Patient navigation for breast and colorectal cancer in 3 community hospital settings: An economic evaluation

BACKGROUND:

The Ralph Lauren Cancer Center implemented patient navigation programs in sites across the United States building on the model pioneered by Harold P. Freeman, MD. Patient navigation targets medically underserved with the objective of reducing the time interval between an abnormal cancer finding, diagnostic resolution, and treatment initiation. In this study, the authors assessed the incremental cost effectiveness of adding patient navigation to standard cancer care in 3 community hospitals in the United States.

METHODS:

A decision‐analytic model was used to assess the cost effectiveness of a colorectal and breast cancer patient navigation program over the period of 1 year compared with standard care. Data sources included published estimates in the literature and primary costs, aggregate patient demographics, and outcome data from 3 patient navigation programs.

RESULTS:

After 1 year, compared with standard care alone, it was estimated that offering patient navigation with standard care would allow an additional 78 of 959 individuals with an abnormal breast cancer screening and an additional 21 of 411 individuals with abnormal colonoscopies to reach timely diagnostic resolution. Without including medical treatment costs saved, the cost‐effectiveness ratio ranged from $511 to $2080 per breast cancer diagnostic resolution achieved and from $1192 to $9708 per colorectal cancer diagnostic resolution achieved.

CONCLUSIONS:

The current results indicated that implementing breast or colorectal cancer patient navigation in community hospital settings in which low‐income populations are served may be a cost‐effective addition to standard cancer care in the United States. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.     

Structural and reliability analysis of a patient satisfaction with cancer-related care measure: a multisite patient navigation research program study

BACKGROUND:

Patient satisfaction is an important outcome measure of quality of cancer care and 1 of the 4 core study outcomes of the National Cancer Institute (NCI)‐sponsored Patient Navigation Research Program to reduce race/ethnicity‐based disparities in cancer care. There is no existing patient satisfaction measure that spans the spectrum of cancer‐related care. The objective of this study was to develop a Patient Satisfaction With Cancer Care measure that is relevant to patients receiving diagnostic/therapeutic cancer‐related care.

METHODS:

The authors developed a conceptual framework, an operational definition of Patient Satisfaction With Cancer Care, and an item pool based on literature review, expert feedback, group discussion, and consensus. The 35‐item Patient Satisfaction With Cancer Care measure was administered to 891 participants from the multisite NCI‐sponsored Patient Navigation Research Program. Principal components analysis (PCA) was conducted for latent structure analysis. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach coefficient alpha (α). Divergent analysis was performed using correlation analyses between the Patient Satisfaction With Cancer Care, the Communication and Attitudinal Self‐Efficacy–Cancer, and demographic variables.

RESULTS:

The PCA revealed a 1‐dimensional measure with items forming a coherent set explaining 62% of the variance in patient satisfaction. Reliability assessment revealed high internal consistency (α ranging from 0.95 to 0.96). The Patient Satisfaction With Cancer Care demonstrated good face validity, convergent validity, and divergent validity, as indicated by moderate correlations with subscales of the Communication and Attitudinal Self‐Efficacy–Cancer (all P < .01) and nonsignificant correlations with age, primary language, marital status, and scores on the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine Long Form (all P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS:

The Patient Satisfaction With Cancer Care is a valid tool for assessing satisfaction with cancer‐related care for this sample. Cancer 2011. © 2010 American Cancer Society.     

The economic impact of a patient navigator program to increase screening colonoscopy

BACKGROUND:

Patient navigation can increase colorectal cancer screening rates. The net economic impact of a colonoscopy patient navigator program was evaluated in an urban public hospital setting.

METHODS:

Cost, cost‐effectiveness, and cost‐benefit analyses were performed of a colonoscopy patient navigation program at 3 urban public hospitals in the period from 2003 to 2007. Program effectiveness was assessed in a 2‐group, pre‐ and post‐program, nonrandomized evaluation, comparing program hospitals with comparison hospitals that served similar populations. Costs were assessed from the provider's perspective. Outcomes included colonoscopy volume, colonoscopy completion rate, program cost, incremental cost‐effectiveness, and net monetary benefit.

