Supportive care plans: Harnessing technology and patient-reported outcomes to drive quality care across the cancer continuum.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (30_suppl) ◽  
pp. 167-167
Author(s):  
Jeannine Brant ◽  
Carrie Tompkins Stricker ◽  
Paul B. Jacobsen
Keyword(s):  
Supportive Care ◽  
Quality Care ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Care Planning ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Post Test

167 Background: Cancer care is increasingly complex. Clinicians lack time to stay current on evolving evidence and resources to implement quality standards. Health information technology solutions have proliferated, including electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) and care pathway technologies, but adoption has been slow. The goal of this study is to explore feasibility, usability, and acceptability of incorporating a novel supportive care planning technology into clinic workflow. The On Q Care Planning System (CPS) collects ePRO and clinical data to generate a personalized supportive care plan aligned with quality care standards and current evidence. Plans promote self-management and patient-provider communication. Methods: Prospective, multi-center pilot study at 2 NCI-affiliated centers (a comprehensive community cancer program [NCCCP] in the Western U.S., and a NCI-designated comprehensive cancer center [NCCC] in the Southeastern U.S.). 100 patients and their providers will participate; 50 women with gynecological cancers on chemotherapy; 50 women post-active treatment for breast cancer. Patients complete an ePRO assessment and are given an electronically generated, personalized supportive care plan by their providers during office visit(s) over a 3-month period. Study outcomes evaluated at baseline and 6 weeks include feasibility/usability of the platform (patient/provider, post-test only; surveys/platform statistics), patient satisfaction with care (pre/post-test; CG-CAHPS), and adherence to care plan recommendations (post-test survey). Results: To date, 10 patients have enrolled at the NCCCP and 7 completed baseline and 6 week measures; 5 at the NCCC have completed baseline measures. Four providers each at the NCCCP and the NCCC are scheduled for post-test assessments. Updated enrollment and results will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: The On Q CPS is a novel supportive care planning technology developed to improve care processes and patient outcomes through the delivery of personalized electronic care plans. Feasibility, usability, acceptability, satisfaction and exploratory outcome data will be presented.

Survivorship care plans: Strategies to enhance patient utility and value.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. 75-75
Author(s):  
Diana Harris ◽  
Carrie Tompkins Stricker ◽  
Deb Walker ◽  
Amanda Katzman ◽  
Nadia Still ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Planning System ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Institute Of Medicine ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Survivor Care Plan ◽  
Sexual Concerns ◽  
After Cancer ◽  
Cancer Experience

75 Background: A decade ago the Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommended that every survivor receive a survivor care plan (SCP), yet despite endorsements of clinical merit, evidence of their effectiveness is inconsistent, and patient satisfaction with, use of, and perceived utility of SCP’s remains unclear. Methods: This ongoing multicenter pilot enrolls breast cancer (BC) patients who have recently completed active treatment. Patients complete an electronic patient reported outcomes (ePRO) survey via the Carevive Care Planning System (CPS), which is combined with clinical data to electronically generate tailored care plans with survivorship and symptom-specific recommendations (i.e. follow-up care, self-management, supportive care referrals) in real-time. Patients receive their care plan at a consultative survivorship visit. Approximately 6-weeks following SCP receipt, patients complete a survey to evaluate satisfaction Results: Over 200 patients have received SCPs to date; 101 have completed follow-up surveys. Patients are on average 59 years old (Range: (33-84 yo), female (100%), and with 0-III stage BC. Study outcomes include patient-reported use and helpfulness of, as well as satisfaction (1-5 Likert scale items) with, their SCP. On average, patients were “very satisfied” with their SCP overall (M = 4.08), and 90% (n=90) would, “recommend other women receive a similar care plan after cancer treatment”. In addition to majority of patients (99%) having read or planning to read the SCP carefully, the three most frequently cited ways for use/planned use of the SCP include to: inform about symptoms (90%); speak with healthcare professionals about concerns (88%); and help identify information online (86%). Seventy-two (78%) patients and 68 (74%) reported that SCP’s were most useful to helping them make changes in what they ate and types of exercises, respectively. Conversely, 51 (58%) of patients and 47 (59%) of patients reported that the SCP was most useful to helping them find support resources and talking about personal cancer experience with family members. When asked to recall what recommendations their SCPs endorsed, patients most commonly recalled surveillance recommendations (e.g. follow up visits (83%), mammograms (80%), compared to recommendations specific to reported concerns and symptoms (e.g, management of sexual concerns (31%), evaluation and management of lymphedema (27%)). Conclusions: n/a

