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]

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]

Patient-reported survivorship care practices and late effects after treatment of Hodgkin (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 119-119
Author(s):  
Melissa Frick ◽  
Carolyn Vachani ◽  
Margaret K. Hampshire ◽  
Christina Bach ◽  
Karen Arnold-Korzeniowski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Disease ◽  
Cognitive Change ◽  
Transitions Of Care ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Care Practices

119 Background: Multimodal treatment of HL and NHL yields excellent outcomes, however, survivors are at risk for developing myriad late- and long-term effects (LLTEs). We describe survivorship care practices and LLTEs reported by HL/ NHL survivors. Methods: From a convenience sample of 964 HL (37%) and NHL (63%) cancer survivors using a publicly available Internet-based survivorship care plan (SCP) tool between 2011-2016, we examined cancer care and toxicity profile data. Results: Of all survivors, 67% were female and 84% were Caucasian; median age of diagnosis was 28y for HL and 49y for NHL survivors with median fu of 5y and 2y, respectively. 88% were free of cancer, 9% with recurrent or secondary malignancy, and 3% with metastatic disease. Chemotherapy was delivered to 89% of HL and 94% of NHL survivors, and radiation (RT) to 64% and 28%, respectively. Of those receiving RT, 96% (n = 217) HL and 61% (n = 106) NHL survivors received chest/mantle RT. Few reported receipt of previous SCP (13%) or treatment summary (4%). Most reported continued care from an oncologist (49%) or in combination with a PCP (19%). A shift to PCP management alone was observed, increasing from 2% of survivors if < 2y fu to 30% once ≥2y fu. Survivors who received chest RT reported: hyper- or hypothyroidism (35%), thyroid nodules (8%), speaking/swallowing changes (20%), heart disease (14%), pulmonary fibrosis/pneumonitis (12%), and skin cancers within the RT field (9%). 6 of 321 (2%) who received chest RT reported secondary breast cancers, compared to zero in the group not receiving chest RT with median time to breast cancer 20.5y (R 6-32 years). Receipt of chemotherapy was associated with: chronic fatigue (56%), cognitive change (56%), peripheral neuropathy (35%), sexual changes (15% of males, 35% of females), and heart disease (10%). Conclusions: While this population achieves excellent disease outcomes, survivors report a substantial burden of LLTEs, suboptimal delivery of survivorship information, and transitions of care in follow-up. Multiple opportunities thus exist through which SCPs may be used to improve awareness regarding survivorship/ LLTEs and communicate follow-up care plans between survivors and treatment teams.

Survivor feedback on a late effects-oriented survivorship care plan for head and neck cancer.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e21596-e21596
Author(s):  
Talya Salz ◽  
Mary S. McCabe ◽  
Kevin C. Oeffinger ◽  
Rebecca B Schnall ◽  
Stacie Corcoran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Head And Neck Cancer ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Neck Cancer ◽  
Late Effects ◽  
Clinic Visit ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Patient Reported

e21596 Background: Survivorship care plans (SCPs) typically include generic advice for the management of late effects (LEs) that can occur, rather than addressing LEs that the survivor actually has. We developed a platform called HN-STAR that uses electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) and evidence-based LE management to generate a personalized SCP for survivors of head and neck cancer (HNC), a population vulnerable to various LEs. We assessed HNC survivors’ experiences with HN-STAR to ensure its acceptability and usefulness. Methods: Disease-free HNC survivors at two cancer hospitals used HN-STAR in conjunction with a routine survivorship visit. Prior to the visit, survivors used a validated ePRO measure (PRO-CTCAE) to report up to 22 physical LEs. Based on clinic visit discussions, HN-STAR generated an SCP that included a treatment summary and LE management plans. Survivors indicated their level of agreement to statements regarding the ease of use of the ePROs, content of the SCP, and intentions to adhere to LE management recommendations. Results: 47 survivors completed surveys (mean 5.4 years from treatment completion). Most were white (89%), male (85%), had an oropharynx tumor (58%), and received multimodality therapy (81%). More than half (51%) experienced at least 9 of the 22 LEs in the last 30 days (mean 8.2 per person). Most survivors reported that completing ePROs improved the discussions with their provider (98%), the quality of their care (96%), and their communication with their provider (98%). 91% agreed the SCP was the right length, and 98% agreed it was easy to follow. 98% intended to follow at least some of the recommendations for LEs management, and 98% reported feeling confident that they could follow the recommendations. The majority agreed that the SCP accurately summarized the clinic visit (98%), they would refer back to the SCP (98%), they trust the SCP (100%), and they plan to share the SCP with a primary care provider (87%). Conclusions: Among HNC survivors, an automatically generated SCP that was tailored to their LEs was acceptable, was trusted, and provided recommendations they intended to follow. Patient-centered SCPs that focus on existing LEs hold promise as a means to help survivors manage LEs.

