Multilevel factors affecting quality: examples from the cancer care continuum

Environmental health disparities in pediatric cancer: a report from the Fourth Symposium on Childhood Cancer Health Disparities

The 4th Symposium on Childhood Cancer Health Disparities was held at Texas Children's Hospital in Houston, Texas, on September 26, 2023. The symposium registered 94 attendees from different backgrounds (e.g. clinicians, epidemiologists, exposure assessment scientists, geospatial experts) with an interest in environmental health disparities of pediatric cancer susceptibility and treatment outcomes. The focus of the symposium was to provide an overview of the role of environmental risk factors in studies of pediatric cancer, introduce novel exposure assessment tools that can be applied to the field, and highlight opportunities to study the impact of environmental health disparities in pediatric cancer susceptibility and outcomes. This report summarizes the scientific content of the symposium and highlights priorities to advance the field.

Characterizing the Design of and Emerging Evidence for Health Care Organization-Based Lung Cancer Screening Interventions: A Systematic Review

Background. Implementing a lung cancer screening (LCS) program with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is complex, requiring health care organizations to consider several steps along the screening continuum from eligibility assessment to recommended follow-up testing adherence. The evidence to support LDCT screening implementation remains unclear. Purpose. To summarize interventions facilitating LCS initiation, adoption, or improvement within health care organizations. Data Sources. Librarian-assisted literature reviews identified published studies between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2023, using CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, Ovid Medline, PsycINFO, and Scopus. Study Selection. Published interventions focusing on any step in the LCS process before lung cancer diagnosis, including risk/eligibility assessment, shared decision making (SDM), and annual screening or diagnostic testing. Data Abstraction. We used a title/abstract review process, full-text review, and risk-of-bias assessments. We characterized studies by design, unit of observation, participant sociodemographic characteristics, primary outcome, and step in the LCS process. DistillerSR and Covidence were used for data management. Data Synthesis. We identified 64 study-eligible published articles, including 19 randomized and 45 nonrandomized studies. SDM interventions were most frequently studied (n = 20) followed by initial LCS uptake (n = 12). Most studies (n = 33) evaluated educational interventions, typically in one-on-one settings. Studies assessed at either low or moderate/some risk of bias reported statistically significant findings in the domains of improved knowledge (n = 7) and other aspects of decision making (n = 8), such as perceived risk or decisional conflict. Findings regarding LCS uptake were more variable. Limitations. The review includes only English-language studies published prior to 2024. The risk of bias was high among 5 of the randomized clinical trials and serious among 27 of the quasi-experimental design studies. Conclusions. LCS intervention strategies have focused on SDM and initial LCS uptake, leaving gaps in knowledge about how to support risk and eligibility assessment, adherence to annual screening, or diagnostic testing. Expanding interventions beyond those that are education focused and with single-level targets would expand the LDCT screening implementation evidence base.

Highlights

Most lung cancer screening (LCS) interventions evaluated to date have been educational in nature and focused primarily on shared decision making or the initial uptake of screening, with some interventions demonstrating statistically significant improvements in patient knowledge and initial LCS order/uptake.A critical gap in knowledge remains regarding how to effectively support LCS eligibility assessment as well as adherence to annual screening and appropriate diagnostic testing.Findings underscore the need for the field to expand beyond education-focused interventions and incorporate multilevel targets when designing interventions to support high-quality LCS in practice.

Association of housing status and cancer diagnosis, care coordination and outcomes in a public hospital: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Cancer is a leading cause of death in unhoused adults. We sought to examine the association between housing status, stage at diagnosis and all-cause survival following cancer diagnosis at a public hospital.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study examining new cancer diagnoses between 1 July 2011 and 30 June 2021.

SETTING

A public hospital in San Francisco.

EXPOSURE

Housing status (housed, formerly unhoused, unhoused) was ascertained via a county-wide integrated dataset that tracks both observed and reported homelessness.

METHODS

We reported univariate analyses to investigate differences in demographic and clinical characteristics by housing group. We then constructed Kaplan-Meier curves stratified by housing group to examine unadjusted all-cause mortality. Finally, we used multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to compare the hazard rate of mortality for each housing status group, adjusting for demographic and clinical factors.

RESULTS

Our cohort included 5123 patients with new cancer diagnoses, with 4062 (79%) in housed patients, 623 (12%) in formerly unhoused patients and 438 (9%) in unhoused patients. Unhoused and formerly unhoused patients were more commonly diagnosed with stage 4 disease (28% and 27% of the time, respectively, vs 22% of housed patients). After adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics, unhoused patients with stage 0-3 disease had a 50% increased hazard of death (adjusted HR (aHR) 1.5, 95% CI 1.1 to 1.9; p<0.004) as did formerly unhoused patients (aHR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2 to 1.9; p=0.001) compared with housed individuals 3 months after diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Unhoused and formerly unhoused patients diagnosed with non-metastatic cancer had substantially increased hazards of death compared with housed patients cared for in a public hospital setting. Current or former lack of housing could contribute to poor outcomes following cancer diagnoses via multiple mechanisms.

fRAP 2.0: a community engagement method applied to cervical cancer disparities among Hispanic women

focused Rapid Assessment Process (fRAP) 2.0 is a community engagement approach combining geospatial mapping with rapid qualitative assessment in cyclical fashion within communities to capture multifactorial and multilevel features impacting primary care problems. fRAP 2.0 offers primary care researchers a methodology framework for exploring complex community features that impact primary healthcare delivery and outcomes. The fRAP 2.0 study design expands the fRAP from a sequential design to a cyclical process of geospatial mapping and rapid qualitative assessment in search of modifiable contextual factors. Research participants are stakeholders from various socioecological levels whose perspectives inform study outcomes that they may use to then become the agents of change for the very problems they helped explore. Here, we present a proof-of-concept study for fRAP 2.0 examining disparities in cervical cancer mortality rates among Hispanic women in Texas. The primary outcomes of interest are features at the community level, medical health system level and regional government policy levels that offer opportunities for collaborative interventions to improve cervical cancer outcomes. In this study, geospatial mapping of county and ZIP code-level variables impacting postdiagnosis cervical cancer care at community, medical and policy levels were created using publicly available data and then overlaid with maps created with Texas Cancer Registry data for cervical cancer cases in three of the largest population counties. Geographically disparate areas were then qualitatively explored using participant observation and ethnographic field work, alongside 39 key informant interviews. Roundtable discussion groups and stakeholder engagement existed at every phase of the study. Applying the fRAP 2.0 method, we created an action-oriented roadmap of next steps to improve cervical cancer care disparities in the three Texas counties with emphasis on the high disparity county. We identified local change targets for advocacy and the results helped convene a stakeholder group that continues to actively create on-the-ground change in the high-disparity county to improve cervical cancer outcomes for Hispanic women.

Colorectal cancer screening program implementation: biennial adherence and participation patterns

INTRODUCTION AND AIM

Adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is essential for the effectiveness of screening programs. Even though organized screening programs can improve the quality of the process and adherence, there are still challenges to overcome. The aim of the present study, in which we implemented a biennial organized screening program for CRC, was to describe adherence and participation patterns.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A longitudinal, descriptive study was conducted, in which a team of trained patient navigators carried out interventions, with reminders via cellphone communication, to follow a cohort of 301 subjects eligible for CRC screening, utilizing a fecal immunochemical test (FIT). All the follow-up subjects received a FIT kit.

RESULTS

A total of 747 cellphone calls were made and divided into three interventions. From the initial cohort, 126 subjects completed their biennial screening process through the FIT, indicating a consistent adherence rate of 41.8% to our program. The participation patterns were: 126 consistent participants (41.8%), 160 inconsistent participants (53.2%), and 15 participants that were never contacted (5%).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, our study underlines the importance of organized screening programs in the early detection of CRC. The implementation of follow-up interventions, through reminders and the training of patient navigators, can improve adherence, but there is a need for examining new strategies, to overcome barriers to communication via cellphone.