Recall and uptake of survivorship care plan recommendations.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 67-67
Author(s):  
Andrew L. Salner ◽  
Deborah Walker ◽  
Amanda Seltzer ◽  
SarahLena Panzer ◽  
Carrie Stricker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer Survivors ◽  
Pilot Project ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Treatment Data

67 Background: Despite the growing delivery of survivorship care plans (SCPs), little research has examined survivors’ recall and adoption of SCP recommendations, including those based on patient-reported symptoms and concerns. Methods: 65 stage 0-III breast cancer survivors participated in this pilot project. Patients completed an electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePRO) survey prior to a visit with a nurse practitioner, who delivered a tailored SCP generated by the Carevive Care Planning System (CPS) using evidence-based algorithms driven by ePRO and diagnosis/treatment data. Approximately 6 weeks later, patients completed a survey to evaluate their recall and any corresponding action taken. Actual SCP recommendations were extracted from the Carevive CPS database and matched to follow-up surveys to determine recall accuracy. Results: Data were analyzed for 35 patients completing follow-up surveys to date. SCPs contained an average of 22.2 recommendations per patient, almost half (n = 10.7) for active symptoms/supportive care issues. Recommendations were broken down into 3 groups 1) Surveillance, 2) Prevention, and 3) Intervention; see table below for select results. Of note, lymphedema-related recommendations were recalled accurately more often (p = 0.005) by those with symptoms vs. those advised on prevention. Conclusions: Incorporating an ePRO survey into SCP delivery enables tailoring to patient needs and concerns, which may in turn enhance recall and follow through given saliency. Patients tended to recall more accurately SCP recommendations for active or more severe symptoms. Additional research is needed to maximize retention and follow through on SCP recommendations. [Table: see text]

Advance care planning for people with dementia: a review

2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (10) ◽  
pp. 1535-1551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Harrison Dening ◽  
Louise Jones ◽  
Elizabeth L. Sampson
Keyword(s):  
Advance Care Planning ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Care Planning ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
People With Dementia ◽  
Current Evidence Base ◽  
Advance Care

ABSTRACTBackground: Few people with dementia have made advance plans for their health care. Advance care planning (ACP) is a process of discussion between an individual and their care providers that takes account of wishes and preferences for future care. We aimed to examine the facilitators and inhibitors to ACP in people with dementia. We also aimed to identify key themes in the literature and critically review the methodologies used.Methods: We systematically searched the English language literature including PubMed, CINAHL, AMED, PsychINFO, EMBASE and BNI. We included empirical studies which reported the characteristics of the patient population, the type of advance care planning used and the study setting, and which involved people with dementia, family members or professional carers.Results: We identified 17 studies (11 quantitative methods, one qualitative and five mixed methods). We found one ACP intervention which changed outcomes for people with dementia. Key themes were identified: there is a point at which cognition decreases critically so that an advanced care plan can no longer be made; factors present in family carers and professionals can influence decision-making and the ACP process; ACPs are affected by preferences for life sustaining treatments; ACP in dementia may differ from other illness groups; and there is a need for education relating to ACP.Conclusion: The current evidence base for ACP in dementia is limited. Since UK government policy recommends that all people should engage in ACP, more evidence is needed to understand the feasibility and acceptability of advanced care plans for people with dementia.