RESULTS:

Patient navigation was associated with a 61% increase in average monthly colonoscopy volume at program hospitals, from 114 procedures to 184 procedures, compared with a 12% increase at comparison hospitals. Adjusted for other factors, the navigator program increased colonoscopy volume by 44 to 67 additional procedures per month. Average program cost varied from $50 to $300 per patient referred to a navigator. Incremental cost‐effectiveness varied from $200 to $700 per additional colonoscopy. At 2 hospitals, net revenue associated with increased colonoscopy volume exceeded the program cost per additional colonoscopy, yielding a net financial benefit; at the third hospital, the program yielded a net cost. Variation between hospitals in the program's economic impact was primarily attributable to differences in personnel costs.

CONCLUSIONS:

Economic evaluation of this colonoscopy patient navigator program in an urban public hospital setting suggests that such programs can be a cost‐effective use of limited resources and yield a net financial benefit for providers. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.     

Evaluating the cost‐effectiveness of cancer patient navigation programs: Conceptual and practical issues

Patient navigators—individuals who assist patients through the healthcare system to improve access to and understanding of their health and healthcare—are increasingly used for underserved individuals at risk for or with cancer. Navigation programs can improve access, but it is unclear whether they improve the efficiency and efficacy of cancer diagnostic and therapeutic services at a reasonable cost, such that they would be considered cost‐effective. In the current study, the authors outline a conceptual model for evaluating the cost‐effectiveness of cancer navigation programs. They describe how this model is being applied to the Patient Navigation Research Program, a multicenter study supported by the National Cancer Institute's Center to Reduce Cancer Health Disparities. The Patient Navigation Research Program is testing navigation interventions that aim to reduce time to delivery of quality cancer care (noncancer resolution or cancer diagnosis and treatment) after identification of a screening abnormality. Examples of challenges to evaluating cost‐effectiveness of navigation programs include the heterogeneity of navigation programs, the sometimes distant relation between navigation programs and outcome of interest (eg, improving access to prompt diagnostic resolution and life‐years gained), and accounting for factors in underserved populations that may influence both access to services and outcomes. In this article, the authors discuss several strategies for addressing these barriers. Evaluating the costs and impact of navigation will require some novel methods, but will be critical in recommendations concerning dissemination of navigation programs. Cancer 2009. © 2009 American Cancer Society.     

Using breast cancer quality indicators in a vulnerable population

BACKGROUND:

Adherence to quality indicators may be especially important to disease‐specific outcomes for uninsured, vulnerable patients. The objective of this study was to measure adherence to National Initiative for Cancer Care Quality (NICCQ) breast cancer quality indicators in a public hospital and compare performance to published rates in a previously collected 5‐city cohort.

METHODS:

One hundred five consecutive, newly diagnosed, stage I‐III, breast cancer patients at a public hospital (from 2005 to 2007) were identified. Adherence rates to 31 quality indicators were measured by using medical record abstraction. Rates were calculated for individual indicators, aggregated domains, and components of care and were compared with the 5‐city cohort results by using a 2‐sided test of proportions.

RESULTS:

Overall adherence to the NICCQ indicators at the public hospital was 82%, versus 86% in the 5‐city cohort. Public hospital adherence was better in 3 domains and components (Management of Treatment Toxicity 95% vs 73%, Referrals 76% vs 15%, and Documentation of Key Clinical Factors 72% vs 64%, P < .05 for all), but it was lower in others (Testing 82% vs 96%, Adjuvant Therapy 76% vs 83%, Surgery 72% vs 86%, Surveillance 63% vs 94%, and Respect for Patient Preferences 52% vs 72%, P < .001 for all).

CONCLUSIONS:

The results showed that it is possible to deliver breast cancer care to vulnerable patients comparable in quality to the care received by the broader population. Further study should identify the factors that lead to variation in adherence across domains of quality. Cancer 2011. © 2011 American Cancer Society.     

