork. Prescriptions from network leadership – including consistent promotion of the National cancer plan, patient participation in governance structures, shared quality indicators, and establishment of multidisciplinary committees at local level, created cognitive proximity: a shared mental model emphasizing patient-centred care and organizational proximity: shared standards across the network. Support for professional communities of practice created relational and institutional proximity, increasing trust and knowledge sharing. Local committees enhanced relational and cognitive proximity as providers came to appreciate and optimize each other's contribution to care. Conclusions: The combination of proximity dimensions created through communities of practice and prescriptions from the national level help develop and spread improvements that are tailored to - and take advantage of - networked team-based cancer care delivery. This reflects a balanced proximity where communities of practice pursue new knowledge and innovative practices that can be introduced in local committees to see how it fits with other contributions to solving a problem, thereby promoting recognition of interdependency within and between teams. Synergy between actions is essential to enhancing proximity. The proximity framework offers a complementary perspective to better understand opportunities for improving models of care. References: 1Weaver, S. J., et al. (2018). Unpacking care coordination through a multiteam system lens. Medical care, 56(3), 247-259. et al. Unpacking Care Coordination Through a Multiteam System Lens. Medical Care. 2018;56(3):247-59. 2Knoben, J., & Oerlemans, L. A. (2006). Proximity and inter‐organizational collaboration: A literature review. I nternational Journal of management reviews, 8(2), 71-89.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Francone ◽  
Jonathan Alhalel ◽  
Will Dunne ◽  
Sankirtana Danner ◽  
Nihmotallahi Adebayo ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp19X703505
Author(s):  
Joseph Clark ◽  
Elvis Amoakwa ◽  
John Blenkinsopp ◽  
Florence Reedy ◽  
Miriam Johnson

BackgroundResearch to identify the role of primary care in cancer care is important. However, trials in primary care are difficult.AimTo understand how patients, families, and primary care clinicians view their role in cancer care and identify opportunities for cancer primary care research.MethodQualitative study embedded within a feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial of a primary care based needs assessment intervention. The Supportive Cancer Needs Survey (SCNS) was the main outcome. In-depth interviews with patients/carers and focus groups with primary care staff explored views on cancer care and trial participation. Data were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed thematically by three independent researchers.ResultsFifteen cancer patients and three carers were interviewed and four focus groups (n = 11) were conducted. Three themes were generated satisfaction with current care; key time-points for improved cancer care; and information and research. Satisfaction with current care among patients was high in spite of 72% reporting at least one moderate-high unmet need at baseline. Most patients undergoing cancer treatment were unsure when to access primary care. Patients and carers highly valued proactive contact from their practice following diagnosis though this was uncommon. Post-oncology discharge was a key time-point for information needs and support for patients. Patients were reluctant to consider palliative care in spite of palliative care needs. Some felt therapeutic benefit from completing study measures.ConclusionPatients are satisfied with cancer primary care despite unmet needs. Palliative care is poorly understood by many who may benefit. Research participation may benefit some patients.


2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 485-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gemma K. Collett ◽  
Ivana Durcinoska ◽  
Nicole M. Rankin ◽  
Prunella Blinman ◽  
David J. Barnes ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. S1137
Author(s):  
S. Colomer-Lahiguera ◽  
K. Ribi ◽  
C.M. Witt ◽  
M. Eicher

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. e032166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kehinde Okunade ◽  
Kennedy Bashan Nkhoma ◽  
Omolola Salako ◽  
David Akeju ◽  
Bassey Ebenso ◽  
...  

IntroductionPalliative care is a clinically and cost‐effective component of cancer services in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Despite the significant need for palliative cancer care in SSA, coverage remains inadequate. The exploration of digital health approaches could support increases in the quality and reach of palliative cancer care services in SSA. However, there is currently a lack of any theoretical underpinning or data to understand stakeholder drivers for digital health components in this context. This project addresses this gap through engaging with key stakeholders to determine data and information needs that could be supported through digital health interventions.Methods and analysisThis is a multicountry, cross-sectional, qualitative study conducted in Nigeria, Uganda and Zimbabwe. In-depth interviews will be conducted in patients with advanced cancer (n=20), caregivers (n=15), health professionals (n=20) and policy-makers (n=10) in each of the three participating countries. Data from a total of 195 interviews will transcribed verbatim and translated into English before being imported into NVivo software for deductive framework analysis. The analysis will seek to understand the acceptability and define mechanisms of patient-level data capture and usage via digital technologies.Ethics and disseminationEthics approvals have been obtained from the Institutional Review Boards of University of Leeds (Ref: MREC 18–032), Research Council of Zimbabwe (Ref: 03507), Medical Research Council of Zimbabwe (Ref: MRCZ/A/2421), Uganda Cancer Institute (Ref: 19–2018), Uganda National Council of Science and Technology (Ref: HS325ES) and College of Medicine University of Lagos (Ref: HREC/15/04/2015). The project seeks to determine optimal mechanisms for the design and development of subsequent digital health interventions to support development, access to, and delivery of palliative cancer care in SSA. Dissemination of these findings will occur through newsletters and press releases, conference presentations, peer-reviewed journals and social media.Trial registration numberISRCTN15727711


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. e726-e733
Author(s):  
Izumi Okado ◽  
Kevin Cassel ◽  
Ian Pagano ◽  
Randall F. Holcombe

PURPOSE: Effective care coordination (CC) is a hallmark of a high-quality cancer care. However, efforts to improve cancer care delivery are limited by the lack of a clinically useful tool to assess CC. In this study, we examined patients’ perceptions of cancer CC using a novel tool, the Care Coordination Instrument (CCI), and evaluated the quality of the CCI. METHODS: The CCI is a 29-item patient questionnaire that assesses CC across varied practice settings and patient populations overall and for three critical domains of CC: communication, navigation, and operational. We conducted univariable and multivariable regression analyses to identify patient clinical and practice characteristics associated with optimal versus suboptimal CC. RESULTS: Two hundred patients with cancer completed the CCI questionnaire between October 2018 and January 2019, of whom 189 were used for the analysis. The presence of a family caregiver and a diagnosis of a blood cancer were correlated with overall positive reports of CC ( P < .001 and P < .05, respectively). Poorer perceptions of CC were associated with having a head and neck cancer and the absence of family caregiver support. The effects of cancer disease stage and having access to a patient navigator on CC were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Integrating a patient-centered tool to assess cancer CC can be a strategy to optimize cancer care delivery. Understanding factors associated with effective and ineffective CC can help inform efforts to improve overall quality of care and care delivery.


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark D. Williams ◽  
Gladys B. Asiedu ◽  
Dawn Finnie ◽  
Claire Neely ◽  
Jason Egginton ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document