Primary care provider-led cancer survivorship care in the first 5 years following initial cancer treatment: a scoping review of the barriers and solutions to implementation

PURPOSE

To synthesize the barriers to primary care provider (PCP)-led cancer survivorship care (≤ 5 years after initial cancer treatment) experienced by healthcare systems around the world, and to explore potential solutions that would succeed within a developed country.

METHODS

A scoping review of peer-reviewed articles and grey literature was conducted. Four electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, and Google Scholar) were searched for articles prior to April 2021.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven articles published across the globe (USA, Canada, Australia, European Union, and UK) met the review inclusion/exclusion criteria. The four most frequently discussed barriers to PCP-led survivorship care in healthcare systems were as follows: (1) insufficient communication between PCPs and cancer specialists, (2) limited PCP knowledge, (3) time restrictions for PCPs to provide comprehensive survivorship care, and (4) a lack of resources (e.g., survivorship care guidelines). Potential solutions to combat these barriers were as follows: (1) improving interdisciplinary communication, (2) bolstering PCP education, and (3) providing survivorship resources.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review identified and summarized key barriers and solutions to the provision of PCP-led cancer survivorship care. Importantly, the findings from this review provide insight and direction to guide optimization of cancer care practice within BC's healthcare system.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Optimizing the PCP-led survivorship care model will be a valuable contribution to the field of cancer survivorship care and will hopefully lead to more widespread use of this model, ultimately lessening the growing demand for cancer-specific care by cancer specialists.

Cancer Survivors Living in Rural Settings: A Qualitative Exploration of Concerns, Positive Experiences and Suggestions for Improvements in Survivorship Care

In Canada, the number of cancer survivors continues to increase. It is important to understand what continues to present difficulties after the completion of treatment from their perspectives. Various factors may present barriers to accessing help for the challenges they experience following treatment. Living rurally may be one such factor. This study was undertaken to explore the major challenges, positive experiences and suggestions for improvement in survivorship care from rural-dwelling Canadian cancer survivors one to three years following treatment. A qualitative descriptive analysis was conducted on written responses to open-ended questions from a national cross-sectional survey. A total of 4646 individuals living in rural areas responded to the survey. Fifty percent (2327) were male, and 2296 (49.4%) were female; 69 respondents were 18 to 29 years (1.5%); 1638 (35.3%) were 30 to 64 years; and 2926 (63.0%) were 65 years or older. The most frequently identified major challenges (n = 5448) were reduced physical capacity and the effects of treatment. Positive experiences included family and friend support and positive self-care practices. The suggestions for improvements focused on the need for better communication and information about self-care, side effect management, and programs and services, with more programs available locally for practical and emotional support.

Team Science Principles Enhance Cancer Care Delivery Quality Improvement: Interdisciplinary Implementation of Breast Cancer Screening Shared Decision Making

PURPOSE

Implementing shared decision making (SDM), recommended in screening mammography by national guidelines for women age 40-49 years, faces challenges that innovations in quality improvement and team science (TS) are poised to address. We aimed to improve the effectiveness, patient-centeredness, and efficiency of SDM in primary care for breast cancer screening.

METHODS

Our interdisciplinary team included primary and specialty care, psychology, epidemiology, communication science, engineering, and stakeholders (patients and clinicians). Over a 6-year period, we executed two iterative cycles of plan-do-study-act (PDSA) to develop, revise, and implement a SDM tool using TS principles. Patient and physician surveys and retrospective analysis of tool performance informed our first PDSA cycle. Patient and physician surveys, toolkit use, and clinical outcomes in the second PDSA cycle supported SDM implementation. We gathered team member assessments on the importance of individual TS activities.

RESULTS

Our first PDSA cycle successfully generated a SDM tool called Breast Cancer Risk Estimator, deemed valuable by 87% of patients surveyed. Our second PDSA cycle increased Breast Cancer Risk Estimator utilization, from 2,000 sessions in 2017 to 4,097 sessions in 2019 while maintaining early-stage breast cancer diagnoses. Although TS activities such as culture, trust, and communication needed to be sustained throughout the project, shared goals, research/data infrastructure support, and leadership were more important earlier in the project and persisted in the later stages of the project.

CONCLUSION

Combining rigorous quality improvement and TS principles can support the complex, interdependent, and interdisciplinary activities necessary to improve cancer care delivery exemplified by our implementation of a breast cancer screening SDM tool.