Innovative Approaches to Reducing Cancer Health Disparities

The Moffitt Cancer Center Patient Navigation Research Program (Moffitt PNRP) is evaluating the efficacy of patient navigation in reducing delays from screening abnormality to diagnostic resolution of a breast or colorectal abnormality. The Moffitt PNRP was conducted in three phases: (1) developing an acceptable, appealing, and culturally appropriate patient navigation program; (2) conducting a group randomized controlled trial to evaluate the patient navigation program; and (3) disseminating research findings and Moffitt PNRP intervention model. The patient navigation program was developed through significant formative research, input from the Moffitt PNRP Community Advisory Board, and through a close collaboration with the Tampa Bay Community Cancer Network. 1367 patients were enrolled in the Phase 2 group randomized trial of the Moffitt PNRP. Most Moffitt PNRP group randomized trial participants are Hispanic, female, and Spanish speaking, with minimal education and income. Analyses are currently being conducted to evaluate efficacy of the Moffitt PNRP.     

Study Protocol: A randomized controlled trial of patient navigation-activation to reduce cancer health disparities

Background  

Cancer health disparities affecting low-income and minority patients are well documented. Root-causes are multifactorial, including diagnostic and treatment delays, social and financial barriers, and poor communication. Patient navigation and communication coaching (activation) are potential interventions to address disparities in cancer treatment. The purpose of this clinical trial is to test the effectiveness of an intervention combining patient navigation and activation to improve cancer treatment.     

Patient navigation for American Indians undergoing cancer treatment: utilization and impact on care delivery in a regional healthcare center

BACKGROUND:

A study was undertaken to assess patient navigation utilization and its impact on treatment interruptions and clinical trial enrollment among American Indian cancer patients.

METHODS:

Between February 2004 and September 2009, 332 American Indian cancer patients received patient navigation services throughout cancer treatment. The patient navigation program provided culturally competent navigators to assist patients with navigating cancer therapy, obtaining medications, insurance issues, communicating with medical providers, and travel and lodging logistics. Data on utilization and trial enrollment were prospectively collected. Data for a historical control group of 70 American Indian patients who did not receive patient navigation services were used to compare treatment interruptions among those undergoing patient navigation during curative radiation therapy (subgroup of 123 patients).

RESULTS:

The median number of contacts with a navigator was 12 (range, 1‐119). The median time spent with the navigator at first contact was 40 minutes (range, 10‐250 minutes), and it was 15 minutes for subsequent contacts. Patients treated with radiation therapy with curative intent who underwent patient navigation had fewer days of treatment interruption (mean, 1.7 days; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1‐2.2 days) than historical controls who did not receive patient navigation services (mean, 4.9 days; 95% CI, 2.9‐6.9 days). Of the 332 patients, 72 (22%; 95% CI, 17%‐26%) were enrolled on a clinical treatment trial or cancer control protocol.

CONCLUSIONS:

Patient navigation was associated with fewer treatment interruptions and relatively high rates of clinical trial enrollment among American Indian cancer patients compared with national reports. Cancer 2011. © 2010 American Cancer Society.     

Diagnostic and therapeutic delays among a multiethnic sample of breast and cervical cancer survivors

BACKGROUND:

Several publications reporting on health disparities document that ethnic minorities disproportionately experience delays in healthcare access, delivery, and treatment. However, few studies examine factors underlying access and receipt of healthcare among cancer survivors from the patient perspective. This study explores diagnostic and therapeutic care delays among a multiethnic sample of breast and cervical cancer survivors and examines contextual factors influencing diagnostic and therapeutic care delays.

METHODS:

Population‐based sampling and a cross‐sectional design were used to recruit 1377 survivors (breast cancer, n = 698; cervical cancer, n = 679). This multiethnic sample included 449 European American, 185 African American, 468 Latina American, and 275 Asian American survivors.

RESULTS:

Latina Americans were more likely to report diagnostic delays (P = .003), whereas African Americans were more likely to report therapeutic delays (P = .007). In terms of cancer type, cervical cancer survivors were more likely to report diagnostic (P = .004) and therapeutic delays (P = .000) compared with breast cancer survivors. “Fear of finding cancer” was the most frequently cited reason for diagnostic delays, and “medical reasons” were most frequently cited for therapeutic delays.

