Perspectives on Post-Treatment Cancer Care: Qualitative Research With Survivors, Nurses, and Physicians

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (16) ◽  
pp. 2270-2273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria E. Hewitt ◽  
Annette Bamundo ◽  
Rebecca Day ◽  
Catherine Harvey
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Post Treatment ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Care Planning ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Psychosocial Needs ◽  
Nurses And Physicians

Purpose Cancer survivors have many medical and psychosocial needs that are unaddressed in the post-treatment period. Qualitative research was carried out to assess how a survivorship care plan created by oncologists could improve the quality of survivorship care. Participants and Methods Focus groups and interviews conducted with cancer survivors, nurses, primary care physicians, and oncologists provide insights into post-treatment follow-up practices and the acceptability and feasibility of providing survivors and referring physicians with a cancer survivorship care plan. Results Cancer survivors reported satisfaction with post-treatment medical care, but felt that their psychosocial needs were not met. Survivors expressed enthusiastic support for receipt of a follow-up care plan. Primary care physicians viewed themselves as playing an important role during the post-treatment period and indicated that a written care plan for follow-up would help them improve their survivorship practices. Nurses recognized the need to improve the care of cancer survivors and suggested that they could play an active role in creating and implementing cancer survivorship plans. Physicians providing oncology care acknowledged the value of survivorship care plans, but were not inclined to complete them because such plans would not reduce other reporting and communication requirements and would be burdensome to complete given their busy schedules. Conclusion Survivorship care planning is viewed favorably by consumers, nurses, and physicians, however there are several barriers to its adoption. Barriers may be overcome with: electronic medical records, changes in reporting requirements of insurers, advocacy on the part of patients, and incorporation of care planning in education and training programs.

Perceived value of cancer survivorship care among Asians and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e22522-e22522
Author(s):  
Jared David Acoba ◽  
Sharon Tamashiro ◽  
Marci Chock
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Racial Differences ◽  
Cancer Survivorship ◽  
Native Hawaiian ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plans ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans

e22522 Background: Numerous studies have evaluated the impact of cancer survivorship care. However, no study to date has focused on Asian or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (NH/PI) cancer survivors. It has been well documented that Asian and NH/PI patients often suffer from inferior cancer outcomes compared to White patients, and differences in their experience with cancer survivorship care could contribute to this disparity. Methods: Surveys were sent to 1410 cancer survivors who were treated at a community cancer center with curative intent and who had received survivorship care plans between Jan 2014 and June 2018. The 26-item questionnaire evaluated patients’ perception of various aspects of their survivorship care plan and follow-up physician visits. All responses were anonymous. Results: Of the 360 patients who responded, 24% were White, 54% Asian, and 13% NH/PI. Compared to Whites, Asian and NH/PI patients were younger (p = 0.004), less educated (p = 0.004), and reported a lower income (p < 0.0005). Among all patients, 62% reported that the survivorship care plan was “very helpful” and 86% rated their satisfaction with physician follow-up visits as “very good” to “excellent.” There were no racial differences in satisfaction with either survivorship care plan or physician follow-up. In a multivariate binary logistic regression, Asians and NH/PI patients were significantly more likely to rate ongoing survivorship care as helpful compared to Whites, OR 4.08 (95%CI, 2.13-7.82). Conclusions: There were no racial differences in patient satisfaction with their survivorship care plans and follow-up care. However, Asian and NH/PI patients valued ongoing cancer survivorship care follow-up significantly more than White patients. Whether more extensive survivorship care would lead to improved outcomes among Asian and NH/PI cancer patients should be investigated further.

scholarly journals Gastrointestinal Disease–Specific Survivorship Care: A New Personalized Model Integrating Onco-Wellness

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
pp. 107327482110060
Author(s):  
Tai Hutchinson ◽  
Sarah Hoffe ◽  
Sabrina Saeed ◽  
Sonya A. Pflanzer ◽  
Jason B. Fleming ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Active Treatment ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Gastrointestinal Disease ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Psychosocial Needs ◽  
Care Continuum ◽  
Gi Cancer ◽  
Care Models