Dimensions of Proximity: An Actionable Framework to Better Understand Integrated Practices in Cancer Networks

Introduction:

This study empirically explores how dimensions of proximity that support integrated care emerge from deliberate actions within a cancer network in Quebec (Canada).

Methods:

We conduct a supplementary analysis of qualitative data from a primary multi-case study focused on collaborative governance and cancer care integration. Data from semi-structured interviews, documents and observation are analysed to find out how relationships take shape through actions that create different dimensions of proximity, and how these contribute to integrated practices.

Results:

Deliberate actions at different levels within the network create dimensions of proximity. The creation of committees and communities of practice at national and local level establish geographic proximity. Relational proximity among actors emerges to different degrees in these venues. Cognitive proximity is generated by consistent promotion of the national cancer plan and person-centred care. The priority of cancer care at policy level and prescription of common standards enhance organizational proximity. Synergy between dimensions of proximity appears essential to the emergence of integrated practices. Insufficient efforts to create technological and institutional proximity contribute to inconsistent clinical and professional integration.

Conclusion:

The concept of proximity appears a promising complement to existing models of integration, especially in complex contexts such as cancer networks.

Highlights

The multiple dimensions of proximity appear a promising complement to existing models of integration, especially in complex contexts such as cancer networks.

Leisure and Leisure Education as Resources for Rehabilitation Supports for Chronic Condition Self-Management in Rural and Remote Communities

The potential of leisure (enjoyable free time pursuits) to be a resource for chronic condition self-management (CCSM) is well-established. Because leisure pursuits are often self-determined, they have the potential to allow people to not only address self-management goals (e.g., managing symptoms through movements or stress-reducing activities) but meet important psychosocial needs (e.g., affiliation, sense of mastery) as well as support participation in a range of meaningful life situations. In this “Perspective” piece, we advocate for the ways leisure and leisure education can be resources for rehabilitation professionals to support CCSM, especially in rural and remote communities. In particular, we focus on aspects of the Taxonomy of Everyday Self-Management Strategies [TEDSS (1)] to highlight ways that embedding leisure and leisure education into supports for CCSM can strengthen rehabilitation services offered to rural and remote dwelling adults living with chronic conditions. Recognizing the breadth of leisure-related resources available in rural and remote communities, we recommend the following strategies to incorporate a focus on leisure-based self-management within rehabilitation services: (a) enhance the knowledge and capacity of rehabilitation practitioners to support leisure-based CCSM; (b) focus on coordinated leadership, patient navigation, and building multi-sectoral partnerships to better link individuals living with chronic conditions to community services and supports; and (c) educate individuals with chronic conditions and family/carers to develop knowledge, skills, awareness and confidence to use leisure as a self-management resource.

Cancer patient management: role of multidisciplinary teams

OBJECTIVES

As a cancer model recommended by numerous governments and health care systems, multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) can improve clinical decision-making and overall patient care quality. This paper aims to discuss key elements and resources, as well as contingencies for effectiveness MDTs and their meetings.

METHODS

We derived elements, resources, and contingencies for effective MDTs by analyzing articles on the themes of MDTs and MDT meetings.

RESULTS

This paper identifies key elements comprising MDT characteristics, team governance, infrastructure for MDM, MDM organization, MDM logistics, and clinical decision-making in light of patient-centeredness. Resources that facilitate an MDM functioning consist of human resources and non-human resources. The paper further detects barriers to the sustainable performance of MDTs and provide suggestions for improving their functioning in light of patients' and healthcare providers' perspectives.

CONCLUSIONS

MDTs are vital to cancer care through enabling healthcare professionals with diversity of clinical specialties to collaborate and formulate optimal treatment recommendations for patients with suspected or confirmed cancer.

Patient participation in cancer network governance: a six-year case study

Background

Patient participation in decision-making has become a hallmark of responsive healthcare systems. Cancer networks in many countries have committed to involving people living with and beyond cancer (PLC) at multiple levels. However, PLC participation in network governance remains highly variable for reasons that are poorly understood. This study aims to share lessons learned regarding mechanisms that enable PLC participation in cancer network governance.