Health-care organization characteristics in cancer care delivery: an integrated conceptual framework with content validation

Context can influence cancer-related outcomes. For example, health-care organization characteristics, including ownership, leadership, and culture, can affect care access, communication, and patient outcomes. Health-care organization characteristics and other contextual factors can also influence whether and how clinical discoveries reduce cancer incidence, morbidity, and mortality. Importantly, policy, market, and technology changes are transforming health-care organization design, culture, and operations across the cancer continuum. Consequently, research is essential to examine when, for whom, and how organizational characteristics influence person-level, organization-level, and population-level cancer outcomes. Understanding organizational characteristics-the structures, processes, and other features of entities involved in health care delivery-and their dynamics is an important yet understudied area of care delivery research across the cancer continuum. Research incorporating organizational characteristics is critical to address health inequities, test care delivery models, adapt interventions, and strengthen implementation. The field lacks conceptual grounding, however, to help researchers identify germane organizational characteristics. We propose a framework identifying organizational characteristics relevant for cancer care delivery research based on conceptual work in health services, organizational behavior, and management science and refined using a systematic review and key informant input. The proposed framework is a tool for organizing existing research and enhancing future cancer care delivery research. Following a 2012 Journal of the National Cancer Institute monograph, this work complements National Cancer Institute efforts to stimulate research addressing the relationship between cancer outcomes and contextual factors at the patient, provider, team, delivery organization, community, and health policy levels.

Multilevel barriers and facilitators to widespread use of preconception carrier screening in the United States

PURPOSE

Although preconception reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) is preferred to screening during pregnancy, population-wide preconception screening is not routinely performed in the United States. We explored the multilevel barriers to the widespread adoption of preconception RGCS in the United States via key informant interviews.

METHODS

Semi-structured virtual video interviews were conducted with 29 informants with a breadth of professional expertise between May and October 2022. Data collection and qualitative analyses were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and socioecological model. Analysis focused on identifying barriers to delivering preconception RGCS at and across different levels of health care and exploring potential facilitators of preconception RGCS delivery.

RESULTS

Barriers to preconception RGCS were identified at the levels of test characteristics, patients and couples, clinicians and care teams, and the external health care and policy environments. Across the different levels of care delivery, 3 themes of barriers emerged: (1) fragmentation and inconsistencies hinder care delivery, (2) gaps in knowledge, misconceptions, and uncertainties about RGCS are pervasive, and (3) expanding preconception RGCS in the diverse US population presents unique implementation challenges. Potential solutions were detailed by informants.

CONCLUSION

Identifying individual and thematic barriers to preconception RGCS delivery may help to define strategies to alleviate obstacles.

The use of individual and multilevel data in the development of a risk prediction model to predict patients' likelihood of completing colorectal cancer screening

Promotion of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening can be expensive and unnecessary for many patients. The use of predictive analytics promises to help health systems target the right services to the right patients at the right time while improving population health. Multilevel data at the interpersonal, organizational, community, and policy levels, is rarely considered in clinical decision making but may be used to improve CRC screening risk prediction. We compared the effectiveness of a CRC screening risk prediction model that uses multilevel data with a more conventional model that uses only individual patient data. We used a retrospective cohort to ascertain the one-year occurrence of CRC screening. The cohort was determined from a Health Maintenance Organization, in Oregon. Eligible patients were 50-75 years old, health plan members for at least one year before their birthday in 2018 and were due for screening. We created a risk model using logistic regression first with data available in the electronic health record (EHR), and then added multilevel data. In a cohort of 59,249 patients, 36.1% completed CRC screening. The individual level model included 14 demographic, clinical and encounter based characteristics, had a bootstrap-corrected C-statistic of 0.722 and sufficient calibration. The multilevel model added 9 variables from clinical setting and community characteristics, and the bootstrap-corrected C-statistic remained the same with continued sufficient calibration. The predictive power of the CRC screening model did not improve after adding multilevel data. Our findings suggest that multilevel data added no improvement to the prediction of the likelihood of CRC screening.

System dynamics modeling for cancer prevention and control: A systematic review

Cancer prevention and control requires consideration of complex interactions between multilevel factors. System dynamics modeling, which consists of diagramming and simulation approaches for understanding and managing such complexity, is being increasingly applied to cancer prevention and control, but the breadth, characteristics, and quality of these studies is not known. We searched PubMed, Scopus, APA PsycInfo, and eight peer-reviewed journals to identify cancer-related studies that used system dynamics modeling. A dual review process was used to determine eligibility. Included studies were assessed using quality criteria adapted from prior literature and mapped onto the cancer control continuum. Characteristics of studies and models were abstracted and qualitatively synthesized. 32 studies met our inclusion criteria. A mix of simulation and diagramming approaches were used to address diverse topics, including chemotherapy treatments (16%), interventions to reduce tobacco or e-cigarettes use (16%), and cancer risk from environmental contamination (13%). Models spanned all focus areas of the cancer control continuum, with treatment (44%), prevention (34%), and detection (31%) being the most common. The quality assessment of studies was low, particularly for simulation approaches. Diagramming-only studies more often used participatory approaches. Involvement of participants, description of model development processes, and proper calibration and validation of models showed the greatest room for improvement. System dynamics modeling can illustrate complex interactions and help identify potential interventions across the cancer control continuum. Prior efforts have been hampered by a lack of rigor and transparency regarding model development and testing. Supportive infrastructure for increasing awareness, accessibility, and further development of best practices of system dynamics for multidisciplinary cancer research is needed.

The Role of Nurses in the Quality of Cancer Care Management: Perceptions of Cancer Survivors and Oncology Teams

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to explore the perceptions of cancer survivors and oncology professionals of quality in cancer care and the role of oncology nurses in prompting and maintaining quality across the cancer care continuum.

DATA SOURCES

Semistructured in-depth interviews were conducted with 16 cancer survivors and 22 healthcare professionals between August and October 2021. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using ATLAS.ti v8 software according to a thematic analysis method based on grounded theory. The COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research (COREQ) was used to guide the report of the study.

CONCLUSION

Four main themes emerged from the interviews, which are outlined as follows. (1) Patient participation in the cancer care plan: shared information and decision-making; (2) emotional and support aspects in cancer care; (3) continuity in cancer care: from being a patient at the hospital to a survivor in the community; and (4) cancer care management. Cancer survivors pointed to elements that can increase the quality of cancer care, including the ongoing provision of information, support in decision-making, and continuity of care. Oncology staff interviewees mentioned the need for a single staff member to manage the cancer care plan and serve as a case manager for patients and survivors.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Nurses have a central role in achieving the highest possible quality of cancer care for the growing number of survivors and their families. It is recommended to expand the role of oncology nurses, providing them the training and competencies needed to formally declare them as care managers throughout the continuum of cancer care.

Disparities in geospatial patterns of cancer care within urban counties and structural inequities in access to oncology care

OBJECTIVE

To examine geospatial patterns of cancer care utilization across diverse populations in New Jersey-a state where most residents live in urban areas.

DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING

We used data from the New Jersey State Cancer Registry from 2012 to 2014.