Health Literacy and Patient -Reported Outcomes

2018 ◽  
pp. 109-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Irene Bellini ◽  
Andre Kubler
Keyword(s):  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Quality Care ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Subjective Data ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Satisfaction Rates

Modern healthcare needs to identify parameters for high-quality care. Quality improvement is the key for advancing in healthcare, and the new assessment tool shifts from a disease-centered outcome to a patient-centered outcome. Clinical outcome such as morbidity and mortality are directly connected and interdependent from patient-reported outcomes: well-informed patients who decide with their healthcare provider what treatment is best for them have better outcomes and higher patient satisfaction rates. These subjective data collected by rigorous, meaningful, and scientific methods and presented in a utilizable format can be used to create care objectives towards which both the surgeon and their patient can travel. Time has come to carry patient-centered outcomes from research into decision making and daily care plans. This chapter outlines a focus beyond life-prolonging therapy, aiming to minimize the negative effects of treatment, optimize quality of life, and align medical decisions with patient expectations.

scholarly journals Development and implementation of a structured ward round in acute adult psychiatry

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. e000035 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Rebecca Mattinson ◽  
Sarah Jane Cheeseman
Keyword(s):  
Improve Patient Safety ◽  
Quality Care ◽  
General Medicine ◽  
Multidisciplinary Care ◽  
Ward Round ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Adult Psychiatry ◽  
Paired Male ◽  
Ward Rounds

Delivering high quality care in acute psychiatry requires a coordinated approach from a multidisciplinary team (MDT). Weekly ward rounds are an important forum for reviewing a patient’s progress and developing a personalised care plan for the coming week. In general medicine, structured ward rounds and check lists have been shown to prevent omissions and improve patient safety; however, they are not widely used in psychiatry. At the Royal Edinburgh Hospital, the format of ward rounds differed between psychiatry wards and clinical teams, and care plans were not standardised. An audit in October 2015 found only 5% of acute psychiatric inpatients had a documented nursing care plan. It was agreed that a clear multidisciplinary care plan from the weekly ward round would be beneficial. A group of consultant psychiatrists identified seven key domains for ward round (Social needs, Community Mental Health Team liaison, Assessments required, Mental Health Act, Prescriptions: medication electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), T2/T3, Engagement with relatives and carers, Risk Assessment and Pass Plans). This was given the acronym SCAMPER. Following this, a clinical MDT on a paired male and female ward, developed and introduced a structured ward round sheet. Within 8 weeks this was being used for 100% of patients. It was subsequently introduced into three other acute adult psychiatry wards and the intensive psychiatric care unit. Staff feedback was sought verbally and via a questionnaire. This was positive. The form was widely accepted and staff felt it improved patient care and ward round quality.

Care planning and adherence to diabetes process guidelines: Medicare data analysis

2013 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akuh Adaji ◽  
Peter Schattner ◽  
Kay Margaret Jones ◽  
Bronwyn Beovich ◽  
Leon Piterman
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Strong Association ◽  
Hdl Cholesterol ◽  
Practice Management ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Care Planning ◽  
Process Measures ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Management Plans ◽  
Chi Square Analysis

Objective. To test the association, in patients with a diagnosis of diabetes I and II, between having or not having a care plan, (i.e. General Practice Management Plans (GPMPs),Team Care Arrangements (TCAs)), and having the recommended number of biochemical checks according to the diabetes Annual Cycle of Care guideline. The checks comprised HbA1c, HDL cholesterol and urinary microalbumin. Methods. Chi-square analysis of retrospective group data obtained from the Medicare database (from ‘billing’ patterns only). Results. The creation of GPMPs was associated with general practitioners (GPs) requesting checks for HbA1c (59.7%), HDL cholesterol (36.9%) and microalbumin (50.8%) for diabetes patients in accordance with guideline recommendations. Although the introduction of multidisciplinary care via a TCA was associated with an increase in the frequency of HbA1c checks (61.3%) in accordance with the guidelines, there was a reduction in the number of HDL cholesterol (23.7%) and microalbumin (36.8%) checks. The group with no care plans had the lowest association with HbA1c (47.8%), HDL cholesterol (19.7%) and microalbumin (29.3%) checks that met guideline requirements for diabetes. Conclusions. The use of GPMPs showed strong association with increased testing of process measures that met guideline requirements for diabetes. Further research is needed to understand the value and benefits of TCAs in promoting adherence to diabetes guidelines. What is known about the topic? Research suggests that care planning is associated with increased adherence by GPs to some of the processes of care stipulated in diabetes guidelines. What does the paper add? This study examines Australia-wide data obtained from Medicare. The findings demonstrated strong association between care planning and the process measures examined in this study. In contrast to previous studies, multidisciplinary team involvement via a TCA appeared to be less important than a GPMP in promoting adherence to process measures. What are the implications for practitioners? GPs should continue to provide structure care to patients via General Practice Management Plans.