CONCLUSIONS:

Due in part to a higher proportion of diagnostic and therapeutic delays, ethnic minorities endure greater cancer burden, including poorer survival and survivorship outcomes. The medical community must recognize the impact of existing psychological and cultural dimensions on diagnostic care, as well as the personal and healthcare system level barriers that contribute to therapeutic delays. Cancer 2010. © 2010 American Cancer Society.     

Variations in pain management outcomes among palliative care centers and the impact of organizational factors

BACKGROUND:

The assessment of pain management outcomes is important for the quality assurance of palliative care. The objective of this study was to determine whether there are significant variations in pain management outcomes among palliative care centers and whether they are affected by organizational factors.

METHODS:

Data used in this investigation were from the 2009 Korean Terminal Cancer Patient Information System and administrative records of the 34 inpatient palliative care centers designated by the Korean Ministry of Health and Welfare in 2009. Self‐reported pain scores (range, from 0 to 10) at admission and 1 week after admission were prospectively collected. Multilevel mixed‐effect regression models were used to analyze the variations and the impact of organizational‐level factors on 2 pain management outcomes (ie, reduction in average pain score and achievement of adequate pain control at 1 week after admission).

RESULTS:

In total, 1711 patients with terminal cancer were included in the analyses. The mean reduction in the pain score was 0.69 to 1.91 after 1 week, and most patients (82.8%) achieved adequate pain control. There were significant variations in pain management outcomes among palliative care centers. Higher composite scores for human resources adequacy were associated significantly with a greater reduction in pain score (β, 0.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.01‐0.21), and achievement of adequate pain control (adjusted odds ratio, 1.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.10‐1.45).

CONCLUSIONS:

There were significant variations in pain management outcomes among inpatient palliative care centers, and they were affected by organizational factors, such as human resources adequacy. Cancer 2011. © 2012 American Cancer Society.     

Limitations in health care access and utilization among long‐term survivors of adolescent and young adult cancer

BACKGROUND:

Health care outcomes for long‐term survivors of adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer were compared with young adults without a cancer history, using the 2009 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data.

METHODS:

Eligible participants were 20 to 39 years of age. There were N = 979 who self‐reported a cancer diagnosis between the ages of 15 to 34 years and were at least 5 years from diagnosis (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer). The remaining 67,216 participants with no cancer history were used as controls. Using multivariable regressions, relative risks and 95% confidence intervals were generated to examine the relationship of survivor status on indicators of poor health care (uninsured, no personal health care provider, no routine care, and avoiding seeing a doctor due to cost). Adjusted proportions were calculated by demographic groups. Results are weighted by Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey design.

RESULTS:

Although the proportion uninsured did not differ (21% of survivors vs 23% of controls), AYA survivors reported forgoing care due to cost at higher levels than controls (relative risk = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.44‐1.94). Cost barriers were particularly high for survivors aged 20 to 29 years (44% vs 16% of controls; P < .001) and female survivors (35% vs 18% of controls; P < .001). Survivors reporting poorer health had more cost barriers. Moreover, uninsured survivors tended to report lower use of health care than did controls.

CONCLUSIONS:

AYA cancer survivors may forgo health care due to cost barriers, potentially inhibiting the early detection of late effects. Expanding health insurance coverage for young cancer survivors may be insufficient without adequate strategies to reduce their medical cost burdens. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.     

Complex care systems in developing countries

BACKGROUND:

As the global visibility and importance of breast cancer increases, especially in developing countries, ensuring that countries strengthen and develop health systems that support prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of a complex chronic disease is a priority. Understanding how breast cancer patients navigate health systems to reach appropriate levels of care is critical in assessing and improving the health system response in countries to an increasing breast cancer burden in their populations. Ethiopia has accelerated attention to breast cancer, expanding clinical and public health efforts at diagnosing and treating breast cancer earlier and more efficiently.