STUDY DESIGN

We examined the location of cancer treatment among patients 20-65 years of age diagnosed with breast, colorectal, or invasive cervical cancer and investigated differences in geospatial patterns of care by individual and area-level (e.g., census tract-level) characteristics.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

Multivariate generalized estimating equation models were used to determine factors associated with receiving cancer treatment within residential counties, residential hospital service areas, and in-state (versus out-of-state) care.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We observed significant differences in geospatial patterns of cancer treatment by race/ethnicity, insurance type, and area-level factors. Even after adjusting for tumor characteristics, insurance type, and other demographic factors, non-Hispanic Black patients had a 5.6% higher likelihood of receiving care within their own residential county compared to non-Hispanic White patients (95% CI: 2.80-8.41). Patients insured with Medicaid and those without insurance had higher likelihoods of receiving care within their residential county compared to privately insured individuals. Patients living in census tracts with the highest quintile of social vulnerability were 4.6% more likely to receive treatment within their residential county (95% CI: 0.00-9.30) and were 2.7% less likely to seek out-of-state care (95% CI: -4.85 to -0.61).

CONCLUSIONS

Urban populations are not homogenous in their geospatial patterns of cancer care utilization, and individuals living in areas with greater social vulnerability may have limited opportunities to access care outside of their immediate residential county. Geographically tailored efforts, along with socioculturally tailored efforts, are needed to help improve equity in cancer care access.

Association of Patient and Site-of-Care Characteristics With Reproductive Carrier Screening Timing in a Large Integrated Health System

IMPORTANCE

Reproductive genetic carrier screening can be performed prior to or during pregnancy to assess a reproductive couple's risk of having a child with a recessively inherited disorder. Although professional societies endorse preconception screening as preferable to prenatal screening to allow for greater reproductive choice, implementation of preconception screening is challenging.

OBJECTIVE

To determine how carrier screening timing varies by multilevel factors associated with health care delivery including patient, clinician, and location across a large integrated health care system.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study used a mixed-methods approach including (1) quantitative analysis of multilevel factors associated with the timing of reproductive carrier screening and (2) qualitative analyses of data from interviews conducted with clinicians ordering carrier screenings. The setting was the Mass General Brigham, a large integrated health care system in the greater Boston, Massachusetts area. Participants included adult female patients who completed reproductive carrier screening performed by Myriad Women's Health between October 1, 2018, to September 30, 2019.

EXPOSURES

Site of care (ordering clinical location and hospital affiliate), ordering clinician specialty, and patient characteristics, including age at date of test collection, self-reported race and ethnicity, primary insurance payor, and number of comorbidities.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the timing of carrier screening (preconception vs prenatal). A series of 4 multilevel logistic regression models were fitted to measure the relative contribution of site, clinician, and patient-level factors on the timing of screening. Interviews with ordering clinicians (N = 9) were analyzed using a framework approach to explore barriers to preconception screening.

RESULTS

Among 6509 adult female patients who completed carrier screenings, 770 (12%) were Asian, 352 (5%) were Hispanic, 640 (10%) were non-Hispanic Black, 3844 (59%) were non-Hispanic White, 858 (13%) were other or multiple races and ethnicities, and 2611 (40%) were aged 31 to 35 years; 4701 (63%) had prenatal screening and 2438 (37%) had preconception screening; screenings were ordered by 161 distinct clinicians across 32 clinical locations affiliated with 4 hospitals. In model 1, adjusted for hospital (fixed effect), clinic and clinician (random effects), 49% of the variability in timing was associated with clinician-level effects (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.49) and 28% was associated with clinic-level effects (ICC, 0.28). Clinician specialty explained the greatest amount of variation in screening timing. Interviewed clinicians (N = 9) supported preconception screening but cited several barriers to offering population-based preconception screening.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cross-sectional study, multilevel factors were associated with carrier screening timing. These findings suggest that increasing access to preconception screening may involve engaging specific medical specialties.

Association Between Availability of Women's Health Services and Women Veterans' Care Experiences

INTRODUCTION

Few studies have focused on determinants of women's ratings of care experiences in primary care. We assessed associations between availability of women's health services and women veterans' ratings of care experiences.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional analysis, we linked Fiscal Year 2017 (October 1, 2016, to September 30, 2017) survey data from 126 Veterans Health Administration (VA) primary care leaders to 4,254 women veterans' ratings of care from VA's Survey of Health care Experiences of Patients-Patient Centered Medical Home (2017). The dependent variables were ratings of optimal access (appointments, information), care coordination, comprehensiveness (behavioral health assessment), patient-provider communication, and primary care provider. Key independent variables were number of women's health services 1) routinely available all weekday hours (compared with some hours or not available) and 2) available in VA general primary care vs. other arrangements. In multilevel logistic regression models, we adjusted for patient-, facility-, and area-level characteristics.

RESULTS

A greater number of women's health services routinely available in VA primary care was associated with a higher likelihood of optimal ratings of care coordination (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.10), provider communication (AOR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.002-1.16), and primary care provider (AOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.13). A greater number of services available in VA primary care was associated with a lower likelihood of optimal ratings for access (AOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.88-0.99).

CONCLUSION

For the most part, routine availability of women's health services in VA primary care clinics enhanced women's health care experiences. These empirical findings offer health care leaders evidence-based approaches for improving women's care experiences.

Evaluating and Improving Cancer Screening Process Quality in a Multilevel Context: The PROSPR II Consortium Design and Research Agenda

BACKGROUND

Cancer screening is a complex process involving multiple steps and levels of influence (e.g., patient, provider, facility, health care system, community, or neighborhood). We describe the design, methods, and research agenda of the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR II) consortium. PROSPR II Research Centers (PRC), and the Coordinating Center aim to identify opportunities to improve screening processes and reduce disparities through investigation of factors affecting cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening in U.S. community health care settings.

METHODS

We collected multilevel, longitudinal cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening process data from clinical and administrative sources on &gt;9 million racially and ethnically diverse individuals across 10 heterogeneous health care systems with cohorts beginning January 1, 2010. To facilitate comparisons across organ types and highlight data breadth, we calculated frequencies of multilevel characteristics and volumes of screening and diagnostic tests/procedures and abnormalities.

RESULTS

Variations in patient, provider, and facility characteristics reflected the PROSPR II health care systems and differing target populations. PRCs identified incident diagnoses of invasive cancers, in situ cancers, and precancers (invasive: 372 cervical, 24,131 colorectal, 11,205 lung; in situ: 911 colorectal, 32 lung; precancers: 13,838 cervical, 554,499 colorectal).

CONCLUSIONS

PROSPR II's research agenda aims to advance: (i) conceptualization and measurement of the cancer screening process, its multilevel factors, and quality; (ii) knowledge of cancer disparities; and (iii) evaluation of the COVID-19 pandemic's initial impacts on cancer screening. We invite researchers to collaborate with PROSPR II investigators.

IMPACT

PROSPR II is a valuable data resource for cancer screening researchers.

Novel Application of Predictive Modeling: A Tailored Approach to Promoting HCC Surveillance in Patients With Cirrhosis

OBJECTIVE

There has been increased interest in interventions to promote hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance given low utilization and high proportions of late stage detection. Accurate prediction of patients likely versus unlikely to respond to interventions could allow a cost-effective approach to outreach and facilitate targeting more intensive interventions to likely non-responders.

DESIGN

We conducted a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial evaluating a mailed outreach strategy to promote HCC surveillance among 1200 cirrhosis patients at a safety-net health system between December 2014 and March 2017. We developed regularized logistic regression (RLR) and gradient boosting machine (GBM) algorithm models to predict surveillance completion during each of the 3 screening rounds in a training set (n = 960). Model performance was assessed using multiple performance metrics in an independent test set (n = 240).

RESULTS

Among 1200 patients, surveillance was completed in 41-47% of patients over the three rounds. The RLR and GBM models demonstrated good discriminatory accuracy, with area under receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves of 0.67 and 0.66 respectively in the first surveillance round and improved to 0.77 by the third surveillance round after incorporating prior screening behavior as a feature. Additional performance characteristics including the Brier score, Hosmer-Lemeshow test and reliability diagrams were also evaluated. The most important variables for the predictive model were prior screening completion status and past primary care contact.

