scholarly journals On Becoming an Ally

Author(s):  
Josh Epworth, ARNP

Earlier this year, I was asked to participate in a meeting titled “Virtual Summit to Define the Role of Oncology Advanced Practitioners in Equitable Cancer Care Delivery: A Closer Look at Care Coordination, Clinical Trials, and Implicit Bias” held by the Association of Community Cancer Centers (ACCC) and Harborside. This conversation brought together a diverse group of participants to discuss the unique difficulties that people of color and underrepresented populations face with a cancer diagnosis and potential pathways for improvement.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Francone ◽  
Jonathan Alhalel ◽  
Will Dunne ◽  
Sankirtana Danner ◽  
Nihmotallahi Adebayo ◽  
...  

Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 126 (15) ◽  
pp. 3388-3392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liora Sahar ◽  
Leticia M. Nogueira ◽  
Isaac Ashkenazi ◽  
Ahmedin Jemal ◽  
K. Robin Yabroff ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. e726-e733
Author(s):  
Izumi Okado ◽  
Kevin Cassel ◽  
Ian Pagano ◽  
Randall F. Holcombe

PURPOSE: Effective care coordination (CC) is a hallmark of a high-quality cancer care. However, efforts to improve cancer care delivery are limited by the lack of a clinically useful tool to assess CC. In this study, we examined patients’ perceptions of cancer CC using a novel tool, the Care Coordination Instrument (CCI), and evaluated the quality of the CCI. METHODS: The CCI is a 29-item patient questionnaire that assesses CC across varied practice settings and patient populations overall and for three critical domains of CC: communication, navigation, and operational. We conducted univariable and multivariable regression analyses to identify patient clinical and practice characteristics associated with optimal versus suboptimal CC. RESULTS: Two hundred patients with cancer completed the CCI questionnaire between October 2018 and January 2019, of whom 189 were used for the analysis. The presence of a family caregiver and a diagnosis of a blood cancer were correlated with overall positive reports of CC ( P < .001 and P < .05, respectively). Poorer perceptions of CC were associated with having a head and neck cancer and the absence of family caregiver support. The effects of cancer disease stage and having access to a patient navigator on CC were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Integrating a patient-centered tool to assess cancer CC can be a strategy to optimize cancer care delivery. Understanding factors associated with effective and ineffective CC can help inform efforts to improve overall quality of care and care delivery.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14036-e14036
Author(s):  
Izumi Okado ◽  
Ian Pagano ◽  
Tracey Hewitt ◽  
Kelnia Azevedo ◽  
Cherie Guillermo ◽  
...  

e14036 Background: Family caregivers (FCGs) can play a key role in coordinating care for cancer patients. However, little is known about FCGs’ perspectives of care coordination (CC). In this cross-sectional study, we evaluated perceptions of CC in cancer patient-family caregiver dyads using the Care Coordination Instrument (CCI), a validated self-report measure with excellent psychometric properties. Methods: Patients receiving active treatment for cancer and their primary FCGs ( N = 54 dyads) completed the 29-item CCI (patient) and the CCICG (a parallel FCG version) at private oncology practices or hospital-based facilities from June to Sept. 2019. The CCI and CCICG assess overall perceptions of CC (Total) and across 3 domains: Communication, Navigation, and Operational. The CCICG includes a supplemental questionnaire that assesses the degree of caregiver CC involvement on a 4-point Likert scale. Mixed regression models were used to examine differences between patients and FCGs’ perceptions of CC and to identify predictors of dyadic differences on the CCI scores. Pearson’s correlation was used to evaluate associations between FCGs’ perceptions of CC and the degree of caregiver involvement. Results: CCICG Total scores demonstrated a bimodal distribution, representing FCGs’ perceptions of CC in distinct high and low subgroups; thus, all analyses were conducted by subgroups (highCG, lowCG). Overall, no dyadic differences were found in the highCG group on the CCI scores. However, in the lowCG group, FCGs reported poorer Total ( p < .01), Communication ( p < .01), Navigation ( p < .01), and Operational ( p < .05) scores than patients. Provider setting (private practices) and the absence of an identified patient navigator significantly predicted poorer FCG Total scores compared to patients’ perceptions ( p < .05). FCGs’ Total scores were inversely associated with the degree of caregiver involvement among FCGs in the lowCG group ( p < .05) but not among FCGs in the highCG group. Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate that a subgroup of FCGs has poorer perceptions of CC that differ significantly from patient perceptions and is most apparent for patients receiving treatment in a private practice setting and in the absence of a patient navigator. These FCGs report a high degree of caregiver involvement and may be providing additional CC support that is not recognized by cancer patients. These findings underscore the need for interventions to support FCG CC involvement as a member of the care team in order to improve the quality and value of patient-centered cancer care delivery.


2016 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica L. Krok-Schoen ◽  
Jill M. Oliveri ◽  
Electra D. Paskett

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Clauser ◽  
Maureen Johnson ◽  
Donna M O'Brien ◽  
Joy M. Beveridge ◽  
Mary L. Fennell ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document