Prevalence and Benefits of Care Plans and Care Planning for People with Long-Term Conditions in England

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 64-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenni Burt ◽  
Martin Roland ◽  
Charlotte Paddison ◽  
David Reeves ◽  
John Campbell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Survey ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Care Planning ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Long Term Conditions ◽  
Patient Reports ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Interpersonal Care

Objectives Among patients with long-term conditions, to determine the prevalence and benefits of care planning discussions and of care plans. Methods Data from the 2009/10 General Practice Patient Survey, a cross sectional survey of 5.5 million patients in England. Outcomes were patient reports of: care planning discussions; perceived benefit from care planning discussions and resultant care plans. Patient and practice variables were included in multilevel logistic regression to investigate predictors of each outcome. Results Half the respondents (49%) reported a long-term condition and were eligible to answer the care planning questions. Of these, 84% reported having a care planning discussion during the last 12 months and most reported some benefit. Only 12% who reported a care planning discussion also reported being told they had a care plan. Patients who reported having a care plan were more likely to report benefits from care planning discussions. Several factors predicted the reporting of care planning and care plans of which the most important was patients' reports of the quality of interpersonal care. Conclusions There is a gap between policy and current practice which might reflect uncertainty as to the benefits of care plans. There is, therefore, a need for rigorous evaluation of care plans.

Survivorship care plan visits: Mixed methods analysis of patient surveys.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (34_suppl) ◽  
pp. 174-174
Author(s):  
Natalie Garces ◽  
Daisuke Goto ◽  
Carol J. Farhangfar ◽  
Tara Eaton
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Patient Reported

174 Background: Survivorship Care Plans (SCPs) are endorsed by cancer advocacy groups and required for accreditation, yet benefits are unclear. The purpose of this quality initiative was to assess the benefit of SCPs. Methods: From June 2015 to September 2017, survivors who had a SCP visit were surveyed to report their understanding of key survivorship topics pre/post visit; the most valuable information learned and plans to use the information. Descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis were performed. Subgroup analysis was performed for age, insurance, marital status, and race. Wilcoxon signed-rank test computed statistical significance. Results: Of 794 surveys, 657 (83%) were complete and evaluable. Surveys were collected from breast (436 [66%]), lung (45 [7%]), colorectal (33 [5%]), head and neck (25 [4%]), melanoma (24 [4%]), endometrial and ovarian (20 each [3%]), and other (54 (8%) cancer survivors. Statistically significant ( p<0.05) improvements in all questions (Table 1) were noted across nearly all disease sites. Exceptions were endometrial, head and neck, and melanoma, which already had > 75% answering “completely understand” for selected questions pre- SCP visit. Subgroup analysis found no significant differences. Self-management was a theme in the “other” insurance status subgroup (14) qualitative analysis. Four (36%) indicated an interest in information about programs to improve healthy behaviors. Conclusions: There was major positive impact of the SCP visit on patient-reported understanding of all survivorship topics. Providers may benefit from focusing SCP discussion on areas the survivor reports as “some” or “no” understanding pre- SCP visit. Providers should connect survivors to resources to support self-identified needs. [Table: see text]