METHODS:

This project used a mixed‐method approach to assessing patient navigation of the healthcare system that resulted in care at the cancer referral hospital for Ethiopia (Tikur Anbessa Hospital [TAH]). In total, 69 patients representative of the entire breast cancer clinical population at TAH were interviewed.

RESULTS:

Navigation chains are widely divergent and typically involve 3 or more care nodes until they reach the referral hospital. Patients who consult traditional healers have significantly more care nodes to reach the referral hospital than others, and patients who have direct access to local and regional hospitals have the smallest number of care nodes. Patients report moving laterally from 1 health institution to another or regressing to lower levels of care, sometimes complicated by reinvolving traditional healers.

CONCLUSIONS:

The care system can be streamlined for breast cancer patients in Ethiopia to facilitate patient access to available and clinically effective diagnostic and treatment services in the country, largely through improving local primary care and hospital capacity to provide basic breast cancer services and improve detection and referral. Cancer 2010. © 2009 American Cancer Society.     

Patient navigation for underserved patients diagnosed with breast cancer

The elimination of cancer disparities is critically important for lessening the burden of breast cancer (BC). Patient navigator programs (PNPs) have been shown to improve rates of BC screening in underserved communities, but there is a dearth of evidence regarding their benefits after the actual diagnosis of BC. We retrospectively examined sociodemographic characteristics, disease characteristics, and concordance to quality measures (QMs) of BC care among women participating in a PNP that services disadvantaged minority communities in the greater Boston area. Of the 186 PNP patients diagnosed with BC in 2001-2011 in three neighborhood community health centers, treatment data was available for 158 (85%) and race and disease stage information was available for 149 (80%). Regarding stage, 25% were diagnosed with in situ cancer, 32% had stage 1, 25% had stage 2, 13% had stage 3, and 5% had stage 4 BC. Guideline-indicated care was received by 70 of 74 patients (95%) for the hormonal therapy QM, 15 of 17 (88%) patients for the chemotherapy QM, and 65 of 71 (92%) patients for the radiation QM, all similar to published concordance rates at elite National Comprehensive Cancer Network institutions. These findings suggest that PNPs may facilitate evidence-based quality care for vulnerable populations. Future research should prospectively analyze quality metrics to assess measures to improve the process and outcomes of patient navigation in diverse underserved settings, compared with control non-navigated populations.     

How does health literacy affect quality of life among men with newly diagnosed clinically localized prostate cancer?

BACKGROUND:

Health literacy deficits affect half of the US overall patient population, especially the elderly, and are linked to poor health outcomes among noncancer patients. Yet little is known about how health literacy affects cancer populations. The authors examined the relation between health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) and health literacy among men with prostate cancer.

METHODS:

Data analysis included 1581 men with newly diagnosed clinically localized prostate cancer from a population‐based study, the North Carolina‐Louisiana Prostate Cancer Project (PCaP). Participants completed assessment of health literacy using Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine (REALM) and HRQOL using the Short Form‐12 General Health Survey (SF12). Bivariate and multivariate regression was used to determine the potential association between REALM and HRQOL, while controlling for sociodemographic and illness‐related variables.

RESULTS:

Higher health literacy level was significantly associated with better mental well‐being (SF12‐Mental Component Summary [MCS]; P < .001) and physical well‐being (SF12‐Physical Component Summary [PCS]; P < .001) in bivariate analyses. After controlling for sociodemographic (age, marital status, race, income, and education) and illness‐related factors (types of cancer treatment, tumor aggressiveness, and comorbidities), health literacy remained significantly associated with SF12‐MCS scores (P < .05) but not with SF12‐PCS scores.

CONCLUSIONS:

Among patients with newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer, those with low health literacy levels were more vulnerable to mental distress than those with higher health literacy levels, but physical well‐being was no different. These findings suggest that health literacy may be important in patients managing prostate cancer and the effects of treatment, and provide the hypothesis that supportive interventions targeting patients with lower health literacy may improve their HRQOL. Cancer 2012. © 2011 American Cancer Society.     

