The integration of cancer survivorship training in the curriculum of hematology/oncology fellows and radiation oncology residents.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20667-e20667
Author(s):  
Michelle Shayne ◽  
Eva Culakova ◽  
Michael T. Milano ◽  
Sughosh Dhakal ◽  
Louis S. Constine
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Survivorship ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Care Physician ◽  
Comfort Level ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Survey Questions

e20667 Background: The population of cancer survivors is steadily increasing. Cancer specialists require an understanding of survivors’ needs to insure optimal delivery of post-treatment care. Residency and fellowship training traditionally focus on cancer therapy, while survivorship care is often not emphasized. As a paradigm shift in our training programs, we instituted a Cancer Survivorship Workshop. Methods: In academic year 2011-2012 a Cancer Survivorship Workshop course was held at the James P. Wilmot Cancer Center/University of Rochester, a comprehensive cancer center with accredited training programs in Hematology Oncology (HO) and Radiation Oncology (RO). Course objectives included 1) learning about survivorship from patient, primary care physician, and oncologist perspectives using an evidenced-based curriculum; 2) designing treatment summaries (TS) and survivorship care plans (SCP) for 5 malignancies (lung, breast, prostate, colon, lymphoma) for integration into the electronic medical record and dissemination to patients; 3) establishing collaboration between HO and RO trainees by working together in assigned teams. Course impact was assessed pre- and post- training with a 13 question survey. Questions were answered using a 10 point scale, with a pre-defined rating system for each question. Results: Significant differences in responses to several survey questions were observed comparing pre- and post-course experience. Improvement in comfort level when discussing survivorship issues with patients (median pre-course score=6, post-course=8; p=.001), reported knowledge of survivorship care for 5 types of cancer (5 to 7; p=.002), confidence in ability to explain a SCP to a patient (5 to 8; p=.001), and comfort discussing late effects of treatment with patients (5 to 8; p=.001). The number of articles read regarding cancer survivorship increased. Five unique sets of TS and SCP’s were completed. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the feasibility of implementing cancer survivorship education into the curriculum of HO and RO training. This represents, to our knowledge, the first documented educational undertaking of its kind nationally in HO and RO Programs.

Internal medicine residents’ awareness on cancer survivorship care plan: A cross sectional study.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e23011-e23011
Author(s):  
Ivy Riano ◽  
Hugo Pomares-Millan ◽  
Klaorat Prasongdee ◽  
Robin Park ◽  
Narjust Duma
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Survivorship ◽  
Comfort Level ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Program Type ◽  
Significant Difference

e23011 Background: Survivorship care plans (SCPs) is recommended as a tool for communication between oncologists and primary care physicians. According to the Institute of Medicine, it is necessary to lead a cultural shift to provide SCPs to all cancer survivors to improve the transition from the oncology clinic to primary care practices. Studies suggest residency training curriculums for internal medicine (IM) are lacking education about cancer survivorship and SCPs. We aimed to assess the awareness of trainees toward SCPs. Methods: A survey was distributed to IM trainees in an outpatient setting. We stratified the descriptive analyses by program type (transitional [TY] and categorical [CT] trainees) and year of training. Differences in the proportions were tested appropriately. Analyses were conducted in R v3.6.2. Results: 37 trainees were interviewed; 32.4% were TY and 67.6% CT trainees. A 54% were PGY-1, 21.6% PGY-2, and 24.3% PGY-3. None of the trainees reported following a SCP for cancer-free patients nor to use SCP as a source to obtain cancer-related information. 78.3% and 92.6% reported that they were not taught during residency or medical school about SCPs, respectively. 84.8% informed that cancer-related information was inaccessible during the encounter with patients; sources cancer diagnosis and treatment information included: patients/family members (97.3%), outside records (83.8%), and oncology notes (86.5%). By program type, there was a statistically significant difference between TY v. CT groups (p = 0.017) regarding how often cancer-related issues were discussed with patients; the TY group mainly reported ‘Not at all’ whether CT were more likely to engage in discussion about cancer. Differences in the trainees’ comfort level answering patients concerns about cancer recurrence were observed between TY v. CT trainees but was not statistically significant (p = 0.864). Most common barriers to discuss cancer history and/or SCP were insufficient information from patients (83.8%), perceived inaccuracy from patients’ information (81.1%), unclear if patient has a SCP (81.1%), lack of SCP in medical record (75.7%), and trainees’ low medical knowledge about side effects of cancer therapies (70.3%). Conclusions: The awareness of cancer SCP among the IM trainees is limited, and many have not accessed or received training in SCPs. Efforts intended to facilitate SCP use and educate residents about cancer survivorship may be effective to increase the comfort level of trainees managing the growing number of survivors and improve transition from oncology to primary care clinics.[Table: see text]

scholarly journals Building a survivorship care plan delivery process: Experience in an academic center.