Methods

This multiple case study, using a qualitative approach in a natural setting, was conducted over six years in three local cancer networks within the larger national cancer network in Quebec (Canada), where PLC participation is prescribed by the Cancer Directorate. Data were collected from multiple sources, including individual and focus group interviews (n = 89) with policymakers, managers, clinicians and PLC involved in national and local cancer governance committees. These data were triangulated and iteratively analysed according to a framework based on functions of collaborative governance in the network context.

Results

We identify three main mechanisms that enable PLC participation in cancer network governance: (1) consistent emphasis on patient-centred care as a network objective; (2) flexibility, time and support to translate mandated PLC representation into meaningful participation; and (3) recognition of the distinct knowledge of PLC in decision-making. The shared vision of person-centred care facilitates PLC participation. The quality of participation improves through changes in how committee meetings are conducted, and through the establishment of a national committee where PLC can pool their experience, develop skills and establish a common voice on priority issues. PLC knowledge is especially valued around particular challenges such as designing integrated care trajectories and overcoming barriers to accessing care. These three mechanisms interact to enable PLC participation in governance and are activated to varying extents in each local network.

Conclusions

This study reveals that mandating PLC representation on governance structures is a powerful context element enabling participation, but that it also delineates which governance functions are open to influence from PLC participation. While the activation of mechanisms is context dependent, the insights from this study in Quebec are transferable to cancer networks in other jurisdictions seeking to embed PLC participation in decision-making.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-06834-1.

Risk-Stratified Pathways for Cancer Survivorship Care: Insights from a Deliberative Multi-Stakeholder Consultation

Risk-stratified pathways of survivorship care seek to optimize coordination between cancer specialists and primary care physicians based on the whole person needs of the individual. While the principle is supported by leading cancer institutions, translating knowledge to practice confronts a lack of clarity about the meaning of risk stratification, uncertainties around the expectations the model holds for different actors, and health system structures that impede communication and coordination across the care continuum. These barriers must be better understood and addressed to pave the way for future implementation. Recognizing that an innovation is more likely to be adopted when user experience is incorporated into the planning process, a deliberative consultation was held as a preliminary step to developing a pilot project of risk-stratified pathways for patients transitioning from specialized oncology teams to primary care providers. This article presents findings from the deliberative consultation that sought to understand the perspectives of cancer specialists, primary care physicians, oncology nurses, allied professionals, cancer survivors and researchers regarding the following questions: what does a risk stratified model of cancer survivorship care mean to care providers and users? What are the prerequisites for translating risk stratification into practice? What challenges are involved in establishing these prerequisites? The multi-stakeholder consultation provides empirical data to guide actions that support the development of risk-stratified pathways to coordinate survivorship care.

Characterizing Low-Risk Breast and Gynecological Cancer Patients for Transition into an Oncology/Primary Care Coordinated Care Model: Findings from a Survey of Diverse Survivors in a Rural U.S. State

We conducted a survey to characterize the key attributes of racial/ethnic and geographically diverse low-risk breast and gynecologic cancer patients. We collected data regarding patients' access to primary care (PC); compliance with screening recommendations; treatment for comorbidities; logistical barriers to clinic visits; and receipt of survivorship care documentation (SCD). Survey findings informed the development of an oncology/Primary Care Provider (PCP) care coordination intervention to improve care. We distributed a cross-sectional survey among a convenience sample of 150 cancer survivors. Responses were calculated using descriptive statistics and compared based on the distance participants traveled to their appointments at the cancer center (≤30 vs. >30 miles). Of the 150 respondents, 35% traveled >30 miles for follow-up care and 78% reported having one or more comorbid condition(s). PC utilization was high: 88% reported having a PCP, and 91% indicated ≤1 yearly follow-up visit. Participants traveling >30 miles reported higher rates of logistical challenges associated with cancer center visits compared to those traveling ≤30 miles. Nearly half of respondents (46%) had not received SCD. In conclusion, survey studies such as these allow for the systematic assessment of survivor behaviors and care utilization patterns to inform the development of care coordination interventions for diverse, low-risk cancer patients.

Thematic Analysis of Challenges of Care Coordination for Underinsured and Uninsured Cancer Survivors With Chronic Conditions

IMPORTANCE

Although a majority of underinsured and uninsured patients with cancer have multiple comorbidities, many lack consistent connections with a primary care team to manage chronic conditions during and after cancer treatment. This presents a major challenge to delivering high-quality comprehensive and coordinated care.

