The University of Pittsburgh CancerCenter Primary Care Provider Workforce Integration Initiative: An institutional model—Design, process, status, and implications.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 41-41
Author(s):  
G J. Van Londen ◽  
Jill Weiskopf Brufsky ◽  
Ira Russell Parker
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Geriatric Medicine ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
University Of Pittsburgh ◽  
The University ◽  
Workforce Integration

41 Background: Due to increasing numbers of individuals diagnosed with cancer, a burgeoning cohort of cancer survivors with significant medical co-morbidities, and oncology workforce “supply-demand” challenges, the optimal integration of Primary Care Providers (PCPs) into the comprehensive cancer care paradigm is of timely importance. The objective is to describe those specific planning and implementation issues impacting the establishment of a cancer care delivery model targeting the interface between Oncology and Primary Care. Methods: The University of Pittsburgh CancerCenter PCP Workforce Integration Initiative received authorization to proceed in December of 2014. Immediate actions were then undertaken: 1) Establishment of an “Advisory/Working Group” [Fifteen stakeholders representing the interests of Oncology, Patient Advocacy, Nursing, Primary Care (Family Medicine, Geriatric Medicine, Internal Medicine, and Gynecology); Administration, Information Technology, and Research]; 2) Conduct of focus groups and individual, fact-finding conversations; 3) Programmatic planning of a “pilot” intervention; and 4) Planning of a full-day, continuing medical/nursing education symposium focusing upon the specific training and empowerment needs of PCPs with regard to their evolving roles in the comprehensive cancer care paradigm (November/2015). Results: Focus groups demonstrated an overall acknowledgement of the importance of the issue and a willingness to participate. Specific identification of those unique provider roles and competencies necessary to address a patient’s individual “survivorship” risk profile and the development of a system to best enhance communication and information exchange among the providers and patients were made evident. The results of a survey (knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and practices) conducted to the attendees of the Symposium will be discussed. Conclusions: To best optimize the interface between Oncologists and PCPs with regard to best practices cancer care, well-planned competency training and “system development” will be necessary.

Integrating primary care and cancer care in survivorship: A collaborative approach.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 103-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Sussman ◽  
Mary L McBride ◽  
Jeffrey Sisler ◽  
Grace Kim ◽  
Laura Game ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Vertical Integration ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Functional Integration ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Collaborative Approach ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Integration ◽  
The Impact

103 Background: Primary care providers (PCPs) have an important role in the provision of survivorship care. While there is evidence to support the feasibility and safety of PCP-led survivorship care, there are gaps in knowledge about how to best integrate providers to support transitions, enhance quality of care, increase system efficiencies, and improve patient and provider satisfaction. Methods: A pan-Canadian study comprised of three projects has been initiated to address three key aspects of care integration, based on a previously described system performance framework. Functional integration will be studied through the evaluation of electronic survivorship care plans using a prospective cohort of breast and colorectal cancer patients with pre and post measures of knowledge, care coordination, and satisfaction. Vertical integration will be evaluated through a series of descriptive case studies to document structures and processes that are currently in place to support PCP re-referral to regional cancer centres. Clinical integration will be studied through the development and evaluation of an interspecialty survivorship training curriculum for oncology and family medicine trainees. Results: Functional integration: Development of an electronic platform for care plan outputs is complete. Two sites in Ontario (ON) and one in British Columbia (BC) have been selected to study the impact on 200 patients and their providers. Vertical integration: Using a study-specific interview guide, 48 semi-structured key informant interviews have been successfully conducted in ON; 15 interviews are planned for Manitoba (MB) and 15 for BC. Clinical Integration: a National Advisory Committee was established and needs assessments were performed with postgraduate program directors, cancer survivors, and trainees using online surveys and focus groups. A blended learning curriculum is being piloted in MB, ON, and BC in 2015. Conclusions: Integrating primary care and cancer care in survivorship requires a collaborative approach that begins in residency, supports PCPs with clear mechanisms for re-entry, and optimizes communication. This study will inform approaches to enhancing provider integration and survivorship care.