Although the number of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer survivors is projected to increase in the coming years, there are currently no survivorship care models that address the specific and growing needs of this population. Current survivorship care models were evaluated to assess their suitability for GI cancer survivors. A survivorship care model based on foundational wellness principles is under development to address the specific needs of GI cancer survivors. This model delivers a cohesive and collaborative care continuum for survivors of different GI malignancies. Oncology providers in GI departments and internal medicine providers in survivorship programs are positioned to provide a comprehensive approach for the care of patients treated with curative intent. Survivorship care is introduced at the conclusion of active treatment in the form of an Onco-wellness consultation, an in-person or telemedicine comprehensive care plan creation and review by our Survivorship Program. Personalized care plan including long term and late effects of treatment, nutrition, physical activity and rehabilitation recommendations, prevention of secondary malignancies and psychosocial needs are reviewed. As patients transition from active treatment to survivorship within the GI Program, the GI Advance Practice Professionals (APPs) are well-positioned to deliver comprehensive survivorship care specific to the GI patient’s needs while integrating recommendations and principles from the Onco-wellness consultation. With projected shortages of both oncology and primary care physicians, such an APP-based model has the potential to bridge gaps in the survivorship care continuum and mutually benefit patients and physicians.

Developing a cultural and socioecological patient-centered survivorship care plan template for African American survivors.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (34_suppl) ◽  
pp. 40-40
Author(s):  
Kimlin T. Ashing-Giwa ◽  
Carlyn Tapp ◽  
Shirley Brown ◽  
June Smith ◽  
Eudora Mitchell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
African American ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Medical Care ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Follow Up Care

40 Background: Cancer and its treatments bring added health and life challenges. Cancer survivors require ongoing surveillance and medical care. To facilitate best practice in follow-up care, the Institute of Medicine, the American Society of Clinical Oncology and advocacy organizations advise that cancer survivors be provided with treatment summaries and Survivorship Care Plan (SCP). African-American breast cancer survivors (AABCS) have poorer outcomes characterized by greater morbidity and mortality, hence warranting their careful surveillance and follow-up medical care. SCP investigations are urgently needed to improve follow-up care and cancer outcomes in AABCS. Methods: The study embraced a community-based participatory research framework, building upon a series of research projects conducted by the African American Cancer Coalition, a partnership of scientific researchers and community-based advocates. Three informative focus groups were conducted with AABCS (N=25) and advocates (N=3) to obtain input on cultural and socio-ecological SCP contents to increase patient responsiveness. Results: AABCS believed that increased mortality may be due to comorbidities and inadequate surveillance and follow-up care. Participants recommended that the SCP attend to and document all comorbidities and medications; allow for participation of primary care providers; referrals for providers especially surgeons who are familiar with treating AABCS to the reduce keloid, and health advisories on nutrition, exercise and stress management. Quality-of-life related components and community referrals should be included because they are important for overall health. AABCS noted the importance of spirituality in life, and the disproportionately high levels of socioecological stress in the community. Conclusions: Participants infused cultural and socioecologic relevance towards the development of a patient centered SCP template to increase acceptability and utilization among AABCS. Participants underscored that developing the SCP responsive to AABCS and facilitating adherence to SCP recommendations, are areas warranting increased intervention and research.

A model for delivering survivorship care: Integrating the oncology and the primary care setting—An Italian experience.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. e275-e275
Author(s):  
Elena Lorenzi ◽  
Lucia Morello ◽  
Rita Mazza ◽  
Isabella Garassino ◽  
Raffaele Cavina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Disease Stage ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Early Stage Disease

