Breast cancer survivorship care plan: Patient satisfaction with a web-based application.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 50-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Moore ◽  
Anna Carlson ◽  
Naomi Kornhauser ◽  
Sarah E. Schneider ◽  
Eleni Andreopoulou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Patient Data ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Survey Results

50 Background: The American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer Standard 3.3 mandates that by 2018, oncologists provide Survivorship Care Plans (SCPs) to more than 75% of Stage 1-3 breast cancer survivors. Preparation and delivery of SCPs is time-consuming and requires dedicated staff commitment. Working with PatientsWithPower(PWP), a digital health company supporting patient decision-making for breast cancer, we developed a web-based SCP and surveyed patients regarding their satisfaction with the SCP. The objective of this study was to assess patient satisfaction with the PWP SCP. Methods: SCP’s were prepared using data extracted from the electronic medical record (EMR) and PWP software. A one-page SCP was presented to each patient by the Nurse Practitioner (NP) during a routine visit after patients completed active treatment. Results were reviewed after all surveys were completed. Fifty women with Stage 0-3 breast cancer participated in the IRB approved study and reported their satisfaction with the PWP SCP via online survey. Results: Using patient data in the EMR, the PWP plan took about 45 minutes to prepare. Once completed, NPs spent 10-15 minutes with each patient reviewing the SCP. Patient surveys indicated that 98% of patients felt it was important to receive a SCP, 84% planned to use it to plan follow up management, and 75% intended to share the SCP with their primary care physician. According to patients, the most valuable parts of the SCP were diagnosis and treatment history, and the follow up schedule. More than 70% of women requested additional information about future screening for recurrence, nutrition, and long-term side effect management. 92% of women appreciated the electronic “living document” that can be easily updated at subsequent visits. Conclusions: Presenting SCPs to patients is an essential component of high-quality cancer care. PWP’s online platform facilitates the development and delivery of SCPs by organizing and storing on-going patient data to make future SCP updates easy and efficient. Our patient satisfaction survey results underscore the value of SCPs, particularly for follow-up management and communications with primary care doctors.

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.

scholarly journals Views of family physicians about survivorship care plans to provide breast cancer follow-up care: exploration of results from a randomized controlled trial

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 252 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.A. O'Brien ◽  
E. Grunfeld ◽  
J. Sussman ◽  
G. Porter ◽  
M. Hammond Mobilio
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Family Physicians ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plans ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Background The U.S. Institute of Medicine recommends that cancer patients receive survivorship care plans, but evaluations to date have found little evidence of the effectiveness of such plans. We conducted a qualitative follow-on study to a randomized controlled trial (rct) to understand the experiences of family physicians using survivorship care plans to support the follow-up of breast cancer patients.MethodsA subset of family physicians whose patients were enrolled in the parent rct in Ontario and Nova Scotia were eligible for this study. In interviews, the physicians discussed survivorship care plans (intervention) or usual discharge letters (control), and their confidence in providing follow-up cancer care.Results Of 123 eligible family physicians, 18 (10 intervention, 8 control) were interviewed. In general, physicians receiving a survivorship care plan found only the 1-page care record to be useful. Physicians who received only a discharge letter had variable views about the letter’s usefulness; several indicated that it lacked information about potential cancer- or treatment-related problems. Most physicians were comfortable providing care 3–5 years after diagnosis, but desired timely and informative communication with oncologists. Conclusions Although family physicians did not find extensive survivorship care plans useful, discharge letters might not be sufficiently comprehensive for follow-up breast cancer care. Effective strategies for two-way communication between family physicians and oncologists are still lacking.

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.