CONCLUSIONS

Predictive models can help stratify patients' likelihood to respond to surveillance outreach invitations, facilitating tailored strategies to maximize effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HCC surveillance population health programs.

A Novel Mixed Methods Approach Combining Geospatial Mapping and Qualitative Inquiry to Identify Multilevel Policy Targets: The Focused Rapid Assessment Process (fRAP) Applied to Cancer Survivorship

Multi-level perspectives across communities, medical systems and policy environments are needed, but few methods are available for health services researchers with limited resources. We developed a mixed method health policy approach, the focused Rapid Assessment Process (fRAP), that is designed to uncover multi-level modifiable barriers and facilitators contributing to public health issues. We illustrate with a study applying fRAP to the issue of cancer survivorship care. Through this multi-level investigation we identified two major modifiable areas impacting high-quality cancer survivorship care: 1) the importance of cancer survivorship guidelines/data, 2) the need for improved oncology-primary care relationships. This article contributes to the mixed methods literature by coupling geospatial mapping to qualitative rapid assessment to efficiently identify policy change targets.

Achieving a multilevel evidence-based approach to improve cancer care in the U.S. post-COVID era: What is the role of management?

In 2013, the Institute of Medicine already had declared the state of U.S. cancer care as "a delivery system in crisis." Beginning in early 2020, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically revealed the fragile nature of the U.S. health system. As a microcosm of that larger health system, cancer care can provide us with opportunities for innovative thinking and new solutions. This paper describes a series of public and private-sector cancer care initiatives that are the building blocks for a multilevel evidence-based approach to improve cancer care in the post-COVID era. Achieving these objectives requires significant managerial policy decisions, some risk taking, and the development of organizational strategies that involve collaboration within the managerial and clinical leadership. Such strategies should reflect adaptability to navigate the complex and changing science, policy and financing environment, while retaining the central values of patient-centered care. As suggested by Edward Deming, an early pioneer in quality-improvement initiatives, the problems are with the system, and the system belongs to management. Though future challenges are undefined and likely to be significant, the foundational elements of a multilevel, evidence-based approach for improving cancer care are established and able to be built upon and will offer application in the post-COVID era.

Conceptual Model for the Hepatocellular Carcinoma Screening Continuum: Current Status and Research Agenda

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) continues to have a dismal prognosis, with 5-year survival below 20%. This poor prognosis can be in part attributed to failures along the cancer screening process continuum such as underuse of screening in at risk patients and appropriate treatments for patients with HCC. Better understanding these process failures, and how they compare to those seen in other cancer types, can help inform potential intervention targets and strategies to reduce HCC-related mortality. Herein, we outline a conceptual model with several discrete steps in the HCC screening process continuum including risk assessment, screening initiation, follow-up of screening results, diagnostic evaluation, and treatment evaluation. The conceptual model illustrates how each step in the screening process is prone to delays or failure, resulting in worse outcomes such as late stage diagnosis or poor survival, and how factors at the patient, provider, and health care system levels can contribute to these failures. We compare cancer screening processes for HCC with those employed in breast and colorectal cancer screening to identify opportunities for improvement. The Translational Liver Cancer consortium was recently established by the National Cancer Institute with the goal of improving early detection of HCC. Studies designed to address failures in the HCC screening process continuum will help accomplish this goal.

A Teachable Moment: Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Companions Waiting for Outpatients Undergoing a Colonoscopy

To determine colorectal cancer (CRC) screening knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and preferences for a future CRC screening educational intervention among adults (companions) waiting for outpatients undergoing a colonoscopy. We approached 384 companions at three endoscopy centers associated with one healthcare system to complete a survey from March to July 2017. The survey assessed CRC and CRC screening knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and preferences for a future CRC screening educational intervention. There were 164 companions at average risk for CRC that completed a self-administered survey. Among average-risk companions, 23% were not within screening guidelines. Additionally, 74% of those not within guidelines reported that they had never completed a CRC screening test. The most frequently reported barriers to CRC screening were the perception of not needing screening because they were asymptomatic and lack of a provider recommendation for screening. Companions suggested that a future CRC screening intervention include a brochure and/or a brief video, featuring men and women from different races/ethnicities, a CRC survivor, and a healthcare professional. Almost one-fourth of average-risk companions waiting at endoscopy centers were not within CRC screening guidelines, providing a teachable moment to recruit companions to participate in an educational intervention to encourage screening. Companions provided suggestions (e.g., content and channel) for a future intervention to promote CRC screening in this population.

Cancer prevention, risk reduction, and control: opportunities for the next decade of health care delivery research

In this commentary, we discuss opportunities to optimize cancer care delivery in the next decade building from evidence and advancements in the conceptualization and implementation of multi-level translational behavioral interventions. We summarize critical issues and discoveries describing new directions for translational behavioral research in the coming decade based on the promise of the accelerated application of this evidence within learning health systems. To illustrate these advances, we discuss cancer prevention, risk reduction (particularly precision prevention and early detection), and cancer treatment and survivorship (particularly risk- and need-stratified comprehensive care) and propose opportunities to equitably improve outcomes while addressing clinician shortages and cross-system coordination. We also discuss the impacts of COVID-19 and potential advances of scientific knowledge in the context of existing evidence, the need for adaptation, and potential areas of innovation to meet the needs of converging crises (e.g., fragmented care, workforce shortages, ongoing pandemic) in cancer health care delivery. Finally, we discuss new areas for exploration by applying key lessons gleaned from implementation efforts guided by advances in behavioral health.

Provider- and patient-level predictors of oral anticancer agent initiation and adherence in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Background

Improving oral anticancer agent (OAA) initiation and adherence is the important quality‐of‐care issues, particularly since one fourth of anticancer agents being developed will be administered orally. Our objective was to identify provider‐ and patient‐level characteristics associated with OAA initiation and adherence among individuals with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

Methods

We used state cancer registry data linked to multi‐payer claims data to identify patients with mRCC diagnosed in 2004–2015. Provider data were obtained from North Carolina Health Professions Data System and the National Plan & Provider Enumeration System. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence limits (CLs) using modified Poisson regression to evaluate factors associated with OAA initiation and adherence.

Results

Among the 207 (out of 687) patients who initiated an OAA following mRCC diagnosis and survived 90 days, median proportion of days covered was 0.91. Patients with a modal provider specializing in hematology/medical oncology were much more likely to initiate OAAs than those seen by other specialties. Additionally, patients with a female provider were more likely to initiate OAAs than those with a male provider. Compared to patients treated by providers practicing in both urban and rural areas, patients with providers practicing solely in urban areas were more likely to initiate OAAs, after controlling for patient‐level factors (RR = 1.37; 95% CL: 1.09–1.73). Medicare patients were less likely to be adherent than those with private insurance (RR = 0.61; 95% CL: 0.42–0.87).

Conclusions

Our results suggest that provider‐ and patient‐level factors influence OAA initiation in patients with mRCC but only insurance type was associated with adherence.

Understanding the processes that Federally Qualified Health Centers use to select and implement colorectal cancer screening interventions: a qualitative study

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is highly effective at reducing cancer-related morbidity and mortality, yet screening rates remain suboptimal. Evidence-based interventions can increase screening rates, particularly when they target multiple levels (e.g., patients, providers, health care systems). However, effective interventions remain underutilized. Thus, there is a pressing need to build capacity to select and implement multilevel CRC screening interventions. We report on formative research aimed at understanding how Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) staff select and implement CRC screening interventions, which will inform development of capacity-building strategies. We report the qualitative findings from a study that used a mixed methods design, starting with a quantitative survey followed by a qualitative study. In-depth interviews were conducted with 28 staff from 14 FQHCs in 8 states. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided interview questions and data analysis. Related to the CFIR process domain, few respondents described conducting formal assessments of factors contributing to low screening rates prior to planning their interventions. Many described engaging champions, implementation leaders, and external change agents. Few described a systematic approach to executing implementation plans beyond conducting plan-do-study-act cycles. Reflection and evaluation consisted primarily of reviewing Uniform Data System performance measures. Findings also include themes related to factors influencing these implementation processes. Although FQHCs are implementing CRC screening interventions, they are not actively targeting the multilevel factors influencing their CRC screening rates. Our findings on gaps in FQHCs' implementation processes will inform development of strategies to build capacity to select and implement multilevel CRC screening interventions.

