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.

QIM19-140: A New Standard of Care

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (3.5) ◽  
pp. QIM19-140
Author(s):  
Bianshly Rivera Rivero ◽  
Melissa Kapsick ◽  
Smitha R. Pabbathi ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Registry ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Patient Portal ◽  
Survivorship Care Plans ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Specific Patient ◽  
Care Plans

Background: Nationally, many cancer survivors do not receive a survivorship care plan following completion of therapy. The American College of Surgeons’ Commission of Cancer’s Standard 3.3 requirement for accreditation placed this issue front and center for many of the participating cancer programs. The Commission on Cancer (CoC) survey found only one fifth of the cancer programs would be successful by 2015 and thus updated the standard in 2017. We describe a successful process created to deliver on this standard in an NCI designated cancer center to meet the needs of our patients. Methods: In early 2017, a multidisciplinary task force was created to initiate and implement survivorship care plans for newly diagnosed patients. Eligibility for care plans is determined by the CoC and the Moffitt cancer committee. The initiative included a cost-effective solution, “Journey Forward.” Moffitt Cancer Center was able to incorporate additional specific patient education and surveillance recommendations. A dedicated nursing team creating the care plans individually discussed with patients with the oversight of the Cancer Committee. Results: With collaboration from the cancer registry, nursing leadership and survivorship clinic, the diseases targeted initially were breast, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, head and neck, gynecology, non-small cell lung, thyroid, and lymphoma. Within 5 months of inception of the task force, 25% of survivorship care plans (SCP) were completed and by the end of the 2017 calendar year, we delivered 50% of analytic cases treated, amounting to approximately 2,500. The care plans were housed in the electronic medical record and available for patients via the patient portal. Conclusions: This initiative is made up of a multidisciplinary team from senior leadership, cancer committee members, the cancer registry, the survivorship clinic staff, nursing, social work, health information management, case management, and our information technology colleagues. A shared passion and vision lead the task force’s momentum. We all believed this was not just a mandate to comply with but a communication tool that is essential for our patients’ wellness long-term. Although there is minimal evidence to show the benefit of SCP with regard to outcomes, our team felt this document can indeed assist cancer patients’ transition into the next phase of their journey. Our project has improved the patient experience with positive feedback.

Who is receiving survivorship care plans? Findings from the 2012 Livestrong survey.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9608-9608
Author(s):  
Ruth Rechis ◽  
Carla Bann ◽  
Stephanie Nutt ◽  
Linda Squiers ◽  
Naveen Rao
Keyword(s):  
Medical Center ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Survivorship Care Plans ◽  
Institute Of Medicine ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Key Stakeholders

9608 Background: There are more than 14 million cancer survivors in the US – a number that is on the rise. Care coordination resources will be essential to provide support to this growing population. Key stakeholders, including the Commission on Cancer (CoC) and the Institute of Medicine, have proposed survivorship care plans (SCPs) as a way to extend support. However, limited research has been conducted to date on SCPs. Methods: In 2012, the LIVESTRONG Foundation (LIVESTRONG) administered a survey to understand the role of a treatment summary (TS) and SCPs and how they fit into survivors’ care. Logistic regression models were conducted to identify factors associated with receiving SCPs or TS. Results: 5,303 survivors responded to these questions (Table). While 92% of these respondents received information about where to return to for cancer check-ups, only 51% reported receiving a TS and 17% reported receiving a SCP. Survivors who were more likely to receive SCPs if they had a navigator (p<.001) and if they were male, Black, had finished treatment within the past year, or received care at a university-based medical center or community cancer center (p < 0.05). Also, those receiving a SCP were significantly more likely to have had a detailed discussion with a provider regarding long-term side effects, emotional needs, and lifestyle recommendations. Specifically, 60% of those with a SCP discussed long-term effects compared to 39% who did not. Conclusions: Results here indicate that few survivors receive SCPs but survivors reported benefits from receiving them. Currently many workflow barriers impede delivering SCPs, and LIVESTRONG is working with key stakeholders including the CoC to automate the LIVESTRONG Care Plan powered by Penn Medicine’s OncoLink through a registry and EMR system to understand how to address this issue. [Table: see text]