Faster and better: Improving the diagnostic phase of lung cancer at a system level.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (8_suppl) ◽  
pp. 115-115
Author(s):  
Melissa Kaan ◽  
Claire Holloway ◽  
Julie Gilbert ◽  
Vicky Simanovski ◽  
Garth Matheson
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Patient Experience ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Diagnostic Process ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
The Past ◽  
Rule Out

115 Background: For many patients going through diagnostic testing for cancer, the time from suspicion to diagnosis or rule-out, can be a confusing and anxious time. In 2007, Cancer Care Ontario began investing in the implementation of diagnostic assessment programs (DAPs) across Ontario, Canada to improve the quality of care during the diagnostic phase of lung cancer. DAPs consist of multidisciplinary healthcare teams that manage and coordinate a patient’s diagnostic care from testing to a definitive diagnosis. The objectives of the DAPs are to: 1) decrease time from suspicion to diagnosis or resolution; 2) optimize the patient’s experience during the diagnostic process; 3) optimize satisfaction and experience among primary care providers and specialists; and 4) provide a sustainable solution by offering good value for money. Today over 35,000 patients have been diagnosed in one of the 18 lung DAPs that exist across the province. Methods: The implementation of DAPs featured the introduction of a patient navigator to act as the primary point of contact for patients, improve the patient experience and ensure their patients were progressing through any required diagnostic imaging and consultations in a timely manner. Cancer Care Ontario also engaged with primary care providers to refer patients with findings suspicious for lung cancer to DAPs as early as possible to ensure they benefited from organized assessment. Cancer Care Ontario has collected patient level data to measure wait times and implemented a patient survey to assess patient experience. Results: In the past five years, the median wait time from referral to a lung DAP to diagnosis or rule out has decreased by 19% to 24 days and the 90th %tile has decreased by 28% to 51 days. The large majority of patients have had a positive experience with their DAPs, with 95% of patients scoring their experience in the diagnostic process as “good” or “excellent”. Conclusions: The implementation of DAPs across the province is seen as a valuable component of quality of care by improving the diagnostic phase of cancer. The sustainability of the DAP model is demonstrated by the continued improvements in access and maintained patient experience in spite of growing volumes (91% increase in the past five years).

Evaluation of coordination of cancer care between designated cancer hospitals and primary care providers: Results from a nationwide survey in Japan.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 84-84
Author(s):  
Taro Tomizuka ◽  
Tomone Watanabe ◽  
Satoru Kamitani ◽  
Takahiro Higashi
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Care Coordination ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Critical Path ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Follow Up Care ◽  
Cancer Specialist

84 Background: To improve coordination of cancer care between cancer specialist hospitals and primary care providers (PCPs), the Japanese government accredited cancer specialist hospitals, so called “designated cancer care hospitals (DCCHs)” and introduced “Cancer care coordination instruction fee” which PCPs can receive if they share a cancer critical path (Japanese version of Survivorship Care Plans) of each cancer patient with DCCHs. We sought to assess the current status of coordination of cancer care in Japan and communication between DCCHs and PCPs from PCPs’ point of view. Methods: A cross-sectional mail survey was administered to randomly selected clinic-based PCPs (4,000 clinics) from a nation-wide database of medical institutions authorized by Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare Japan to treat patients with health insurance (87,869 clinics). The survey evaluated how much PCPs provided cancer follow-up care and how well DCCHs coordinated care and communicated with PCPs in cancer survivorship. Results: 1,873 PCPs returned the questionnaire (response rate: 46.8%). 1,223 (65.3%) answered to provide cancer follow-up care in outpatient setting. Most of the PCPs which provided cancer follow-up care evaluated the care coordination and support by DCCHs were satisfactory (946, 77.4%) but the degree of good evaluation varied by region (highest: 91.3%, lowest: 45.8%). In regression analysis, provision of palliative care by PCPs (OR 1.52 95%CI 1.05-2.17) and use of cancer critical path (OR 2.10 95%CI 1.63-2.71) were significantly correlated with better evaluation of communication and care coordination. Conclusions: DCCHs communicated well with PCPs and PCPs were satisfied with the communication and care coordination by DCCHs. Provision of palliative care by PCPs and use of cancer critical path are likely to lead good care coordination in cancer care.

scholarly journals Stakeholders’ views on identifying patients in primary care at risk of dying: a qualitative descriptive study using focus groups and interviews

2018 ◽  
Vol 68 (674) ◽  
pp. e612-e620 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Urquhart ◽  
Jyoti Kotecha ◽  
Cynthia Kendell ◽  
Mary Martin ◽  
Han Han ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Early Identification ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Descriptive Study ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Team Approach ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Qualitative Descriptive

BackgroundStrategies have been developed for use in primary care to identify patients at risk of declining health and dying, yet little is known about the perceptions of doing so or the broader implications and impacts.AimTo explore the acceptability and implications of using a primary care-based electronic medical record algorithm to help providers identify patients in their practice at risk of declining health and dying.Design and settingQualitative descriptive study in Ontario and Nova Scotia, Canada.MethodSix focus groups were conducted, supplemented by one-on-one interviews, with 29 healthcare providers, managers, and policymakers in primary care, palliative care, and geriatric care. Participants were purposively sampled to achieve maximal variation. Data were analysed using a constant comparative approach.ResultsSix themes were prevalent across the dataset: early identification is aligned with the values, aims, and positioning of primary care; providers have concerns about what to do after identification; how we communicate about the end of life requires change; early identification and subsequent conversations require an integrated team approach; for patients, early identification will have implications beyond medical care; and a public health approach is needed to optimise early identification and its impact.ConclusionStakeholders were much more concerned with how primary care providers would navigate the post-identification period than with early identification itself. Implications of early identification include the need for a team-based approach to identification and to engage broader communities to ensure people live and die well post-identification.