The Growth of Integrated Care Models in Urology

With heightened awareness of health care outcomes and efficiencies and reimbursement-based metrics, it is ever more important that urologists consider the effects of integrated care models on physicians/staff/clinics fulfillment and patient outcomes, and whether and how to optimally implement these models within their unique practice settings. Despite growing evidence that integrating care improves outcomes, uncertainty persists regarding which approach is most efficient and achievable in terms of specialty considerations and financial resources. In this article, we discuss strategies for integrating urologic care and its impact on current and future health care delivery.

Determinants of Guideline-Discordant Breast Cancer Care

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based breast cancer treatment guidelines recommend the most appropriate course of therapy based on tumor characteristics and extent of disease. Evaluating the multilevel factors associated with guideline discordance is critical to identifying strategies to eliminate breast cancer survival disparities.

METHODS

We identified females diagnosed with a first primary, stage I-III breast cancer between the ages of 20-69 years of age from the population-based Seattle-Puget Sound Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry. Participants completed a survey about social support, utilization of patient support services, hypothesized barriers to care, and initiation of breast cancer treatment. We used logistic regression to estimate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Among 1,390 participants, 10% reported guideline-discordant care. In analyses adjusted for patient-level sociodemographic factors, individuals who did not have someone to go with them to appointments or drive them home (OR 1.96; 95% CI, 1.09-3.59) and those who had problems talking to their doctors or their staff (OR 2.03; 95% CI, 1.13-3.64) were more likely to be guideline discordant than those with social support or without such problems, respectively. Use of patient support services was associated with a 43% lower odds of guideline discordance (OR 0.57; 95% CI, 0.36-0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Although guideline discordance in this cohort of early-stage breast cancer survivors diagnosed <70 years of age was low, instrumental social support, patient support services, and communication with doctors and their staff emerged as potential multilevel intervention targets for improving breast cancer care delivery.

IMPACT

This study supports extending the reach of interventions designed to improve guideline concordance.

Impact of Structured Nurse Leader Rounds on Satisfaction With Nursing Care Among Patients With Cancer

BACKGROUND

The patient satisfaction rate is considered a challenge for nurse leaders, especially among patients with cancer, due to the complexity of the disease, diagnostic procedures, and treatment.

AIM

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of structured nurse leader rounds (NLRs) on satisfaction with nursing care among patients with cancer. Moreover, we assessed the relationship among NLRs, patient satisfaction, and demographical variables.

METHODS

A two-group posttest design was used in four adult inpatient oncology units in a specialized oncology center. A stratified random sampling technique was utilized to select 169 patients for the experimental group (80 patients) and control group (89 patients). Structured leader rounds were conducted by nurse leaders using a scripted nurse leader tool to standardize the rounds in the experimental group, while the unstructured leader round was conducted in the control group. Patient satisfaction was measured using the Patient Satisfaction with Nursing Care Quality Questionnaire.

RESULTS

The findings revealed that there was a significant difference in total score of patients' satisfaction between study groups (t = -9.213, p > .001). Conversely, the structured leader round has a significant impact on the patient's experience with nurse concern and caring (t = -2.054, p = .042).

CONCLUSIONS

Adoption of a structured NLR has a significant impact on improving patient satisfaction in an oncology setting where patients receive care from many disciplines, such as surgical, medical, radiotherapy, and radiology.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Efficient structured NLRs of nursing professionals are important for enhancing the quality of nursing care and patient satisfaction.

Delay in the Diagnosis of Breast and Colorectal Cancer in People With Severe Mental Disorders

BACKGROUND

People with severe mental disorders have a worse cancer prognosis, with higher mortality rates than the general population, and this could be partially attributed to a later detection. Breast cancer and colorectal cancer have mass population screenings in Spain, but the influence in early diagnosis is unknown in persons with severe mental disorders.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the severity of breast and colorectal cancers at diagnosis in people with and without mental disorders.

METHODS

This was an observational, retrospective, case-control study with 1:2 matching performed in Eastern Spain. Data were retrieved for analysis from electronic medical records.

RESULTS

The study included 111 oncology patients (75 with breast cancer and 36 with colorectal cancer). Individuals with mental disorders had a significantly higher (P = .002) relative risk (odds ratio [OR], 3.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.60-9.65) to be diagnosed with an advanced tumor stage (clinical stages IIIA, IIIB, IIIC, and IV), for both breast and colorectal cancers when analyzed separately. The variables associated with advanced cancer at the time of diagnosis were the presence of a previous mental disorder (OR, 4.67; 95% CI, 1.73-12.61) and older age (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.02-1.14).

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with severe mental disorders showed a higher risk of being diagnosed with breast and colorectal cancers at advanced stages.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Cancer screening for earlier detection and intervention in people with severe mental disorders needs improvement. Mental health nurses, screening nurses, and oncology nurses could serve an essential role in increasing the screening adherence of this group of individuals.

Improving Nurses’ Hand-off Process on Oncology Setting Using Lean Management Principles

Background: Patients in oncology setting are struggling with the complexed disease, and long and intensive treatment options. This increase the need of patients for more coordination and effective hand-off between health providers including nurses. Aims: The main aim of this project is to improve the effectiveness of hand-off between nurses in the oncology setting using lean management principles. Methods: One group pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design was conducted at King Hussain Cancer Center during quarter two to quarter four in 2017. The project was conducted using the lean tools including root cause analysis, redesigning the hand-off process; using structured tools, and standardization of the hand-off process. Results: The finding of this project showed a significant decreasing in the hand-off duration and the incidence of events related to nursing practice deviation in post-intervention. Moreover, the results showed that the nurse satisfaction score was improved. However, there is a little difference in patient satisfaction results between two quarters for overall satisfaction and per each domain. Conclusion: The project approved that the use of structured tools, safety briefing, and standardized hand-off process play important role in improving the effectiveness of the hand-off process.

Use of Evidence-Based Interventions and Implementation Strategies to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening in Federally Qualified Health Centers

While colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates have been increasing in the general population, rates are considerably lower in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), which serve a large proportion of uninsured and medically vulnerable patients. Efforts to screen eligible patients must be accelerated if we are to reach the national screening goal of 80% by 2018 and beyond. To inform this work, we conducted a survey of key informants at FQHCs in eight states to determine which evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to promote CRC screening are currently being used, and which implementation strategies are being employed to ensure that the interventions are executed as intended. One hundred and forty-eight FQHCs were invited to participate in the study, and 56 completed surveys were received for a response rate of 38%. Results demonstrated that provider reminder and recall systems were the most commonly used EBIs (44.6%) while the most commonly used implementation strategy was the identification of barriers (84.0%). The mean number of EBIs that were fully implemented at the centers was 2.4 (range 0-7) out of seven. Almost one-quarter of respondents indicated that their FQHCs were not using any EBIs to increase CRC screening. Full implementation of EBIs was correlated with higher CRC screening rates. These findings identify gaps as well as the preferences and needs of FQHCs in selecting and implementing EBIs for CRC screening.