Systematic development of a a breast cancer survivorship program at a small independent oncology practice.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 52-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cynthia Rogers ◽  
Shailesh R. Satpute
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Data Entry ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plans ◽  
Full Time ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Care Plans

52 Background: It is widely accepted that providing survivorship care plans leads to improvements in outcomes for cancer survivors. Treatment summaries are now part of ASCO and NCCN survivorship guidelines. We faced a unique challenge of implementing the survivorship care plan at the Jones Clinic as a small independent practice. The Jones Clinic consists of three full time physicians and two full time nurse practitioners. We see approximately 850 new patients per year. Methods: As a part of ASCO’s quality training program, we focused on the stage I – III (early stage) breast cancer patients who completed their initial therapy. We formed a team, identified the barriers, created a flow diagram of the process, assigned roles for each individual member and finally implemented the process. Results: The major issues identified were lack of provision in the electronic medical record (EMR) system for survivorship and lack of standardized data entry process. We created a system in the EMR for survivorship data entry and extraction of such data in a document. Since July 2015, one hundred percent of breast cancer patients completing adjuvant therapy at the Jones Clinic have received a survivorship treatment summary and a plan of care. The care plan is also shared with their primary care provider. Importantly, creating a survivorship document required less than 10 minutes of the provider’s time. Conclusions: We are now able to provide our patients with a survivorship care plan and address survivorship issues within thirty days of completion of therapy. Creating the care plan requires minimal time from the providers. Our new process meets ASCO guidelines for survivorship care plans and no additional staffing was needed. We now plan to provide a survivorship care plan to all oncology patients treated with curative intent.

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]

scholarly journals Use of Survivorship Care Plans and Analysis of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Multinational Patients With Lung Cancer

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. e527-e535 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abigail T. Berman ◽  
Cristina M. DeCesaris ◽  
Charles B. Simone ◽  
Carolyn Vachani ◽  
Gloria DiLullo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Primary Lung Cancer ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Survivorship Care Plans ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Cognitive Changes ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Patient Reported

Purpose: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death and is a significant source of morbidity. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have been shown to be prognostic for survival. We have analyzed emerging patterns of longitudinal PROs collected in the development of survivorship care plans (SCPs). Methods: OncoLife and the LIVESTRONG Care Plans are Internet-based programs designed to generate unique SCPs. We selected SCPs from patients identifying as survivors of primary lung cancer. Patient-reported demographics and treatment and toxicity data were examined. Effects were categorized by the physiologic system that they affected. Results: Six hundred eighty-nine plans were created for users self-identifying as survivors of primary lung cancer. Average time from diagnosis to reporting was 1.68 years (range, 0 to 24 years). Most were white (85.9%), well educated (61.1% “some college” or higher), and lived in the United States (90.7%). Patients underwent chemotherapy (75.8%), radiotherapy (54.7%), and surgery (54.4%). Neurocognitive symptoms (eg, fatigue, cognitive changes) were the most common (48.8%), especially among those receiving chemotherapy, followed by musculoskeletal/dermatologic symptoms (14.1%) and thoracic symptoms (13.5%). Only 11.2% were initially offered an SCP. Of those offered SCPs, 54.5% were offered by their health care provider, and most often were at a non–university-based cancer center (66.2%). Conclusion: For patients with lung cancer worldwide, it is feasible to obtain PROs and to create SCPs through an Internet-based program. As patients with lung cancer achieve improved survival, further attention should be paid to PROs. Surprisingly, neurocognitive symptoms seem to be the most common issues and therefore the most important to address. Increased effort should be made to provide SCPs, particularly in urban and university cancer center settings.

Updated patient reported outcomes and survivorship care plan use by survivors of colorectal cancer (CRC).