OBJECTIVE

To describe challenges and opportunities for coordinating care in an integrated safety-net system for patients with both cancer and other chronic conditions.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This multimodal qualitative study was conducted from May 2016 to July 2019 at a county-funded, vertically integrated safety-net health system including ambulatory oncology, urgent care, primary care, and specialty care. Participants were 93 health system stakeholders (clinicians, leaders, clinical, and administrative staff) strategically and snowball sampled for semistructured interviews and observation during meetings and daily processes of care. Data collection and analysis were conducted iteratively using a grounded theory approach, followed by systematic thematic analysis to organize data, review, and interpret comprehensive findings. Data were analyzed from March 2019 to March 2020.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Multilevel factors associated with experiences of coordinating care for patients with cancer and chronic conditions among oncology and primary care stakeholders.

RESULTS

Among interviews and observation of 93 health system stakeholders, system-level factors identified as being associated with care coordination included challenges to accessing primary care, lack of communication between oncology and primary care clinicians, and leadership awareness of care coordination challenges. Clinician-level factors included unclear role delineation and lack of clinician knowledge and preparedness to manage the effects of cancer and chronic conditions.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Primary care may play a critical role in delivering coordinated care for patients with cancer and chronic diseases. This study's findings suggest a need for care delivery strategies that bridge oncology and primary care by enhancing communication, better delineating roles and responsibilities across care teams, and improving clinician knowledge and preparedness to care for patients with cancer and chronic conditions. Expanding timely access to primary care is also key, albeit challenging in resource-limited safety-net settings.

Salivary Gland Hypofunction and/or Xerostomia Induced by Nonsurgical Cancer Therapies: ISOO/MASCC/ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based recommendations for prevention and management of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia induced by nonsurgical cancer therapies.

METHODS

Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) and ASCO convened a multidisciplinary Expert Panel to evaluate the evidence and formulate recommendations. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials published between January 2009 and June 2020. The guideline also incorporated two previous systematic reviews conducted by MASCC/ISOO, which included studies published from 1990 through 2008.

RESULTS

A total of 58 publications were identified: 46 addressed preventive interventions and 12 addressed therapeutic interventions. A majority of the evidence focused on the setting of radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. For the prevention of salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia in patients with head and neck cancer, there is high-quality evidence for tissue-sparing radiation modalities. Evidence is weaker or insufficient for other interventions. For the management of salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia, intermediate-quality evidence supports the use of topical mucosal lubricants, saliva substitutes, and agents that stimulate the salivary reflex.

RECOMMENDATIONS

For patients who receive radiation therapy for head and neck cancer, tissue-sparing radiation modalities should be used when possible to reduce the risk of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia. Other risk-reducing interventions that may be offered during radiation therapy for head and neck cancer include bethanechol and acupuncture. For patients who develop salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia, interventions include topical mucosal lubricants, saliva substitutes, and sugar-free lozenges or chewing gum. For patients with head and neck cancer, oral pilocarpine and oral cevimeline, acupuncture, or transcutaneous electrostimulation may be offered after radiation therapy.Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Eliciting primary care and oncology provider perspectives on diabetes management during active cancer treatment

PURPOSE

We sought to elicit the perspectives of primary care providers (PCPs) and oncologists regarding their expectations on who should be responsible for diabetes management, as well as communication mode and frequency about diabetes care during cancer treatment.

METHODS

In-depth interviews were conducted with PCPs (physicians and nurse practitioners) and oncologists who treat cancer patients with type 2 diabetes. Interviews were audio-recorded and professionally transcribed. A grounded theory approach was used to analyze the qualitative data and identify key themes.

RESULTS

Ten PCPs and ten oncologists were interviewed between March and July 2019. Two broad themes emerged from our interviews with PCPs: (1) cancer patients pausing primary care during cancer treatments, and (2) patients with poorer prognoses and advanced cancer. The following theme emerged from our interviews with oncologists: (3) challenges in caring for cancer patients with uncontrolled diabetes. Three common themes emerged from our interviews with both PCPs and oncologists: (4) discomfort with providing care outside of respective specialty, (5) the need to individualize care plans, and (6) lack of communication across primary and oncology care.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that substantial barriers to optimal diabetes management during cancer care exist at the provider level. Interventions prioritizing effective communication and educational resources among PCPs, oncologists, and additional members of the patients' care team should be prioritized to achieve optimal outcomes.