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (suppl) ◽  
pp. 69-69
Author(s):  
Zoneddy R. Dayao ◽  
Bernard Tawfik ◽  
Janet Abernathy ◽  
Charles Wiggins ◽  
Amy Gundelach ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effective ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Multiple Time ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Care Plans

69 Background: The Institute of Medicine endorses delivery of survivorship care plans (SCPs) to the growing number of cancer survivors in order to improve the coordination of care between oncologists and primary care providers (PCPs). In response, the Commission on Cancer (COC) has increased the SCP delivery requirement to >50% of eligible patients, a goal that is difficult to meet given limited resources. Here we outline the initiatives taken to achieve this goal at the University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center (UNMCCC). Methods: Prior to 2017, SCPs were not routinely delivered. Beginning 2017, providers were tasked to complete and deliver printed SCPs , resulting in a 17% rate of SCP completion. However, there was general lack of provider support and enthusiasm as the process was time consuming with no method for identifying eligible patients and tracking SCP delivery. In 2018, designated staff was assigned to partially complete the SCPs to assist providers, resulting in an increase in SCP delivery rate to 41%. However, the same barriers existed. SCP softwares, although available, were expensive. A cost effective process therefore was needed. A committee was then formed to create a system-wide process utilizing the existing electronic health record (EHR) MOSAIQ. ASCO based SCPs were created. Once providers identify eligible patients, an SCP electronic order was initiated. Designated staff then partially completes the SCPs based on review of medical records. The EHR extracts data items including demographics, PCP information, cancer type and stage. The EHR is programmed to flag SCPs ready for delivery which the provider then edits and approves. This system tracks multiple time points including referral, completion and delivery of SCPs. This new process was implemented in April 2019. Quarterly reviews are set to assess metrics. Results: Utilizing existing EHR (MOSAIQ), a new SCP delivery process was created that allows tracking of assembly, completion and timing of delivery. Conclusions: To overcome existing barriers to SCP completion and delivery, a new cost effective process was created utilizing existing staff and EHR resources. Institutional support is key to the success of this initiative.

Role of the nurse in the design, delivery, monitoring and coordination of cancer survivorship care plans: An integrative review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nerea Elizondo Rodriguez ◽  
Leire Ambrosio ◽  
Virginia La Rosa‐Salas ◽  
Marta Domingo‐Osle ◽  
Cristina Garcia‐Vivar
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Survivorship ◽  
Integrative Review ◽  
Survivorship Care Plans ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans

Dissemination of cancer survivorship care plans: who is being left out?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lava R. Timsina ◽  
Ben Zarzaur ◽  
David A. Haggstrom ◽  
Peter C. Jenkins ◽  
Maryam Lustberg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Survivorship ◽  
Survivorship Care Plans ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans

Perceptions of barriers to patient financial hardship screening differ by provider role within gynecologic oncology outpatient care.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 317-317
Author(s):  
Jhalak Dholakia ◽  
Maria Pisu ◽  
Warner King Huh ◽  
Margaret Irene Liang
Keyword(s):  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology ◽  
Financial Hardship ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Staff Members ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Patient Barriers

317 Background: Although approximately half of patients with gynecologic malignancy experience financial hardship (FH) during treatment, best practices to identify and assist patients with FH are lacking. To develop such practices, we assessed oncology provider and staff perspectives about FH screening and provision of assistance. Methods: An anonymous survey was conducted electronically within the Gynecologic Oncology outpatient office at a Comprehensive Cancer Center. Potential barriers to patient FH screening and follow-up were assessed within 2 domains: 1) logistic barriers to incorporating FH screening and follow-up into outpatient workflow and 2) perceived patient barriers to FH screening. Responses were elicited on a 5-point Likert scale from ‘very’ to ‘not at all’ significant and dichotomized into significant and not significant barriers. Results: Of 43 providers approached, 37 responded (86% response rate) of which 14 were physicians (MD)/nurse practitioners (NP) and 23 were other staff members (i.e., clinical and research nurses, social workers, pharmacists, care coordinators, lay navigators, and financial counselors). Altogether, 38% worked in their current position for >5 years (n=14), 11% for 3-5 years (n=4), and 51% for <3 years (n=19). For logistic barriers to implementing FH screening and follow-up, the most frequently reported significant barriers included lack of personnel training (69%) and lack of available staff (62%), training regarding follow-up (72%), and case tracking infrastructure (67%). The most frequent significant perceived patient barriers were lack of knowledge of whom to contact (72%), concerns about impact on treatment if FH needs were identified (72%), and lack of patient readiness to discuss financial needs (62%.) Compared to MD/NP, staff members more often indicated the following as significant barriers: difficulty incorporating FH screening into initial visit workflow (31 % vs. 57%, p=0.03), overstretched personnel (29% vs 73%, p=0.005), and patient concerns about influence on treatment (62% vs 86%, p=0.01). Conclusions: Care team members identified barriers to patient FH screening across logistic and patient-centered domains, although MD/NP less so than other staff possibly reflecting different exposures to patient financial needs during clinical encounters or burden of workflow. Implementation of universal FH screening, dedicated personnel, convenient tracking mechanisms, and multi-disciplinary provider and staff training may improve recognition of patient FH and facilitate its integration into oncology care plans.

scholarly journals Cancer Survivorship Care Plans: What Can Be Learned From Hospital Discharge Summaries?

2012 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larissa Nekhlyudov ◽  
Jeffrey L. Schnipper
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Discharge ◽  
Cancer Survivorship ◽  
Survivorship Care Plans ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Discharge Summaries

Exploration of potential lessons from hospital discharge summaries, which may be used to facilitate development, implementation, and testing of survivorship care plans.

scholarly journals Patient Satisfaction With Breast and Colorectal Cancer Survivorship Care Plans

2013 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 266-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian L. Sprague ◽  
Kim L. Dittus ◽  
Claire M. Pace ◽  
Dorothy Dulko ◽  
Lori A. Pollack ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Cancer Survivorship ◽  
Survivorship Care Plans ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document