Developing a strategy for delivering educational information to patients with cancer.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (27_suppl) ◽  
pp. 190-190
Author(s):  
Emily Elizabeth Monteleone ◽  
Meredith Rachek ◽  
Alison Ibsen ◽  
Cheryl M. Carrino ◽  
Edwin Wortham ◽  
...  

190 Background: Patients’ preferences and ability to receive information regarding their cancer diagnosis and treatment vary greatly. Large academic medical centers are skilled at diagnosing and treating cancer. The perceived patient experience can be influenced by the delivery of information provided to them by clinical teams, support staff, and online resources. This project identified nuances in how cancer patients absorb and reference information regarding their diagnosis and treatment; specifically, treatment modalities, side effects, and resources available. The objective was to develop a strategy to improve and standardize the delivery and availability of educational information in our large academic medical center. Methods: Development of a team that has influence and understanding in various communication functions throughout the enterprise. Primary focus was on cancer patients. Research was conducted in three phases. Phase one was a patient panel survey electronically administered. Phase two involved observations and interviews of current breast cancer patients. Phase three incorporated the feedback received and design concepts generated from research during phases one and two, and involved six cancer patient focus groups. Results: Panel survey results contained feedback from 777 participants previously diagnosed with or caring for someone with cancer. Observations and interviews encompassed over 40 hours of information gathering from all stages of the breast cancer treatment process, including survivorship. Focus groups involved 7-9 patients (50 total) each of varying ages and diagnoses, with 4 of the 6 groups treated at our cancer center. Conclusions: In getting to know patients, large academic medical centers can tailor their educational information to ensure everyone receives what is needed and wanted in the time and manner best suited for them. Core components of the strategy being developed are 1) formulating ways to personalize the delivery of information, 2) methods to allow patients’ caregivers to participate in educational discussions remotely, 3) enabling on demand access to content previously discussed in person, 4) setting expectations for the intent of appointments ahead of time.

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teddy D. Warner ◽  
Carol J. Weil ◽  
Christopher Andry ◽  
Howard B. Degenholtz ◽  
Lisa Parker ◽  
...  

Commentators are concerned that broad consent may not provide biospecimen donors with sufficient information regarding possible future research uses of their tissue. We surveyed with interviews 302 cancer patients who had recently provided broad consent at four diverse academic medical centers. The majority of donors believed that the consent form provided them with sufficient information regarding future possible uses of their biospecimens. Donors expressed very positive views regarding tissue donation in general and endorsed the use of their biospecimens in future research across a wide range of contexts. Concerns regarding future uses were limited to for-profit research and research by investigators in other countries. These results support the use of broad consent to store and use biological samples in future research.


Hand ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 155894471989881 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taylor M. Pong ◽  
Wouter F. van Leeuwen ◽  
Kamil Oflazoglu ◽  
Philip E. Blazar ◽  
Neal Chen

Background: Total wrist arthroplasty (TWA) is a treatment option for many debilitating wrist conditions. With recent improvements in implant design, indications for TWA have broadened. However, despite these improvements, there are still complications associated with TWA, such as unplanned reoperation and eventual implant removal. The goal of this study was to identify risk factors for an unplanned reoperation or implant revision after a TWA at 2 academic medical centers between 2002 and 2015. Methods: In this retrospective study, 24 consecutive TWAs were identified using CPT codes. Medical records were manually reviewed to identify demographic, patient- or disease-related, and surgery-related risk factors for reoperation and implant removal after a primary TWA. Results: Forty-six percent of wrists (11 of 24 TWAs performed) had a reoperation after a median of 3.4 years, while 29% (7 of 24) underwent implant revision after a median of 5 years. Two patients had wrist surgery prior to their TWA, both eventually had their implant removed ( P = .08). There were no risk factors associated with reoperation or implant removal. Conclusion: Unplanned reoperation and implant removal after a primary TWA are common. Approximately 1 in 3 wrists are likely to undergo revision surgery. We found no factors associated with reoperation or implant removal; however, prior wrist surgery showed a trend toward risk of implant removal after TWA.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document