Identifying critical data elements for a provincial transition plan from a primary care perspective.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. 54-54
Author(s):  
Stacey Hunter ◽  
Stefanie De Rossi ◽  
Angelika Gollnow ◽  
Grace Kim ◽  
Ed Kucharski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Provincial Government ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Delphi Approach ◽  
Transition Plan ◽  
Data Elements

54 Background: Cancer Care Ontario is the provincial government advisor on the cancer and renal systems, as well as access to care for key health services. Enhancing flow of patient information and care plans are priorities to improve continuity and quality of survivorship care. Cancer Care Ontario’s Primary and Community Care and Survivorship Programs have initiated work to identify required information that primary care providers (PCPs) should receive about a patient’s cancer care at the point of transition back to primary care. Methods: Fifteen focus groups were conducted with PCPs in Ontario using a guide to facilitate group discussions on the utility and content of transition plans. Based on the collective feedback, thematic analysis was conducted on data elements that were expressed as critical with 12 common themes identified. Transition plan materials across Ontario’s Local Health Integration Networks and relevant jurisdictions in Canada and the United States were also reviewed to abstract a list of all documented data elements. A comprehensive matrix of data elements was then created by incorporating the list of all documented data elements with the 12 common themes. Using this matrix, prevalence of data elements amongst reviewed materials was ranked by frequency. A Modified-Delphi approach was used to validate and prioritize data elements with Cancer Care Ontario provincial and regional primary care clinical leadership. Results: In total, 21 documents were reviewed and 30 standard data elements were identified and ranked by frequency. The 10 most frequent data elements were classified as required for a standard transition plan. The remaining data elements were presented to 29 Cancer Care Ontario Cancer Leads to reach consensus on a core set of data elements to be required for inclusion in a transition plan. Conclusions: Essential data elements for inclusion in a transition plan have been identified from the perspective of PCPs. Next steps include engaging patient and family advisors, oncologists, and health system administrators through a phased regional consultation process. The role of synoptic reporting for a future standard survivorship transition plan will also be explored.

scholarly journals Primary care and mental health providers’ perceptions of implementation of pharmacogenetics testing for depression prescribing

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bonnie M. Vest ◽  
Laura O. Wray ◽  
Laura A. Brady ◽  
Michael E. Thase ◽  
Gregory P. Beehler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Implementation Science ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Relative Advantage ◽  
Genetic Profile ◽  
Mental Health Providers ◽  
Health Providers ◽  
Care Providers

Abstract Background Pharmacogenetic testing (PGx) has the potential to improve the quality of psychiatric prescribing by considering patients’ genetic profile. However, there is limited scientific evidence supporting its efficacy or guiding its implementation. The Precision Medicine in Mental Health (PRIME) Care study is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of a specific commercially-available pharmacogenetic (PGx) test to inform antidepressant prescribing at 22 sites across the U.S. Simultaneous implementation science methods using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) are integrated throughout the trial to identify contextual factors likely to be important in future implementation of PGx. The goal of this study was to understand providers’ perceptions of PGx for antidepressant prescribing and implications for future implementation. Methods Qualitative focus groups (n = 10) were conducted at the beginning of the trial with Primary Care and Mental Health providers (n = 31) from six PRIME Care sites. Focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed and data were analyzed using rapid analytic procedures organized by CFIR domains. Results Analysis revealed themes in the CFIR Intervention Characteristics domain constructs of Evidence, Relative Advantage, Adaptability, Trialability, Complexity, and Design that are important for understanding providers’ perceptions of PGx testing. Results indicate: 1) providers had limited experience and knowledge of PGx testing and its evidence base, particularly for psychiatric medications; 2) providers were hopeful that PGx could increase their precision in depression prescribing and improve patient engagement, but were uncertain about how results would influence treatment; 3) providers were concerned about potential misinterpretation of PGx results and how to incorporate testing into their workflow; 4) primary care providers were less familiar and comfortable with application of PGx testing to antidepressant prescribing than psychiatric providers. Conclusions Provider perceptions may serve as facilitators or barriers to implementation of PGx for psychiatric prescribing. Incorporating implementation science into the conduct of the RCT adds value by uncovering factors to be addressed in preparing for future implementation, should the practice prove effective. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03170362; Registered 31 May 2017

scholarly journals Development of the University of Colorado Endocrine ECHO Program