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

Innovation, education, and research: A multidisciplinary survivorship care model.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10519-10519
Author(s):  
Hira Latif ◽  
Patrick Martone ◽  
James Edward Shaw ◽  
Eric Wisotzky ◽  
Asma Ali Dilawari
Keyword(s):  
Physical Function ◽  
Cardiovascular Health ◽  
The United States ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Institute Of Medicine ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Patient Reported

10519 Background: Advances in early detection, therapeutics, and an aging population are expected to lead to an increase in the number of cancer survivors in the United States to 20 million by year 2026. The Institute of Medicine and Commission on Cancer recommends delivery of survivorship care plans on completion of curative treatment. While models exist for high-quality survivorship care, institutions encounter barriers such as lack of resources and limited training in survivorship. Our institution piloted a unique model combining fellows’ education with guideline-driven recommendations from a multidisciplinary team to provide consolidated survivorship care. Methods: A survey for self-reported competence and experience was conducted amongst the hematology and oncology fellows at the MedStar Washington Hospital Center. A bimonthly clinic staffed by a medical oncologist, oncology fellow and a cancer rehabilitation fellow was initiated in September 2018. Didactic lectures, curriculum syllabus and recommended assessments were established. Screening tools for distress, patients’ confidence in knowledge about survivorship and physical function via PROMIS 20a were administered; clinical assessments including the “6-minute walk test” were used to assess cardiovascular health. Results: Most fellows had not encountered a survivor of lung (16%), GU (0%) and head and neck cancer (33%). Majority of the fellows had never delivered a survivorship care plan. Scores were low in competence and experience in survivorship. By December 2018, 15 patients with 17 diagnoses of cancer were referred to the clinic. 10 were survivors of hematologic malignancies while 7 were of solid tumors. The no-show rate was 40%. Fellows conducted the assessments and were supervised by an oncology attending. Of the 9 patients seen, 4 were referred for physical therapy; additional referrals for psychology and cardiology were frequent. Conclusions: A comprehensive multidisciplinary survivorship clinic focusing on fellows’ education is a feasible model for delivery of survivorship care and aims to bridge the gap in experience and competence of fellows. Future goals include re-assessment of patient-reported outcomes, physical function, and competence of fellows.

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.

Evaluating Survivorship Care Plans: Results of a Randomized, Clinical Trial of Patients With Breast Cancer

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (36) ◽  
pp. 4755-4762 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva Grunfeld ◽  
Jim A. Julian ◽  
Gregory Pond ◽  
Elizabeth Maunsell ◽  
Douglas Coyle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Event Scale ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
The Impact

Purpose An Institute of Medicine report recommends that patients with cancer receive a survivorship care plan (SCP). The trial objective was to determine if an SCP for breast cancer survivors improves patient-reported outcomes. Patients and Methods Women with early-stage breast cancer who completed primary treatment at least 3 months previously were eligible. Consenting patients were allocated within two strata: less than 24 months and ≥ 24 months since diagnosis. All patients were transferred to their own primary care physician (PCP) for follow-up. In addition to a discharge visit, the intervention group received an SCP, which was reviewed during a 30-minute educational session with a nurse, and their PCP received the SCP and guideline on follow-up. The primary outcome was cancer-related distress at 12 months, assessed by the Impact of Event Scale (IES). Secondary outcomes included quality of life, patient satisfaction, continuity/coordination of care, and health service measures. Results Overall, 408 survivors were enrolled through nine tertiary cancer centers. There were no differences between groups on cancer-related distress or on any of the patient-reported secondary outcomes, and there were no differences when the two strata were analyzed separately. More patients in the intervention than control group correctly identify their PCP as primarily responsible for follow-up (98.7% v 89.1%; difference, 9.6%; 95% CI, 3.9 to 15.9; P = .005). Conclusion The results do not support the hypothesis that SCPs are beneficial for improving patient-reported outcomes. Transferring follow-up to PCPs is considered an important strategy to meet the demand for scarce oncology resources. SCPs were no better than a standard discharge visit with the oncologist to facilitate transfer.

Challenges in the implementation of survivorship care plans in an NCI-designated cancer center.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 68-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Mendelsohn ◽  
Joanne E. Mortimer ◽  
Leslie Popplewell ◽  
Lily L. Lai ◽  
Ellie Maghami ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Registry ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Survivorship Care Plans ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Coordinator ◽  
Nurse Care ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Patient Reported

68 Background: The development and initiation of Survivorship Care Plans (SCPs) across all disease sites was identified as a Strategic Initiative Goals for 2015 by the Clinical Cancer Committee. The 2012 Commission on Cancer requirements for certification provided an additional incentive to meet this goal. Establishing a process that includes the development and distribution of a SCP’s within the electronic medical record (EMR) is necessary to improve on the completion of SCP’s and to improve the utilization of surveillance tests in cancer survivors. We describe the process developed at a free-standing NCI cancer center to meet the standard of SCP provision to all cancer patients. Methods: A multi-disciplinary subcommittee of the Cancer Committee was designated to develop the overall strategic plan for the implementation of this standard. It met with disease teams to facilitate a treatment summary from Cancer Registry data, identify patient reported symptoms using a self report tablet (SupportScreen). Electronic care plans were created using survivorship research program templates and ASCO framework for each disease site team. The disease team Nurse Care Coordinator inputs information into the eSCP. Results: Templates have been established within the EMR in the documents section under survivorship care plan title. These can be initiated and modified when the Nurse Care Coordinator chooses to start them. The disease teams have established their time points for SCP presentation to their patients. Using the cancer registry to provide data related to staging, treatments and genetic testing has helped minimize development time. Individual survivor’s concerns will be reflected in patient reports and physician symptom documentation. This eSCP completion process is a pilot program within the breast cancer disease team and will be expanded to include patients with head & neck and hematologic malignancies with a goal of including all patients by mid 2016. Conclusions: The goal of improving survivorship care coordination and compliance with surveillance guidelines is challenging. Maximizing available interdisciplinary resources has helped to create a viable Survivorship Care plan at our institution.