e275 Background: The population of cancer-survivors faces different lifetime health risk. Thus, models for high-quality and personalized care delivery are strongly needed. ASCO provides different models for survivorship care delivery but there is not an agreement on what is the best in meeting patients’ needs and in terms of cost-effectiveness. In our institution we started a program that tries to integrate survivors’ health care provided by the oncologist and by the Primary Care Physician (PCP). Methods: We included patients (pts) aged more than 18 yrs-old at the time of diagnosis, affected by hematologic or solid tumors. Pts had no evidence of disease from at least 5 yrs from the diagnosis. They are referred to the PCP with the following documents: Survivorship Care-Plan, Survivorship Care-Program, letter to the PCP. Recurrence rate, death rate, treatment related serious clinical events will be calculated after 12 months from the start of the project. Results: We includedin our program 269 cancer-survivors (60% of pts referred to our survivorship-clinic from April to July 2015). The median age was 67 yrs, they were mainly females. The different cancer types were: breast (157), colorectal (36), hematologic (30), gynecologic (11), gastric (9), melanoma (6) lung (5), genitourinary (5), head/neck (3), sarcoma (3) and others (4). 189 of pts had an early stage disease (stage I-II) at diagnosis. 234 of pts underwent surgical treatment and 161 received chemotherapy with different schedules based on tumor types. 59% of pts received anthracycline-based-chemotherapy, 78% at a cumulative dose > 240 mg/m2 . 154 of pts underwent radiation therapy (90% in thoracic field) with a median dose of 60 Gy. We observed 11 cases of secondary cancer after a median of 2.7 yrs from the first diagnosis. The median observation time from the diagnosis to the inclusion in our program was 10 yrs (range 2-31). Conclusions: The observation period from the beginning of the program is too short to provide follow-up data. A high percentage of pts present a high risk of cardiologic late toxicities, therefore they need a more intensive cardiologic follow-up. We will present the first follow-up analysis of this cohort of pts in April 2016.

Impact of survivorship care plan (SCP) document on cancer survivors’ understanding of their cancer care and follow up.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 53-53
Author(s):  
Farhan Shahzad Imran ◽  
Heather Gorea ◽  
Brittany Heatherington ◽  
Susan Hodes ◽  
Nancy Mary Pictor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Cancer Surveillance ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care

53 Background: Follow up care for cancer survivors is often sidelined due to the lack of well-defined guidelines. A “Survivorship care plan (SCP)” document has been proposed to summarize key aspects of cancer care and the future follow up plan. Survey results of cancer survivors who had not received an SCP were compared with those who did receive an SCP. Methods: Surveys were mailed to patients who had completed cancer therapy with curative intent over two phases; phase I included patients who did not receive an SCP and phase II included patients who had received an SCP. The survey was designed to test understanding of diagnosis (stage), care team, symptoms of relapse, surveillance plan, and side effects of treatment. Microsoft Excel was used to calculate descriptive statistics on the quantitative data and frequency counts for the qualitative data. Results: During Phase I, 162 cancer survivors completed the survey and reported diagnosis of colon (2%), lung (6%) or breast (90%) cancer. During Phase II, 107 cancer survivors completed the survey and reported diagnosis of colon (2%), lung (8%), breast (44%) or other (44%) cancer. For both phases, only 2% patients could not correctly identify their cancer diagnosis. Only 12% Phase I and 18% Phase II patients were unable to identify the stage of their cancer at diagnosis. Phase I patients were better able to recall discussing their follow up plan with their provider (95%) and which tests should be performed as part of their cancer surveillance (86%) when compared to Phase II patients (90% and 78%, respectively). Phase II patients were better able to identify factors associated with their cancer where 57% accurately listed symptoms suggesting cancer recurrence and 52% correctly listed potential long-term side effects of cancer treatment. Only 20% and 17% Phase I patients correctly listed examples of each, respectively. Conclusions: Although it is intuitive that an SCP would improve patient understanding, we found a less than expected impact. Patients scored similarly or less favorable in most aspects with the distribution of the SCP, but were better able to identify signs and symptoms of disease recurrence and potential side effects of treatment.

scholarly journals Developing a post-treatment survivorship care plan to help breast cancer survivors understand their fertility

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 589-595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica R. Gorman ◽  
Anne K. Julian ◽  
Samantha A. Roberts ◽  
Sally A. D. Romero ◽  
Jennifer L. Ehren ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Breast Cancer Survivors ◽  
Post Treatment ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care

scholarly journals Colorectal Cancer Survivors' Needs and Preferences for Survivorship Information

2014 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. e277-e282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Talya Salz ◽  
Shrujal S. Baxi ◽  
Victoria S. Blinder ◽  
Elena B. Elkin ◽  
Margaret M. Kemeny ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Cancer History ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Survivors

In the absence of a survivorship care plan, colorectal cancer survivors still generally understood their cancer history; however, many lacked knowledge of ongoing risks and prevention.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document