Continuity of Cancer Care and Collaboration Between Family Physicians and Oncologists: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

Collaboration between family physicians (FPs) and oncologists can be challenging. We present the results of a randomized clinical trial of an intervention designed to improve continuity of care and interprofessional collaboration, as perceived by patients with lung cancer and their FPs.

METHODS

The intervention included (1) supplying FPs with standardized summaries related to each patient, (2) recommending that patients see their FP after receiving the cancer diagnosis, (3) supplying the oncology team with patient information resulting from FP visits, and (4) providing patients with priority access to FPs as needed. A total of 206 patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer were randomly assigned to the intervention (n = 104) or control group (n = 102), and 86.4% of involved FPs participated. Perceptions of continuity of care and interprofessional collaboration were assessed every 3 months for patients and at baseline and at the end of the study for FPs. Patient distress and health service utilization were also assessed.

RESULTS

Patients and FPs in the intervention group perceived better interprofessional collaboration (patients: P <.0001; FPs: P = .0006) than those in the control group. Patients reported better informational continuity (P = .001) and management continuity (P = .05) compared to the control group, but no differences were found for FPs (information: P = .22; management: P = .13). No effect was found with regard to patient distress or health service utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

This intervention improved patient and FP perception of interprofessional collaboration, but its effectiveness on continuity of care was less clear for FPs than for patients. Additional strategies should be considered to sustainably improve continuity of care and interprofessional collaboration.

Positive Cancer Experiences: Perspectives From Cancer Survivors

The purpose was to review the perspectives of cancer survivors about what they perceive constitutes positive cancer experiences. A national survey was conducted in collaboration with 10 Canadian provinces to identify experiences and unmet needs for cancer survivors between 1 and 3 years of posttreatment. The survey included open-ended questions designed to allow the respondents to add topics and details of importance. This publication presents the analysis of quantitative data and open-ended questions regarding cancer survivors’ perspectives about positive experiences and gaps in care during their cancer journey. Of the 13 534 unique adult survey respondents, 7794 (57.6%) responded to the positive experiences question and 6434 (47.5%) to the question about gaps in care. Elements of positive experiences included the compassionate health care workers, maintaining a positive outlook and the support of family and friends. Gaps in care included a lack of access to services, information, and support. Respondents were able to identify positive aspects of their cancer experiences and where improvements were needed. These findings assist in determining how health care professionals can address the needs of cancer patients based on what survivors have identified as helpful.

Developing a Quality of Cancer Survivorship Care Framework: Implications for Clinical Care, Research, and Policy

There are now close to 17 million cancer survivors in the United States, and this number is expected to continue to grow. One decade ago the Institute of Medicine report, From Cancer Patient to Cancer Survivor: Lost in Transition, outlined 10 recommendations aiming to provide coordinated, comprehensive care for cancer survivors. Although there has been noteworthy progress made since the release of the report, gaps remain in research, clinical practice, and policy. Specifically, the recommendation calling for the development of quality measures in cancer survivorship care has yet to be fulfilled. In this commentary, we describe the development of a comprehensive, evidence-based cancer survivorship care quality framework and propose the next steps to systematically apply it in clinical settings, research, and policy.

Impact of Survivorship Care Plans and Planning on Breast, Colon, and Prostate Cancer Survivors in a Community Oncology Practice

With a growing number of cancer survivors, survivorship care plans (SCPs) are recommended to communicate information about late effects of treatment and follow-up care. Community oncology practices follow 85% of adult cancer survivors but report more difficulty in providing SCPs compared to academic centers. Our objective was to evaluate the impact of delivering SCPs in a community oncology practice by examining awareness of SCP receipt as well as how provision affects survivors' perception of care quality and of their condition. Survivors who accepted a SCP as standard of care were recruited from a community oncology practice in the Midwest and completed surveys prior to SCP provision (baseline) and 4 weeks later (follow-up). Within-survivor changes in knowledge of SCP receipt, satisfaction and perceived care coordination were assessed. Thirty cancer survivors (breast, colon, and prostate) completed the baseline survey, while 24 completed the follow-up survey (80% response rate). Participants reported receiving SCPs and treatment summaries more frequently at follow-up after receiving a SCP. At follow-up, there was a significant increase in survivor activation and involvement in care along with satisfaction of knowledge of care. Communication about and during SCP provision may need to be clearer: 34% of survivors could not correctly identify SCP receipt in this study. This may place these survivors at a disadvantage, if this leads to less awareness of important information regarding follow-up surveillance and management. Of those aware of SCP receipt, SCP provision had positive impacts in this small, short-term study.