A randomized trial of a palliative care intervention for patients on phase I studies.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 12001-12001
Author(s):  
Thomas J. Smith ◽  
Vincent Chung ◽  
Mark T. Hughes ◽  
Marianna Koczywas ◽  
Nilofer Saba Azad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Supportive Care ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Quality Care ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Phase I Clinical Trials ◽  
Care Intervention

12001 Background: The purpose of this study was to test a Palliative Care Intervention for patients with solid tumors enrolled in phase I therapeutic trials. Methods: This randomized trial compared patients accrued to phase I Clinical Trials in groups of Usual Care compared to a Palliative Care Intervention (PCI) in two comprehensive cancer centers. The PCI included assessment of quality of life (QOL) and symptoms, an interdisciplinary meeting to discuss the care plan, including goals of care, and two nurse-delivered teaching sessions. Subjects (n=479) were followed for 24 weeks, with 12 weeks as the primary outcome point. Results: Outcomes revealed that relative to Usual Care, PCI subjects showed less Psychological Distress (1.9 in Intervention and 1.2 in Control pts, p=0.03) and a trend toward improved QOL (3.7 versus 1.6, p=0.07), with differences between sites. We observed high rates of symptom-management admissions (41.3%) and low rates of Advance Directive completion (39%), and use of supportive care services including hospice (30.7%, for only1.2 months duration), despite a median survival for all patients in both groups of 10.1 months from initiating a phase 1 study until death. Patient satisfaction with oncology care was already high at baseline, and we did not see clinically significant changes in those scores by week 12. Conclusions: Palliative care interventions can improve QOL outcomes and distress for patients participating in phase 1 trials. Greater integration of PC is needed to provide quality care to these patients and to support transitions from treatment to supportive care, especially at the end of life. Clinical trial information: NCT01828775 .

Promoting patient health maintenance with cancer care planning at diagnosis and during treatment: baseline data of the Coleman Supportive Oncology Collaborative (CSOC).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e24051-e24051
Author(s):  
Christine B. Weldon ◽  
Julia Rachel Trosman ◽  
Rosa Berardi ◽  
Al Bowen Benson ◽  
Betty Roggenkamp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Care ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Care Planning ◽  
Health Maintenance ◽  
Supportive Cancer Care ◽  
Personalized Care ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
The Impact

e24051 Background: CSOC conducts quality improvements (QI) for cancer patients that facilitate delivery of appropriate health maintenance and supportive cancer care at diagnosis and during treatment. CSOC is implementing a care planning QI starting at diagnosis using the 4R oncology model (Right Info / Care / Patient / Time), which provides patients a formal personalized care plan called Patient Care Sequence. Each Care Sequence includes health maintenance, cancer treatments and supportive care. As part of CSOC, we conducted provider surveys as a pre-intervention baseline to inform QI opportunities. Methods: Online survey of cancer providers from 8 cancer centers (4 academic, 4 community) conducted July 2018 - October 2019, prior to 4R implementation. The survey focused on current care planning practices and inclusion of guideline recommended health maintenance in care plans. Results: Survey response rate: 80% (180/225); respondents were 53% physicians, 20% advanced practice, 27% nurses. Only 59% (107/180) of respondents give patients care plans at diagnosis: 61% (65/107) verbally, 22% (24/107) written, 17% (18/107) using a printed form. Providers reported considerable gaps in including guideline-based health maintenance and promotion activities in care plans given to patients (Table). Additionally, 61% of providers reported concerns that it is challenging for their patients to manage their own health maintenance activities. Providers who are concerned about patients’ challenges in managing their own health maintenance are significantly more likely to give their patients a written or printed plan (76%, 32/42) compared to those providing care plans to patients verbally or not at all (56%, 77/138), p = .02. Conclusions: Guideline based health promotion activities are not consistently included in care plans, and care planning is not sufficiently conducted at cancer diagnosis. The CSOC 4R Oncology Model, which implements Patient Care Sequences at diagnosis, will address these gaps and examine the impact of formal care planning on improving utilization of health maintenance and promotion activities. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document