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 527-527
Author(s):  
James M. Metz ◽  
Margaret K. Hampshire ◽  
Carolyn Vachani ◽  
Gloria A. Di Lullo ◽  
Christine Hill-Kayser
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Sexual Function ◽  
Late Effects ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plans ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Gi Toxicity

527 Background: Colorectal cancer patients may be at risk for late effects after treatment, the impact of which may difficult to evaluate using conventional methods. Here, we described patient reported outcomes after CRC, as well as use of survivorship care plans. Methods: Patient-reported data were gathered via a convenience sample frame from CRC survivors voluntarily utilizing a publically available, free, Internet-based tool for creation of survivorship care plans. Available at www.livestrongcareplan.com and through the OncoLinkwebsite, the tool allows survivors to enter data regarding diagnosis, demographics, and treatments, and provides customized guidelines for future care. During use of the tool, CRC survivors are queried regarding late effects associated with specific treatments, and asked to answer “yes,” “no,” or “I don’t know.” They are also asked to score GI toxicity using WHO criteria. All data have been maintained with IRB approval. Results: 657 CRC survivors utilized the care plan and answered queries regarding late effects; 64% were female and 82% Caucasian. Median diagnosis age was 50 (24 – 76) and median current age 54 (24 – 77). Many reported having had multimodality therapy - 97% surgery, 89% chemotherapy, and 37% radiation. Overall, 63% reported chronic changes in bowel patterns, 38% chronic diarrhea, 9% bowel obstruction, 18% hernia development, 8% radiation colitis, and 2% fistula formation. Of 249 survivors who graded GI toxicity, 23% reported 4-6 stools per day, and 18% > 6 stools per day or incontinence. When queried regarding sexual function, 35% of men reported worse erectile function than pre-treatment, and 42% of women reported sexual changes such as vaginal dryness. A follow-up survey was completed by 31 (5%) of users, who reported that care plans improved knowledge about late effects (90%) and potential related treatments and tests (83%). Conclusions: Survivors using this tool report significant toxicity after cancer treatment, mainly related to GI and sexual function. Survivors appear to gain knowledge from survivorship care plans. The data reported here may be of significant impact in future study of quality of life, as well as patient counseling and survivor care.

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.

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.

A health system wide approach to the delivery of survivorship care plans.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 42-42
Author(s):  
Jennifer R. Klemp ◽  
Heather Vanbebber ◽  
Tanya Folker ◽  
Lisa Serig ◽  
Tim Metcalf ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health System ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Survivorship Care Plans ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Clinical Patient ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Accreditation Standards ◽  
Patient Reported

42 Background: Survivorship care plans (SCPs) are recognized by organizations including the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer, as a best practice for improving survivor care. Little evidence supports this and hospitals and cancer centers are scrambling to meet deadlines for SCP development and delivery. The University of Kansas Cancer Center (KUCC) addressed this utilizing electronic health record (EHR) integration, developing a health system wide approach to education and delivery, and building referral workflows to primary care and specialists. We report on this approach to developing and growing a survivorship care program. Methods: KUCC is a NCI designated cancer center within an academic medical center and health system, with 11 outpatient locations across the Kansas City. Under the guidance of a multidisciplinary team: providers, health care informatics, administrators, nursing, tumor registry, quality improvement, and researchers, KUCC developed a step-wise process to deliver comprehensive survivorship care across the health system. This multi-year initiative aligned with institutional accreditation standards and an ongoing focus on expanding evidence based, comprehensive cancer and supportive care. Results: In 2014 a formal survivorship program plan was put into action: Support from leadership, providers, research priority; Staff and patient survivorship education & training; Integrated delivery of survivorship care at all locations with direct interaction and feedback from cancer care teams; Short & long-term programmatic goals; Management and referral of late effects of cancer; EPIC integrated SCP template: auto-populated, customized, personalized; treatment summary uses tools that pull in data stored discreetly in the patient "file"; SCP delivery targeting COC phase-in timeline: 2015: n= 539 (10% projection n= 434); 2016: n= 1,355 (25% projection n=1,253). Conclusions: This step-wise, integrated approach to survivorship care has resulted in a health system wide delivery of SCPs and meeting national accreditation standards. Next steps include the evaluation of cost and clinical/patient reported outcomes.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document