Understanding primary care-oncology relationships within a changing healthcare environment

Background

Management of care transitions from primary care into and out of oncology is critical for optimal care of cancer patients and cancer survivors. There is limited understanding of existing primary care-oncology relationships within the context of the changing health care environment.

Methods

Through a comparative case study of 14 innovative primary care practices throughout the United States (U.S.), we examined relationships between primary care and oncology settings to identify attributes contributing to strengthened relationships in diverse settings. Field researchers observed practices for 10–12 days, recording fieldnotes and conducting interviews. We created a reduced dataset of all text related to primary care-oncology relationships, and collaboratively identified patterns to characterize these relationships through an inductive “immersion/crystallization” analysis process.

Results

Nine of the 14 practices discussed having either formal or informal primary care-oncology relationships. Nearly all formal primary care-oncology relationships were embedded within healthcare systems. The majority of private, independent practices had more informal relationships between individual primary care physicians and specific oncologists. Practices with formal relationships noted health system infrastructure that facilitates transfer of patient information and timely referrals. Practices with informal relationships described shared commitment, trust, and rapport with specific oncologists. Regardless of relationship type, challenges reported by primary care settings included lack of clarity about roles and responsibilities during cancer treatment and beyond.

Conclusions

With the rapid transformation of U.S. healthcare towards system ownership of primary care practices, efforts are needed to integrate strengths of informal primary care-oncology relationships in addition to formal system driven relationships.

Collaborative governance in the Quebec Cancer Network: a realist evaluation of emerging mechanisms of institutionalization, multi-level governance, and value creation using a longitudinal multiple case study design

BACKGROUND

People living with and beyond cancer (PLC) receive various forms of specialty care at different locations and many interventions concurrently or over time. They are affected by the operation of professional and organizational silos. This results in undue delays in access, unmet needs, sub-optimal care experiences and clinical outcomes, and human and financial costs for PLCs and healthcare systems. National cancer control programs advocate organizing in a network to coordinate actions, solve fragmentation problems, and thus improve clinical outcomes and care experiences for every dollar invested. The variable outcomes of such networks and factors explaining them have been documented. Governance is the "missing link" for understanding outcomes. Governance refers to the coordination of collective action by a body in a position of authority in pursuit of a common goal. The Quebec Cancer Network (QCN) offers the opportunity to study in a natural environment how, why, by whom, for whom, and under what conditions collaborative governance contributes to practices that produce value-added outcomes for PLCs, healthcare providers, and the healthcare system.

METHODS/DESIGN

The study design consists of a longitudinal case study, with multiple nested cases (4 local networks nested in the QCN), mobilizing qualitative and quantitative data and mixed data from various sources and collected using different methods, using the realist evaluation approach. Qualitative data will be used for a thematic analysis of collaborative governance. Quantitative data from validated questionnaires will be analyzed to measure relational coordination and teamwork, care experience, clinical outcomes, and health-related health-related quality of life, as well as a cost analysis of service utilization. Associations between context, governance mechanisms, and outcomes will be sought. Robust data will be produced to support decision-makers to guide network governance towards optimized clinical outcomes and the reduction of the economic toxicity of cancer for PLCs and health systems.

Shared leadership in interprofessional teams: beyond team characteristics to team conditions