Navigating Latinas with breast screen abnormalities to diagnosis

BACKGROUND.

Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer‐related deaths in Latinas, chiefly because of later diagnosis. The time from screening to diagnosis is critical to optimizing cancer care, yet the efficacy of navigation in reducing it is insufficiently documented. Here, the authors evaluate a culturally sensitive patient navigation program to reduce the time to diagnosis and increase the proportions of women diagnosed within 30 days and 60 days.

METHODS.

The authors analyzed 425 Latinas who had Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI‐RADS) radiologic abnormalities categorized as BI‐RADS‐3, BI‐RADS‐4, or BI‐RADS‐5 from July 2008 to January 2011. There were 217 women in the navigated group and 208 women in the control group. Women were navigated by locally trained navigators or were not navigated (data for this group were abstracted from charts). The Kaplan‐Meier method, Cox proportional hazards regression, and logistic regression were used to determine differences between groups.

RESULTS.

The time to diagnosis was shorter in the navigated group (mean, 32.5 days vs 44.6 days in the control group; hazard ratio, 1.32; P = .007). Stratified analysis revealed that navigation significantly shortened the time to diagnosis among women who had BI‐RADS‐3 radiologic abnormalities (mean, 21.3 days vs 63.0 days; hazard ratio, 2.42; P < .001) but not among those who had BI‐RADS‐4 or BI‐RADS‐5 radiologic abnormalities (mean, 37.6 days vs 36.9 days; hazard ratio, 0.98; P = .989). Timely diagnosis occurred more frequently among navigated Latinas (within 30 days: 67.3% vs 57.7%; P = .045; within 60 days: 86.2% vs 78.4%; P = .023). This was driven by the BI‐RADS‐3 strata (within 30 days: 83.6% vs 50%; P < .001; within 60 days: 94.5% vs 67.2%; P < .001). A lack of missed appointments was associated with timely diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS.

Patient‐centered navigation to assist Latina women with abnormal screening mammograms appeared to reduced the time to diagnosis and increase rates of timely diagnosis overall. However, in stratified analyses, only navigated Latinas with an initial BI‐RADS‐3 screen benefited, probably because of a reduction in missed diagnostic appointments. Cancer 2013. © 2012 American Cancer Society.     

Clinician–patient communication: evidence-based recommendations to guide practice in cancer

Goals of Work

To develop recommendations for effective communication between cancer health care providers and patients based on a systematic review of methods of clinician–patient communication that may affect patient outcomes associated with distress at critical points in the course of cancer care.

Materials and Methods

A systematic review of the literature was conducted, and evidence-based recommendations were formulated to guide clinician–patient communication in cancer care. A formal external review was conducted to validate the relevance of these recommendations.

Main Results

Recommendations for communication in cancer care are presented, based on

• guidelines from the Australian National Breast Cancer Centre and the Australian National Cancer Control Initiative,
• an updated systematic review of the research evidence, and
• a consensus by the Clinician–Patient Communications Working Panel of the Program in Evidence-Based Care of Cancer Care Ontario.

The recommendations were sent to 110 Ontario practitioners for external review: 33 responded (30% response rate). Most of these respondents (87%) agreed with the draft recommendations and approved of their use as a practice guideline (90%). A condensed version of the recommendations, including 10 key points, was also created.

Conclusions

There is evidence to support general clinician–patient communication approaches, although the preferences of cancer patients regarding such communication exhibit individual and cultural variability. Recommendations are provided, based on evidence, the consensus of an expert panel, and feedback from a survey of external practitioners. Evidence evaluating the role of decision aids and strategies to facilitate better communication is inconsistent, although such tools may be of value for some patients.     

Is cancer survival associated with cancer symptom awareness and barriers to seeking medical help in England? An ecological study

Background:

Campaigns aimed at raising cancer awareness and encouraging early presentation have been implemented in England. However, little is known about whether people with low cancer awareness and increased barriers to seeking medical help have worse cancer survival, and whether there is a geographical variation in cancer awareness and barriers in England.