Integrating the primary care physician into cancer follow-up.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 102-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew L. Salner ◽  
Deborah Walker ◽  
Amanda Seltzer ◽  
SarahLena Panzer ◽  
Carrie Stricker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Primary Care Physician ◽  
Care Physician ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Follow Up Care

102 Background: After a diagnosis of breast cancer, it can be difficult for patients to understand the role their primary care physician (PCP) should play in their follow up care. Methods: 65 women (mean age 60 years, SD = 10) with breast cancer (stage 0-III) were seen by a nurse practitioner for a 60-90 minute consultative survivorship visit and received a treatment summary and personalized survivorship care plan (SCP) utilizing Carevive Care Planning Systems software. The Carevive system incorporates patient-reported and clinical data to create tailored care plans with personalized recommendations for follow up care and supportive referrals, including direction to follow up with primary care for specific care and health maintenance activities. Approximately 6 weeks following their survivorship care visit, patients completed a survey assessing their use of and satisfaction with the SCP. Patients were advised that the SCP would be mailed to their referring oncologist and primary care physician. Results: Out of 65 sent, 35 surveys have been completed to date. Survivors were diagnosed approximately 10 months prior, and all were within 6 months following completion of treatment. All patients (100%) reported that they read, or planned to read, their survivorship care plan packet carefully. While all care plans included a recommendation to follow up with their PCP, only (71%) of survivors remembered receiving this recommendation. Of those who did, most (74%) had either seen or scheduled an appointment with their PCP. Patients who reported higher anxiety at the time of the survivorship visit were more likely to report that the follow up care plan helped them take action about seeing their PCP (p = .03). Conclusions: Coordination between primary and oncology care providers has previously been shown to improve the quality of care for cancer survivors. SCPs that emphasize the importance of and activities to be undertaken in primary care may help to improve this coordination. Continuation of this research will help to better understand how to integrate the primary care physician into cancer follow up care. Updated data will be shared at time of presentation.

Evaluation of electronic care plan usage and usefulness among breast cancer survivors.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 83-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Sesto ◽  
William Gray Hocking ◽  
Douglas Wiegmann ◽  
Thomas Y Yen ◽  
Mindy Gribble ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Breast Cancer Survivors ◽  
Objective Evaluation ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Patient Portal ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Treatment Summary

83 Background: Survivorship care plans (SCP) are recommended to improve communication between breast cancer survivors (BCS), primary care, and oncology. Objective evaluation of survivor access of specific care plan content is challenging as commonly-used formats (e.g., paper or electronic file) prevent tracking of usage. This project aimed to evaluate the usage and usefulness of an electronic survivorship care plan (eSCP) that could track access and pages visited. Methods: We recruited 128 BCS from outpatient oncology clinics. 121 BCS received eSCP access via an online secure patient portal; seven received paper copies and are not included in this analysis. The research team customized the portal to track eSCP usage and page visits during the study period (at least 12 weeks of eSCP access). The eSCP consisted of four internal pages (Guide, Treatment Summary, Followup Plan, and Glossary) plus 21 external hyperlinks to survivorship resources. eSCP usefulness and understandability were evaluated using 10-item Likert scales: 1 (not at all useful/very hard to understand to 10 very useful/very easy to understand). Results: 90 out of 121 (74.38%) participants accessed the eSCP. The majority accessed the eSCP within two days of receiving access (N = 70/90, 77.8%) and visited 1 to 3 times (N = 81/90, 90%). Treatment Summary was the most frequently visited internal page (158 visits by 69 participants). Other page usage: Followup Plan (124 visits by 65 participants), Guide (113 visits by 62 participants), and Glossary (46 visits by 31 participants). 34 participants (37.78%) accessed external pages from the eSCP. Participants perceived the overall care plan as useful (8.78, 95% CI [8.38, 9.19]) and easy to understand (8.81, 95% CI [8.47, 9.16]). Conclusions: We found high usage rates among BCS provided an eSCP and the majority perceived the eSCP as useful and easy to understand. Based on favorable assessment and use, it is reasonable for eSCPs to serve as a tool to facilitate communication and care coordination for survivors, especially as access to and use of mobile device technology and electronic patient health portals increase. Minority and rural survivors access and use of such features may require further research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document