Multilevel Predictors of Continued Adherence to Breast Cancer Screening Among Women Ages 50-74 Years in a Screening Population

Background: U.S. women of ages 50-74 years are recommended to receive screening mammography at least biennially. Our objective was to evaluate multilevel predictors of nonadherence among screened women, as these are not well known. Materials and Methods: A cohort study was conducted among women of ages 50-74 years with a screening mammogram in 2011 with a negative finding (Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System 1 or 2) within Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR) consortium research centers. We evaluated the association between woman-level factors, radiology facility, and PROSPR research center, and nonadherence to breast cancer screening guidelines, defined as not receiving breast imaging within 27 months of an index screening mammogram. Multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Results: Nonadherence to guideline-recommended screening interval was 15.5% among 51,241 women with a screening mammogram. Non-Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander women, women of other races, heavier women, and women of ages 50-59 years had a greater odds of nonadherence. There was no association with ZIP code median income. Nonadherence varied by research center and radiology facility (variance = 0.10, standard error = 0.03). Adjusted radiology facility nonadherence rates ranged from 10.0% to 26.5%. One research center evaluated radiology facility communication practices for screening reminders and scheduling, but these were not associated with nonadherence. Conclusions: Breast cancer screening interval nonadherence rates in screened women varied across radiology facilities even after adjustment for woman-level characteristics and research center. Future studies should investigate other characteristics of facilities, practices, and health systems to determine factors integral to increasing continued adherence to breast cancer screening.

How Do Women View Risk-Based Mammography Screening? A Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Decades of persuasive messages have reinforced the importance of traditional screening mammography at regular intervals. A potential new paradigm, risk-based screening, adjusts mammography frequency based on a woman's estimated breast cancer risk in order to maximize mortality reduction while minimizing false positives and overdiagnosis. Women's views of risk-based screening are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To explore women's views and personal acceptability of a potential risk-based mammography screening paradigm.

DESIGN

Four semi-structured focus group discussions about screening mammography and surveys before provision of information about risk-based screening. We analyzed coded focus group transcripts using a mixed deductive (content analysis) and inductive (grounded theory) approach.

PARTICIPANTS

Convenience sample of 29 women (40-74 years old) with no personal history of breast cancer recruited by print and online media in New Hampshire and Vermont.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven out of 29 women reported having undergone mammography screening. All participants were white and most were highly educated. Some women accepted the idea that early cancer detection with traditional screening was beneficial-although many also reported hearing inconsistent recommendations from clinicians and mixed messages from media reports about mammography. Some women were familiar with a risk-based screening paradigm (primarily related to cervical cancer, n = 8) and thought matching screening mammography frequency to personal risk made sense (n = 8). Personal acceptability of risk-based screening was mixed. Some believed risk-based screening could reduce the harms of false positives and overdiagnosis (n = 7). Others thought screening less often might result in missing a dangerous diagnosis (n = 14). Many (n = 18) expressed concerns about the feasibility of risk-based screening and questioned whether breast cancer risk estimates could be accurate. Some suspected that risk-based mammography was motivated by a desire to save money (n = 6).

CONCLUSION

Some women thought risk-based screening made sense. Willingness to abandon traditional screening for the new paradigm was mixed. Broad acceptability of risk-based screening will require clearer communication about its rationale and feasibility and consistent messages from the health care team.

Multilevel Examination of Health Disparity: The Role of Policy Implementation in Neighborhood Context, in Patient Resources, and in Healthcare Facilities on Later Stage of Breast Cancer Diagnosis

BACKGROUND

There is a substantial racial/ethnic disparity in female breast cancer mortality in Chicago between non-Hispanic black (NHblack) and Hispanic patients compared with their non-Hispanic white (NHwhite) counterparts. This observation prompted a multilevel examination of factors that might account for the disparity, with the goal of identifying potential policy interventions that might meaningfully address it METHODS: In the Breast Cancer Care in Chicago study, 411 NHblack, 397 NHwhite, and 181 Hispanic patients diagnosed between the ages of 30 and 79 were interviewed, and medical records were abstracted for information on screening and diagnostic follow-up. We conducted a multilevel analysis to assess the role of neighborhood context, patient resources, facility characteristics, and mode of detection in determining the disparity in later stage at diagnosis.

RESULTS

After adjustment for neighborhood context, mode of detection, and facility accreditation/resources, there was no significant disparity in later stage breast cancer diagnosis between NHblack or Hispanic patients compared with NHwhite patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that racial/ethnic differences in mode of detection and facility accreditation/resources account for most of the disparity in stage at diagnosis. Understanding the causes of differential screen detection and access to highly accredited facilities could inform interventions to meaningfully address this disparity.

IMPACT

Multilevel approaches to studying health disparities are becoming the research standard for understanding and addressing health disparities. Optimal design of multilevel interventions addressing disparities in later stage diagnosis would benefit from enhanced understanding of pathways to detection and diagnosis available to patients in medically underserved communities.

A qualitative study exploring patient motivations for screening for lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) of the chest for lung cancer screening of heavy smokers was given a 'B' rating by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) in 2013, and gained widespread insurance coverage in the U.S. in 2015. Lung cancer screening has since had low uptake. However, for those that do choose to screen, little is known about patient motivations for completing screening in real-world practice.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the motivations for screening-eligible patients to screen for lung cancer.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 20 LDCT screen-completed men and women who were members of an integrated mixed-model healthcare system in Washington State. From June to September 2015, participants were recruited and individual interviews performed about motivations to screen for lung cancer. Audio-recorded interviews were transcribed and analyzed using inductive content analysis by three investigators.

RESULTS

Four primary themes emerged as motivations for completing LDCT lung cancer screening: 1) trust in the referring clinician; 2) early-detection benefit; 3) low or limited harm perception; and 4) friends or family with advanced cancer.

CONCLUSION

Participants in our study were primarily motivated to screen for lung cancer based on perceived benefit of early-detection, absence of safety concerns, and personal relationships. Our findings provide new insights about patient motivations to screen, and can potentially be used to improve lung cancer screening uptake and shared decision-making processes.

Deconstructing Decisions to Initiate, Maintain, or Discontinue Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Mixed-Methods Study

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

Adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) has been shown to improve survival in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer survivors, but as many as half do not complete recommended treatment. Management of medication-related side effects and engagement with providers are two potentially modifiable factors, but their associations with adherence are not well understood. The aims were to build on survey results to qualitatively explore survivors' experiences with prescribed AET to (a) describe appraisal and management of AET side effects and (b) deconstruct decisions to initiate, discontinue, or maintain AET.
.

RESEARCH APPROACH

The authors used a mixed-methods explanatory sequence research design with a qualitative emphasis.
.

SETTING

Survivors were recruited from a clinical cancer registry maintained at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, which includes the Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center (National Cancer Institute-designated), in Dallas.
.

PARTICIPANTS

452 survivors completed a survey, and 30 took part in telephone interviews.
.

METHODOLOGIC APPROACH

Qualitative methods were used in which the authors recorded and transcribed interviews for analysis and used open coding to reduce data into themes.
.

FINDINGS

Among adherent survivors, the themes of tolerance of side effects and perseverance were strong. Nonadherent survivors expressed more difficulty managing side effects and perceived fewer benefits when side effects were bothersome. The most common side effects mentioned by all survivors were menopausal symptoms and joint pain; less common side effects were cognitive decline and cardiac distress. Some sought advice from their oncology team. Nonadherent survivors appeared initially motivated to maintain AET but identified a tolerance limit for side effects after which a provider's recommendation was less influential in their decision to maintain or discontinue AET.
.

INTERPRETATION

This study elucidated adherence as a complex continuum of behaviors, appraisals, and decision points. These insights may be particularly useful in counseling survivors taking AET and promoting timely delivery of clinical interventions to enhance adherence.
.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

Nurses should be involved in the planning and implementation of clinical interventions to manage side effects and other barriers to AET adherence.