Methods:

From population-based surveys (n=35 308), using the Cancer Research UK Cancer Awareness Measure, we calculated the age- and sex-standardised symptom awareness and barriers scores for 52 primary care trusts (PCTs). These measures were evaluated in relation to the sex-, age-, and type of cancer-standardised cancer survival index of the corresponding PCT, from the National Cancer Registry, using linear regression. Breast, lung, and bowel cancer survival were analysed separately.

Results:

Cancer symptom awareness and barriers scores varied greatly between geographical regions in England, with the worst scores observed in socioeconomically deprived parts of East London. Low cancer awareness score was associated with poor cancer survival at PCT level (estimated slope=1.56, 95% CI: 0.56; 2.57). The barriers score was not associated with overall cancer survival, but it was associated with breast cancer survival (estimated slope=−0.66, 95% CI: −1.20; −0.11). Specific barriers, such as embarrassment and difficulties in arranging transport to the doctor''s surgery, were associated with worse breast cancer survival.

Conclusions:

Cancer symptom awareness and cancer survival are associated. Campaigns should focus on improving awareness about cancer symptoms, especially in socioeconomically deprived areas. Efforts should be made to alleviate barriers to seeking medical help in women with symptoms of breast cancer.     

Health status of adolescent and young adult cancer survivors

BACKGROUND:

Adolescents and young adults (AYA) ages 15 to 29 years who are diagnosed with cancer are at risk for long‐term morbidity and mortality associated with treatment of their cancer and the cancer itself. In this article, the authors describe the self‐reported health status of AYA cancer survivors.

METHODS:

The authors examined 2009 data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, including demographic characteristics, risk behaviors, chronic conditions, health status, and health care access, among AYA cancer survivors compared with respondents who had no history of cancer.

RESULTS:

The authors identified 4054 AYA cancer survivors and 345,592 respondents who had no history of cancer. AYA cancer survivors, compared with respondents who had no history of cancer, reported a significantly higher prevalence of current smoking (26% vs 18%); obesity (31% vs 27%); chronic conditions, including cardiovascular disease (14% vs 7%), hypertension (35% vs 29%), asthma (15% vs 8%), disability (36% vs 18%), and poor mental health (20% vs 10%) and physical health (24% vs 10%); and not receiving medical care because of cost (24% vs 15%).

CONCLUSIONS:

AYA cancer survivors commonly reported adverse behavioral, medical, and health care access characteristics that may lead to poor long‐term medical and psychosocial outcomes. Increased adherence to established follow‐up guidelines may lead to improved health among AYA cancer survivors. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.     

Implementing a breast cancer registry and treatment plan/summary program in clinical practice: A pilot program

BACKGROUND:

There is a need to better measure and improve the quality of oncology care and improve communication with patients and other providers. The American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Registry (BCR) pilot evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of prospective data collection for quality assessment in daily clinical practice. Data were used to create and share treatment plans/summaries (TPSs) at the point of care.

METHODS:

Using a web‐based tool, 20 diverse practices entered clinical data on each new early‐stage breast cancer patient into the BCR for 14 months (September 2009 through November 2010). The tool created individual TPSs that were shared with patients. Practices received practice‐specific and aggregate BCR quality measures data, participated in a survey, and received a participation stipend.

RESULTS:

Twenty practices entered 2014 patients into the BCR, collecting demographic, clinical, and treatment information. Fifty‐two percent of practice participants replied to an end‐of‐pilot survey: 73% were satisfied with the BCR and web‐based tool, 31% expressed concern regarding time and effort, and 52% reported additional practice costs during the pilot. Among those who created or shared the TPSs, 90% thought the documents improved oncologist‐patient communication, and 95% favored using BCR data for practice quality improvement.

CONCLUSIONS:

Prospective data collection for quality assessment is feasible and allows sharing of TPSs with patients at the point of care. Future efforts should focus on decreasing implementation burden to practices, broadening participation, examining costs, and, most importantly, assessing its effects on patient outcomes. Cancer 2013. © 2012 American Cancer Society.