Transition of breast cancer (BC) survivors to primary care: Results of a Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) pilot project.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (30_suppl) ◽  
pp. 58-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Sussman ◽  
Maria Grant
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Care Process ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Transition Clinic ◽  
Prospective Longitudinal

58 Background: Emerging evidence indicates that the transition of well breast cancer survivors to primary care is safe and effective. Methods: Prospective longitudinal cohort study across 14 health regions in Ontario, Canada. Each region received $100 000 (CAN) to develop and implement a sustainable new model of survivorship care for BC survivors that involved transition from medical oncology-led practice. Each region had a designated lead, and support from primary care. Funding could be used to develop any aspect of the model including personnel support, development of communication materials and outcome measurement. A minimal dataset reporting requirement included a description of the program, documentation of transitioned BC survivors as well as standardized patient and provider experience feedback once transition completed. Results: All 14 health regions in Ontario participated and all developed a survivorship care plan and patient educational materials. The models developed included direct transition to primary care in 6 regions, a nurse-led transition clinic in 4 and a GP-led transition clinic in 4. To date, 3,418 BC survivors have transitioned. Of 676 BC respondents to date, 83% felt there was a clear plan for follow up and 87% felt adequately prepared for transition. Feedback from primary care providers demonstrated that many feel informed about intent of transition and understand their role in on-going follow-up care. Process outcomes such as re-referral back to cancer center and adherence to follow-up guidelines are currently underway. Conclusions: The wide scale transition of appropriate BC survivors to a primary setting appears feasible with high acceptability by patients and providers.

scholarly journals The Potential of Survivorship Care Plans in Primary Care Follow-up of Minority Breast Cancer Patients

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (S2) ◽  
pp. 467-471 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Ann Burg ◽  
Ellen D. S. Lopez ◽  
Amy Dailey ◽  
Mary Elspeth Keller ◽  
Brendan Prendergast
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Survivorship Care Plans ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Care Plans

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.

A model for delivering survivorship care: Integrating the oncology and the primary care setting: Follow-up of the first cohort of patients.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. 40-40
Author(s):  
Elena Lorenzi ◽  
Lucia Morello ◽  
Rita Mazza ◽  
Isabella Maria Giovanna Garassino ◽  
Raffaele Cavina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Cumulative Risk ◽  
Latency Period ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Median Latency ◽  
Early Stage Disease

40 Background: In our Institution, we started a survivorship care program that integrates survivors’ health care provided by the oncologist and the primary care physician (PCP).We present the follow-up analysis of the first cohort of patients (pts) enrolled from April to July 2015. Methods: We included adult pts affected by hematologic or solid tumors without evidence of disease from at least 5 years (yrs). They are referred to the PCP with a survivorship care plan. An online platform for cancer survivors (CS) and their PCPs will be available. Progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and treatment related clinical events were calculated after 17 months from the start of the project. Results: We analyzed data from 269 CS. The median age was 67 yrs, they were mainly females (77%). The most frequent histological types were breast (157), colorectal (37), and hematologic (30) tumors. 189 pts had an early stage disease. 161 pts received chemotherapy with 95 pts receiving anthracycline-based-chemotherapy (ABC), 86% at a cumulative dose > 240 mg/mq. 154 pts underwent radiation therapy (RT), 94% at a dose > 30 Gy. 58 pts received both ABC and RT. The 10-yr cumulative risk of secondary cancer (SC) was 4% with a median latency period from the first cancer diagnosis of 11.3 yrs. 15-yr OS was 98% (one patient died of myocardial infarction), and 15-yr PFS was 96%. The 10-yr cumulative risk of late cardiologic toxicity (LCT) was 11% and 37 pts developed cardiologic complications with a median latency period from treatment of 10.5 yrs. The adhesion to the survivorship care plan was 84%. 13% of pts returned to our Center. The main non-clinical reason for returning was the lack of confidence in PCP. No association was observed between ABC and/or RT exposure and LCT or SC development. Conclusions: In this cohort of patients a high risk of LCT was observed. The risk and latency of SC was similar to the ones reported in literature. The number of cardiac events and SC is too low to give solid conclusions about the association with therapeutic exposure. So far, the compliance of patients and PCPs with the program was high. More data and longer follow-up period are necessary to confirm the accuracy of this model of care.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document