"The disease is mine, the body is mine, I decide": Individual, interpersonal, and institutional barriers and facilitators among survivors of women's cancers in Andean countries

Recent national cancer plans address high cancer mortality in Latin America, particularly in Andean countries. Little is known about which individual, interpersonal, and institutional facilitators and barriers persist, particularly from the perspective of cancer survivors. We conducted 15 semi-structured interviews with survivors of breast and cervical cancers during and after a Pan American Health Organization sponsored conference on women's cancers in Lima, Peru. We analyzed data using an inductive content analysis approach. Patients reported primarily psychosocial barriers and facilitators at individual, interpersonal, and institutional levels. Additionally, survivors provided recom-mendations to refine existing policy to improve the cancer care experience for patients.

A Mobile Breast Cancer Survivorship Care App: Pilot Study

Background

Cancer survivors living in rural areas experience unique challenges due to additional burdens, such as travel and limited access to specialists. Rural survivors of breast cancer have reported poorer outcomes, poorer mental health and physical functioning, and lower-than-average quality of life compared to urban survivors.

Objective

To explore the feasibility and acceptability of developing a mobile health survivorship care app to facilitate care coordination; support medical, psychosocial, and practical needs; and improve survivors' long-term health outcomes.

Methods

An interactive prototype app, SmartSurvivor, was developed that included recommended survivorship care plan components. The prototype's feasibility and acceptability were tested by a sample of breast cancer survivors (n=6), primary care providers (n=4), and an oncologist (n=1).

Results

Overall, both survivors and providers felt that SmartSurvivor was a potentially valuable tool to support long-term survivorship care plan objectives. Portability, accessibility, and having one place for all contact, treatment, symptom tracking, and medication summaries was highly valued.

Conclusions

Our pilot study indicates that SmartSurvivor is a feasible and acceptable approach to meeting survivorship care objectives and the needs of both breast cancer survivors and their health care providers. Exploration of mobile health options for supporting survivorship care plan needs is a promising area of research.

Racial disparity in survival from estrogen and progesterone receptor-positive breast cancer: implications for reducing breast cancer mortality disparities

INTRODUCTION

Non-Latina black breast cancer patients experience a shorter survival from breast cancer than their non-Latina white counterparts. We compared breast cancer-specific survival for the subset of black and white patients with estrogen and/or progesterone receptor-positive tumors that are generally targeted with endocrine therapy.

METHODS

Using data collected from a population-based cohort of breast cancer patients from Chicago, IL, Kaplan-Meier survival curves and hazard functions were generated and proportional hazards models were estimated to determine the black/white disparity in time to death from breast cancer while adjusting for age at diagnosis, patient characteristics, treatment-related variables, and tumor grade and stage.

RESULTS

In regression models, hazard of breast cancer death among ER/PR-positive patients was at least 4 times higher for black than for white patients in all models tested. Notably, even after adjusting for stage at diagnosis, tumor grade, and treatment variables (including initiation of systemic adjuvant therapies), the hazard ratio for death from ER/PR-positive breast cancer between black and white women was 4.39 (95% CI 1.76, 10.9, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed a racial disparity in breast cancer survival for patients diagnosed with ER/PR-positive tumors that did not appear to be due to differences in tumor stage, grade, or therapy initiation in black patients, suggesting that there may be racial differences in the molecular characteristics of hormone receptor-positive tumors, such that ER/PR-positive tumors in black patients may be less responsive to standard treatments.

Improving the Transition From Oncology to Primary Care Teams: A Case for Shared Leadership

This article discusses the case of a 47-year-old woman who underwent primary therapy with curative intent for breast cancer. The case illustrates a number of failure events in transferring information and responsibility from oncology to primary care teams. The article emphasizes the importance of shared leadership, as multiple team members, dispersed in time and space, pursue their own objectives while achieving the common goal of coordinating care for survivors of cancer transitioning across settings. Shared leadership is defined as a team property comprising shared responsibility and mutual influence between the patient and the patient’s family, primary care providers, and oncology teams, whereby they lead each other toward quality and safety of care. Teams, including the patient-family, should achieve leadership when their contribution is relevant in managing task interdependence during transition. Shared leadership fosters coordinated actions to enable functioning as an integrated team-of-teams. This article illustrates how shared leadership can make a difference to coordinate interfaces and pathways, from therapy with curative intent to the follow-up and management of survivors of breast cancer. The detailed case is elaborated as a clinical vignette. It can be used by care providers and researchers to consider the need for new models of care for survivors of cancer by addressing the following questions. Who accepts shared leadership, how, with whom, and under what conditions? What is the evidence that supports the answers to these questions? The detailed case is also valuable for medical and allied health professional education.

Prioritizing US Cervical Cancer Prevention With Results From a Geospatial Model

PURPOSE

To determine if differences in screening and vaccination patterns across the population may accentuate ethnic and geographic variation in future burden of disease.

METHODS

Using Cancer in North America data provided by the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries, county cervical cancer incidence trends from 1995 to 2009 were modeled for the entire United States using ecologic covariates. Rates for health service areas were also modeled by ethnicity. State-level incidence was mapped together with Papanicolaou (Pap) screening, past 3 years (women ≥ 18 years old), and three-dose human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine coverage (girls 13 to 17 years old) to identify potential priority areas for preventive services.

RESULTS

US cervical cancer incidence decreased more during the periods 1995 to 1999 and 2000 to 2004 than during the period 2005 to 2009. During these 15 years, the most affected areas became increasingly confined to Appalachia, the lower Mississippi Valley, the Deep South, Texas, and Florida. Hispanic and black women experienced a higher incidence of cervical cancer than both white and Asian and Pacific Islander women during each period. Women in 10 of 17 states/districts with a high incidence (≥ 8.14/100,000) reported low Pap testing (< 78.5%), HPV vaccine coverage (< 33.9%), or both prevention technologies.

CONCLUSION

The decline in cervical cancer incidence has slowed in recent years. Access to HPV vaccination, targeted screening, and treatment in affected populations is needed to reduce cervical cancer disparities in the future.

Health System-Level Factors Influence the Implementation of Complex Innovations in Cancer Care

BACKGROUND

The movement of new knowledge and tools into healthcare settings continues to be a slow, complex and poorly understood process. In this paper, we present the system-level factors important to the implementation of synoptic reporting tools in two initiatives (or cases) in Nova Scotia, Canada.

METHODS

This study used case study methodology. Data were collected through interviews with key informants, document analysis, non-participant observation and tool use/examination. Analysis involved production of case histories, analysis of each case and a cross-case analysis.

RESULTS

The healthcare system's delivery and support structure, information technology infrastructure, policy environment and history of collaboration and inter-organizational relationships influenced tool implementation in the two cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings provide an in-depth, nuanced understanding of how healthcare system components can influence the implementation of a new tool in clinical practice.

Determinants of patient-reported experience of cancer services responsiveness

Background

In coming years, patient-reported data are expected to play a more prominent role in ensuring early and efficient detection of healthcare system dysfunctions, developing interventions and evaluating their effects on health outcomes, and monitoring quality of care from the patient’s perspective. The concept of responsiveness relates to patient-reported experience measures that focus on the system’s response to service users’ legitimate expectations. We explored this concept in an effort to address unresolved issues related to measuring and interpreting patient experience. Our objectives in this study were to report on patients’ perceptions of cancer services responsiveness and to identify patient characteristics and organizational attributes that are potential determinants of a positive patient-reported experience.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was conducted of 1379 cancer patients in nine participating ambulatory cancer clinics in hospitals across the province of Quebec, Canada. They were invited to complete the Cancer Services Responsiveness tool, a 19-item questionnaire evaluating patients’ perceptions of the responsiveness of cancer services. Sociodemographic data and self-reported clinical and organizational data were collected. Descriptive statistical analysis, univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were performed.

