scholarly journals Caring for Alaska Native prostate cancer survivors in primary care: a survey of Alaska Tribal Health System providers

2014 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 23637 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon C. Tilburt ◽  
Stacy Kelley ◽  
Christine A. DeCourtney ◽  
Katherine M. Humeniuk ◽  
Jerilyn Latini ◽  
...  
2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 906-914 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shawna V. Hudson ◽  
Pamela A Ohman-Strickland ◽  
Alicja Bator ◽  
Denalee O’Malley ◽  
Daniel Gundersen ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6126-6126
Author(s):  
Jon C. Tilburt ◽  
Simon P. Kim ◽  
Stacey Kelley ◽  
Katherine James ◽  
Christine DeCourtney ◽  
...  

6126 Background: Little is known about the actual constraints of doing so in the distinctive geographic context of Alaska. We performed a survey of primary care providers (PCPs) within the Alaska Tribal Health System (ATHS) to learn more about their attitudes and practices surrounding prostate cancer (PC) survivorship care. Methods: We surveyed primary care physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants practicing in the ATHS. We administered surveys to assess attitudes about PSA monitoring, responsibility for long-term surveillance, supporting emotional health and medical needs, their degree of confidence in managing patients on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), as well as their comfort level in managing common side effects of treatment. Results: Of the 221 providers surveyed, 114 responded (52%). Most PCPs indicated a preference for annual PSA monitoring (69%), but several (27%) indicated monitoring every 6 months, and a few (4%) indicated monitoring every 24 months. Most (60%) thought PCPs should manage cancer surveillance, but many (40%) thought a specialist (urologist or medical oncologist) should perform that function. When asked about supporting patients’ emotional needs, PCPs indicated that support groups (63%) followed by survivorship clinics (16%) or on-site specialist visits (14%) were the most appropriate venues to address these concerns. Most respondents thought that medical needs of PC survivors could be addressed locally with appropriate specialty input (71%) or potentially through dedicated survivorship clinics (14%). Only 46% indicated being "moderately" or "very" confident managing ADT. Most PCPs indicated being moderately or very comfortable monitoring for recurrence (59%), managing erectile dysfunction (66%), addressing urinary incontinence (63%), and addressing emotional needs (61%). Conclusions: PCPs practicing in the ATHS express comfort with monitoring for PC recurrence, but express some concerns about the full range of issues in PC survivorship. Constructing cancer survivor care models in geographically dispersed and resource-limited contexts for Alaska Natives is an ongoing clinical and policy challenge.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miho Kimachi ◽  
Kenji Omae ◽  
Tsukasa Kamitani ◽  
Shingo Fukuma

Abstract PurposeGiven the growing diversity among cancer survivors and the fact that oncologists typically do not perform long-term care, the expected role of primary care physicians (PCPs) in cancer survivor care is expanding. However, communication and collaboration between oncologists and PCPs is lacking. Therefore, we assessed the perception of cancer survivor care among PCPs.MethodsWe surveyed 767 Japanese Board-certified PCPs, regardless of facility type (clinics and hospitals), inquiring about PCPs’ perceptions of their role in survivor care. Additionally, we included vignette-based scenarios focused on colorectal and prostate cancer survivors to explore factors associated with their clinical decisions. Results We obtained 91 replies (response rate: 11.9%). A total of 75% of PCPs had encountered at least 1 cancer patient in actual practice. Even for patients actively receiving cancer treatment, >70% of PCPs reported that they were willing to engage in all aspects of survivor care, except for the administration of anticancer drugs. Further, 49% of PCPs considered that both PCPs and oncologists were suited to performing regular screening for cancer recurrence in high-risk patients. Multivariable logistic regression analyses revealed that clinic PCPs were less inclined to conduct screening for recurrence than hospital PCPs in both colorectal (odds ratio, 3.85 [95% confidence interval 1.40-10.6]) and prostate cancer (4.36 [95% confidence interval 1.51-12.6]) scenarios.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that Japanese PCPs are willing to engage in survivor care and encourage closer collaboration between oncologists and PCPs. However, oncologists might need to request cooperation, considering the facility type with which PCPs are affiliated.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document