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. A409-A410
Author(s):  
Eleanor Lorton ◽  
Alexandra Coluzzi ◽  
Laura Maurer ◽  
Lauren Pitzer ◽  
David Saxon
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Endocrine Disorders ◽  
Thyroid Disorders ◽  
Initial Experience ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
University Of Colorado ◽  
Bone Calcium ◽  
The University

Abstract Background: The Extension for Community Health Outcomes (ECHO) model aims to improve rural community healthcare by providing specialist-lead telementoring for primary care providers (PCPs) in a didactic and discussion-based format.1 There is a notable shortage of endocrinologists in Colorado, particularly in rural and frontier counties. Best estimate is that 14 of 64 Colorado counties have at least one practicing endocrinologist. Here we describe the development and initial experience with an endocrine-specific ECHO program. Methods: Grant-funding was obtained to develop a longitudinal endocrine ECHO program to support PCPs who care for a large proportion of patients with Medicaid insurance. Program development occurred with input from endocrinologists, primary care physicians, and ECHO Colorado staff. Program participation results in continuous medical education credit. PCP recruitment occurred through listserv emails sent to various Colorado-based medical organizations. Endocrinologists provided weekly hour-long sessions focused on 5 main topic domains: diabetes, obesity/lipids, thyroid disorders, reproductive and adrenal disorders, and bone/calcium disorders. Results: Our endocrine ECHO program started in August 2020 and consisted of 30 weekly sessions (i.e. 9 diabetes, 8 obesity/lipids, 3 thyroid disorders, 5 reproductive and adrenal disorders, 4 bone/calcium disorders, and 1 pseudo-endocrine disorders). A total of 65 clinicians registered for the ECHO series. Sessions were designed by academic endocrinologists and fellows-in-training at the University of Colorado. During block 1 (diabetes block) there were 45 participants of which 12% practice in rural or frontier designated areas, 80% serve patients with Medicaid, and 42% primarily care for an underserved population. Matched pre/post-surveys asking about PCPs’ confidence with each ECHO session were obtained and final results are currently pending completion of the full series in March 2021. Survey data will inform future iterations of this program which is slated to run annually for at least 3 years. Conclusion: Access to endocrinologists is often a scarce resource for rural communities and underserved populations. The ECHO model can serve as a means to provide longitudinal education and support for PCPs across a range of endocrine topics. Here we describe our initial experience with a 30-week endocrine ECHO program in Colorado and highlight future directions of this program.

Breast Cancer Follow-Up: Strategies for Successful Collaboration between Cancer Care Specialists and Primary Care Providers

2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. 452-463
Author(s):  
Mary Ann Zalewski ◽  
Susan Beikman ◽  
Shannon Ferrari ◽  
Kathleen Slavish ◽  
Margaret Rosenzweig
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Successful Collaboration

scholarly journals Inter-clinician eConsults without programmatic incentives or requirements: a qualitative study of primary care provider perspectives

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 525-529 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leah Zallman ◽  
Carolyn F Fisher ◽  
Sofia Ladner ◽  
Kira Mengistu ◽  
Alison B Rapaport ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Provider Perspectives ◽  
Care Systems ◽  
The Usa

Abstract Background Inter-clinician electronic consultation (eConsult) programmes are becoming more widespread in the USA as health care systems seek innovative ways of improving specialty access. Existing studies examine models with programmatic incentives or requirements for primary care providers (PCPs) to participate. Objective We aimed to examine PCP perspectives on eConsults in a system with no programmatic incentive or requirement for PCPs to use eConsults. Methods We conducted seven focus groups with 41 PCPs at a safety-net community teaching health care system in Eastern Massachusetts, USA. Results Focus groups revealed that eConsults improved PCP experience by enabling patient-centred care and enhanced PCP education. However, increased workload and variations in communication patterns added challenges for PCPs. Patients were perceived as receiving timelier and more convenient care. Timelier care combined with direct documentation in the patient record was perceived as improving patient safety. Although cost implications were less clear, PCPs perceived costs as being lowered through fewer unnecessary visits and laboratories. Conclusions Our findings suggest that eConsult systems with no programmatic incentives or requirements for PCPs have the potential to improve care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document