Results

The patients surveyed generally perceived cancer services as highly responsive. The individual determinants of overall responsiveness found to be significant were self-assessed health status, age, and education level; organizational determinants were academic affiliation and geographic location of the clinic.

Discussion

Responsiveness refers to distinctive indicators of healthcare quality focused on patient-provider interactions and presents a complementary picture to other patient-reported experience measures. The identified determinants of patients’ positive experience with cancer services provide valuable information to guide care providers in targeting quality improvements.

Conclusions

Finally, our results suggest these determinants should be further studied to eliminate confounders and produce usable results.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-015-1104-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Physician perspectives on colorectal cancer surveillance care in a changing environment

The purpose of this formative qualitatively driven mixed-methods study was to refine a measurement tool for use in interventions to improve colorectal cancer (CRC) surveillance care. We employed key informant interviews to explore the attitudes, practices, and preferences of four physician specialties. A national survey, literature review, and expert consultation also informed survey development. Cognitive pretesting obtained participant feedback to improve the survey's face and content validity and reliability. Results showed that additional domains were needed to reflect contemporary interdisciplinary trends in survivorship care, evolving practice changes and current health policy. Observed dissonance in specialists' perspectives poses challenges for the development of interventions and psychometrically sound measurement. Implications for future research include need for a flexible care model with enhanced communication and role definitions among clinical specialists, improvements in surveillance at multilevels (patients, providers, and systems), and measurement tools that focus on multispecialty involvement and the changing practice and policy environment.

Unifying screening processes within the PROSPR consortium: a conceptual model for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening

General frameworks of the cancer screening process are available, but none directly compare the process in detail across different organ sites. This limits the ability of medical and public health professionals to develop and evaluate coordinated screening programs that apply resources and population management strategies available for one cancer site to other sites. We present a trans-organ conceptual model that incorporates a single screening episode for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers into a unified framework based on clinical guidelines and protocols; the model concepts could be expanded to other organ sites. The model covers four types of care in the screening process: risk assessment, detection, diagnosis, and treatment. Interfaces between different provider teams (eg, primary care and specialty care), including communication and transfer of responsibility, may occur when transitioning between types of care. Our model highlights across each organ site similarities and differences in steps, interfaces, and transitions in the screening process and documents the conclusion of a screening episode. This model was developed within the National Cancer Institute-funded consortium Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR). PROSPR aims to optimize the screening process for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer and includes seven research centers and a statistical coordinating center. Given current health care reform initiatives in the United States, this conceptual model can facilitate the development of comprehensive quality metrics for cancer screening and promote trans-organ comparative cancer screening research. PROSPR findings will support the design of interventions that improve screening outcomes across multiple cancer sites.

Unveiling SEER-CAHPS®: a new data resource for quality of care research

BACKGROUND

Since 1990, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have collaborated to create linked data resources to improve our understanding of patterns of care, health care costs, and trends in utilization. However, existing data linkages have not included measures of patient experiences with care.

OBJECTIVE

To describe a new resource for quality of care research based on a linkage between the Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) patient surveys and the NCI's Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) data.

DESIGN

This is an observational study of CAHPS respondents and includes both fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with and without cancer. The data linkage includes: CAHPS survey data collected between 1998 and 2010 to assess patient reports on multiple aspects of their care, such as access to needed and timely care, doctor communication, as well as patients' global ratings of their personal doctor, specialists, overall health care, and their health plan; SEER registry data (1973-2007) on cancer site, stage, treatment, death information, and patient demographics; and longitudinal Medicare claims data (2002-2011) for fee-for-service beneficiaries on utilization and costs of care.

PARTICIPANTS

In total, 150,750 respondents were in the cancer cohort and 571,318 were in the non-cancer cohort.

MAIN MEASURES

The data linkage includes SEER data on cancer site, stage, treatment, death information, and patient demographics, in addition to longitudinal data from Medicare claims and information on patient experiences from CAHPS surveys.

KEY RESULTS

Sizable proportions of cases from common cancers (e.g., breast, colorectal, prostate) and short-term survival cancers (e.g., pancreas) by time since diagnosis enable comparisons across the cancer care trajectory by MA vs. FFS coverage.

CONCLUSIONS

SEER-CAHPS is a valuable resource for information about Medicare beneficiaries' experiences of care across different diagnoses and treatment modalities, and enables comparisons by type of insurance.

The process of engaging members from two underserved populations in the development of interventions to promote the uptake of the HPV vaccine

We describe a community-engaged research process used to develop multilevel interventions (caregivers, providers, system) to improve the uptake of human papillomavirus vaccine among adolescents by partnering with members from two underserved populations in Ohio. We began by conducting focus groups to better understand the knowledge and attitudes of caregivers and providers about the human papillomavirus vaccine and to develop teams of community members to assist with development of the interventions. The process continued with conducting writing sessions to determine the content and format of the interventions, and initial feedback was obtained during review sessions to refine the interventions prior to implementation. Using this approach, we were able to consider contextual factors that made the interventions more acceptable and relevant to members of the priority populations. Challenges included development and maintenance of a team of community members to participate in the entire intervention development process, rejection of ideas presented by academic researchers, the need to balance community members' suggestions with what was known from evidence-based research, and the time, cost, and effort associated with partnering with community members. The benefits, however, outweigh the challenges associated with using a community-engaged research process to develop interventions aimed at reducing cancer disparities among underserved populations.

Technology diffusion and prostate cancer quality of care

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of technological capacity with prostate cancer quality of care. Technological capacity was conceptualized as a market's ability to provide prostate cancer treatment with new technology, including robotic prostatectomy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we used data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked database from 2004 to 2009 to identify men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer (n = 46,274). We measured technological capacity as the number of providers performing robotic prostatectomy or IMRT per population in a health care market. We used multilevel logistic regression analysis to assess the association of technological capacity with receiving quality care according to a set of nationally endorsed quality measures, while adjusting for patient and market characteristics.

RESULTS

Overall, our findings were mixed with only subtle differences in quality of care comparing high-tech with low-tech markets. High robotic prostatectomy capacity was associated with better adherence to some quality measures, such as avoiding unnecessary bone scans (79.8% vs 73.0%; P = .003) and having follow-up with urologists (67.7% vs 62.6%; P = .023). However, for most measures, neither high robotic prostatectomy nor high-IMRT capacity was associated with significant increases in adherence rates. In fact, for 1 measure (treatment by a high-volume provider), high-IMRT capacity was associated with lower performance (23.4% vs 28.5%; P <.001).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that new technology is not clearly associated with higher quality of care. To improve quality, more specific efforts will be needed.

Follow-up to abnormal cancer screening tests: considering the multilevel context of care

The call for multilevel interventions to improve the quality of follow-up to abnormal cancer screening has been out for a decade, but published work emphasizes individual approaches, and conceptualizations differ regarding the definition of levels. To investigate the scope and methods being undertaken in this focused area of follow-up to abnormal tests (breast, colon, cervical), we reviewed recent literature and grants (2007-2012) funded by the National Cancer Institute. A structured search yielded 16 grants with varying definitions of "follow-up" (e.g., completion of recommended tests, time to diagnosis); most included minority racial/ethnic group participants. Ten grants concentrated on measurement/intervention development and 13 piloted or tested interventions (categories not mutually exclusive). All studies considered patient-level factors and effects. Although some directed interventions at provider levels, few measured group characteristics and effects of interventions on the providers or levels other than the patient. Multilevel interventions are being proposed, but clarity about endpoints, definition of levels, and measures is needed. The differences in the conceptualization of levels and factors that affect practice need empirical exploration, and we need to measure their salient characteristics to advance our understanding of how context affects cancer care delivery in a changing practice and policy environment.