Shared leadership has been shown to enhance processes, effectiveness, and performances in interprofessional teams. While earlier studies suggest the association of internal team environment (ITE) and transactive memory system (TMS) with shared leadership, the relative influence of these team conditions vis-a-vis team characteristics (such as team size, stability, and interprofessional roles) on shared leadership is not well understood. This study aims to examine the comparative influence of team characteristics versus team conditions of ITE and TMS on shared leadership during interprofessional team meetings (IPTMs). We compared interprofessional teams from two departments, namely larger and more diverse teams of Geriatric Medicine versus the smaller and more homogeneous Palliative Medicine. We administered a questionnaire survey to healthcare professionals who attended IPTMs in both departments (N = 133). Our results revealed significantly higher scores in shared leadership, ITE and TMS in Palliative Medicine (p < .05). Using hierarchical regression analysis adjusting for team conditions, department and number of IPTMs attended were not significant in the final model (both p > .05). Instead, TMS (β= 0.250, p < .01) and ITE (β= 0.584, p < .01) outperformed team characteristics as conditions that are highly associated with shared leadership, explaining an additional 29.8% and 19.0%, respectively, of model variance. Further analysis revealed a stronger correlation between shared leadership subdomains with TMS in Geriatric Medicine and with ITE in Palliative Medicine. Our results demonstrate how a positive working environment with a high level of shared memory engendered a perception of shared leadership, and how these team conditions can be tapped upon to circumvent differences in team characteristics to facilitate shared leadership. Identifying key conditions that are highly associated with shared leadership is critical for the teaching of dynamic leadership roles to junior clinicians which in turn, can enhance patient care.

Transition to survivorship: can there be improvement?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The transition from primary cancer treatment to posttreatment follow-up care is seen as critical to the long-term health of survivors. However, relatively little attention has been paid to understanding this pivotal period. This review will offer a brief outline of the significant work surrounding this pivotal time published in the past year.

RECENT FINDINGS

The growing number of cancer survivors has stimulated an emphasis on finding new models of care, whereby responsibility for survivorship follow-up is transitioned to primary care providers. A variety of models and tools have emerged for follow-up care. Survivorship care plans are heralded as a key component of survivorship care and a vehicle for supporting transition. Uptake of survivorship care plans and implementation of evidence-based models of survivorship care has been slow, hindered by a range of barriers.

SUMMARY

Evaluation is needed regarding survivorship models in terms of feasibility, survivor friendliness, cost effectiveness, and achievement of sustainable outcomes. How, and when, to introduce plans for transition to the patient and determine transition readiness are important considerations but need to be informed by evidence. Additional study is needed to identify best practice for the introduction and application of survivorship care plans.

Translation and perceptions of the French version of the Cancer Survivor Profile-Breast Cancer (CSPro-BC): a tool to identify and manage unmet needs

PURPOSE

Worldwide healthcare systems continue to struggle to reduce the unmet needs of a growing population of breast cancer survivors (BCSs). The Cancer Survivor Profile-Breast Cancer (CSPro-BC) survey was developed to address BCS's specific needs. This study aims to produce a culturally adapted French version of the CSPro-BC.

METHODS

The CSPro-BC_(French) was developed through five steps including back translation, use of a multidisciplinary committee, and pretest with BCS (n = 22). Healthcare providers (HCP) (n = 7) from cancer and primary care settings were also interviewed to obtain perceptions of facilitators and barriers to utilization in daily practice.

RESULTS

BCS were 40-69 years old (50%), ≥ 5 years post-diagnosis (45%), received chemotherapy alone or in combination (73%). Questionnaire instructions were perceived as clear, the number of questions (n = 73) acceptable, the questions non-intrusive and not complicated. Clarity of questions (min = 1; max = 7) ranged from 4 to 7 with a mean score of 5.9 out of 7. HCP perceived the CSPro-BC_(French) as useful for improving communication with BCS. However, HCP stressed implementation concerns regarding competencies, BCS acceptability, and limited resources in the healthcare system to meet the identified concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

CSPro-BC_(French) is a credible tool for assessment in Francophone nations. Our study provides an important perspective in the translation method, including both survivors and HCP perspectives. Further research is required to evaluate its psychometric qualities, sensitivity to change and its clinical signification.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Access to assessment tools specific to French-speaking cancer survivors having a potential to improve support from HCP and self-management capacity for BCS.

Survivor and Clinician Assessment of Survivorship Care Plans for Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Patients: An Engineering, Primary Care, and Oncology Collaborative for Survivorship Health

The long-term care of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) survivors poses special challenges owing to a myriad of possible chronic and/or late complications. Survivorship care plans (SCPs) have been proposed as tools to communicate information on the late effects of treatment and recommended follow-up care to clinicians and survivors. The primary aims of this study were to determine SCP content and format, as well as to assess the preferred timing of SCP provision following HSCT. HSCT survivors and nontransplantation clinicians (oncologists and primary care physicians) were invited to participate in a survey evaluating the usefulness and utility of a sample HSCT-specific SCP with a treatment summary generated by autopopulation from an electronic health record (EHR). All participating HSCT survivors (n = 29) and clinicians (n = 18) indicated a desire to receive an SCP. More than 85% of the participants perceived information about treatments received, recommended follow-up and health maintenance including vaccinations, survivor and clinician resources, and graft-versus-host disease and other late/chronic side effects to be useful. The majority of survivors also believed that care team contact information was useful. In addition, >85% of survivors and clinicians agreed that the SCP increased their understanding of treatments and chronic/late side effects, improved health care provided, and were satisfied with the SCP and found it understandable and easy to use. The majority of survivors indicated that additional information should be added to the SCP, whereas some clinicians deemed the SCP too long. Survivors preferred to receive the SCP as a paper document at the end of a regular follow-up visit and review it with a cancer clinician, whereas clinicians preferred to receive the SCP through the EHR. These findings will help improve the design of future SCPs for use by HSCT survivors and clinicians. Future work will include leveraging the EHR to ease the burden of creating user-centered documents.

Exploration of the contexts surrounding the implementation of an intervention supporting return-to-work after breast cancer in a primary care setting: starting point for an intervention development

BACKGROUND

Many recommendations have been made regarding survivorship care provided by teams of primary care professionals. However, the nature of that follow-up, including support for return-to-work (RTW) after cancer, remains largely undefined. As implementation problems are frequently context-related, a pilot study was conducted to describe the contexts, according to Grol and Wensing, in which a new intervention is to be implemented. This pilot study is the first of three steps in intervention development planning.

METHOD

In-depth semi-structured interviews (n=6) were carried out with stakeholders selected for their knowledgeable perspective of various settings, such as hospitals, primary care, employers, and community-based organizations. Interviews focused on participants' perceptions of key contextual facilitators and barriers to consider for the deployment of an RTW intervention in a primary care setting. Data from interviews were transcribed and analyzed. A content analysis was performed based on an iterative process.

RESULTS

An intervention supporting the process of RTW in primary care makes sense for participants. Results suggest that important levers are present in organizational, professional, and social settings. However, many barriers, mainly related to organizational settings, have been identified, eg, distribution of tasks for survivor follow-up, continuity of information, and coordination of care between specialized oncology care and general primary care.

CONCLUSION

To develop and deploy the intervention, recommendations that emerged from this pilot study for overcoming barriers were identified, eg, training (professionals, survivors, and employers), the use of communication tools, and adopting a practice guide for survivor care. The results were also helpful in focusing on the relevance of an intervention supporting the RTW process as a component of primary care for survivors.

Optimizing clinical and organizational practice in cancer survivor transitions between specialized oncology and primary care teams: a realist evaluation of multiple case studies

Background

Cancer is now viewed as a chronic disease, presenting challenges to follow-up and survivorship care. Models to shift from haphazard, suboptimal and fragmented episodes of care to an integrated cancer care continuum must be developed, tested and implemented. Numerous studies demonstrate improved care when follow-up is assured by both oncology and primary care providers rather than either group alone. However, there is little data on the roles assumed by specialized oncology teams and primary care providers and the extent to which they work together. This study aims to develop, pilot test and measure outcomes of an innovative risk-based coordinated cancer care model for patients transitioning from specialized oncology teams to primary care providers.

Methods/design

This multiple case study using a sequential mixed-methods design rests on a theory-driven realist evaluation approach to understand how transitions might be improved. The cases are two health regions in Quebec, Canada, defined by their geographic territory. Each case includes a Cancer Centre and three Family Medicine Groups selected based on differences in their determining characteristics. Qualitative data will be collected from document review (scientific journal, grey literature, local documentation), semi-directed interviews with key informants, and observation of care coordination practices. Qualitative data will be supplemented with a survey to measure the outcome of the coordinated model among providers (scope of practice, collaboration, relational coordination, leadership) and patients diagnosed with breast, colorectal or prostate cancer (access to care, patient-centredness, communication, self-care, survivorship profile, quality of life). Results from descriptive and regression analyses will be triangulated with thematic analysis of qualitative data. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods data will be interpreted within and across cases in order to identify context-mechanism associations that explain outcomes.

Discussion

The study will provide empirical data on a risk-based coordinated model of cancer care to guide actions at different levels in the health system. This in-depth multiple case study using a realist approach considers both the need for context-specific intervention research and the imperative to address research gaps regarding coordinated models of cancer care.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-017-2785-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.