1
|
Guerra-Londono CE, Cata JP, Nowak K, Gottumukkala V. Prehabilitation in Adults Undergoing Cancer Surgery: A Comprehensive Review on Rationale, Methodology, and Measures of Effectiveness. Curr Oncol 2024; 31:2185-2200. [PMID: 38668065 PMCID: PMC11049527 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31040162] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2024] [Revised: 04/03/2024] [Accepted: 04/04/2024] [Indexed: 04/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Cancer surgery places a significant burden on a patients' functional status and quality of life. In addition, cancer surgery is fraught with postoperative complications, themselves influenced by a patient's functional status. Prehabilitation is a unimodal or multimodal strategy that aims to increase a patient's functional capacity to reduce postoperative complications and improve postoperative recovery and quality of life. In most cases, it involves exercise, nutrition, and anxiety-reducing interventions. The impact of prehabilitation has been explored in several types of cancer surgery, most commonly colorectal and thoracic. Overall, the existing evidence suggests prehabilitation improves physiological outcomes (e.g., lean body mass, maximal oxygen consumption) as well as clinical outcomes (e.g., postoperative complications, quality of life). Notably, the benefit of prehabilitation is additional to that of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs. While safe, prehabilitation programs require multidisciplinary coordination preoperatively. Despite the existence of numerous systematic reviews and meta-analyses, the certainty of evidence demonstrating the efficacy and safety of prehabilitation is low to moderate, principally due to significant methodological heterogeneity and small sample sizes. There is a need for more large-scale multicenter randomized controlled trials to draw strong clinical recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carlos E. Guerra-Londono
- Department of Anesthesiology, Pain Management & Perioperative Medicine, Henry Ford Health, Detroit, MI 48202, USA; (C.E.G.-L.); (K.N.)
| | - Juan P. Cata
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA;
| | - Katherine Nowak
- Department of Anesthesiology, Pain Management & Perioperative Medicine, Henry Ford Health, Detroit, MI 48202, USA; (C.E.G.-L.); (K.N.)
| | - Vijaya Gottumukkala
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA;
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kazemi RJ, VanWinkle C, Pesavento CM, Wang T, Dossett LA. Understanding Treatment Decision-Making in Older Women With Breast Cancer: A Survey-Based Study. J Surg Res 2024; 296:418-424. [PMID: 38320360 DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2023.12.051] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2023] [Revised: 11/21/2023] [Accepted: 12/23/2023] [Indexed: 02/08/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION For women ≥70 y old with early-stage hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer, the national guidelines recommend the omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) and post-lumpectomy radiotherapy. However, national-level data suggest these treatments remain common. We utilized a survey-based approach to explore patient-level factors driving overutilization. METHODS We recruited women ≥70 y old with early-stage hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer within 6 mo of surgery. An exploratory cross-sectional survey captured information on offered and pursued treatments, the importance of patient-centered outcomes, and the influence of each outcome on treatment decision-making. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis. RESULTS 31/51 patients completed the survey with a response rate of 61%. Most patients (86%) received a lumpectomy. Twenty-eight percent of patients received SLNB, and 56% of lumpectomy patients underwent adjuvant radiotherapy. When considering treatment options, the patient-centered outcomes, most important for decision-making, were overall survival, breast-specific survival, and preventing local recurrence, while breast appearance, financial costs, and avoiding the need for pills (endocrine therapy) were the least important. CONCLUSIONS Patients' treatment decisions align with their values. The correlation between patient-stated values and treatment decisions suggests a perceived mortality benefit of low-value SLNB and radiotherapy. These findings can inform targeted efforts to deimplement low-value care in breast cancer through patient-focused tools and education.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruby J Kazemi
- University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
| | | | - Cecilia M Pesavento
- Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Ton Wang
- Department of Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Lesly A Dossett
- Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kinzer H, Lee CN, Cooksey K, Myckatyn T, Olsen MA, Foraker R, Johnson AR, Politi MC. Financial Toxicity Considerations in Breast Reconstruction: Recommendations for Research and Practice. Womens Health Issues 2024:S1049-3867(24)00005-7. [PMID: 38413293 DOI: 10.1016/j.whi.2024.01.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2023] [Revised: 01/21/2024] [Accepted: 01/31/2024] [Indexed: 02/29/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Hannah Kinzer
- Washington University in St Louis, School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
| | - Clara N Lee
- University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Krista Cooksey
- Washington University in St Louis, School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Terence Myckatyn
- Washington University in St Louis, School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Margaret A Olsen
- Washington University in St Louis, School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Randi Foraker
- Washington University in St Louis, School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Anna Rose Johnson
- Washington University in St Louis, School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Mary C Politi
- Washington University in St Louis, School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Karoobi M, Yazd SMM, Nafissi N, Zolnouri M, Khosravi M, Sayad S. Comparative clinical outcomes of using three-dimensional and TIGR mesh in immediate breast reconstruction surgery for breast cancer patients. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2023; 86:321-328. [PMID: 37826925 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2023.07.038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2023] [Revised: 06/21/2023] [Accepted: 07/16/2023] [Indexed: 10/14/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Breast reconstruction (BR) surgery is a widely utilized approach for women who have undergone mastectomy. Using synthetic mesh can offer advantages over other materials providing long-lasting support and natural-looking results. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of 3DMax™ mesh to TIGR mesh in BR surgery, providing clear information about the non-inferiority of 3DMax™ mesh to TIGR. METHODS This retrospective cohort study evaluates postoperative complications in breast cancer patients who underwent subcutaneous mastectomy with direct-to-implant immediate BR using silicone implants and either 3DMax™ mesh or TIGR® Matrix Surgical Mesh. RESULTS This study involved BR surgeries in 82 patients, including 57 surgeries in the 3D mesh group and 49 in the TIGR mesh group. The two groups had no significant differences regarding age, body mass index (BMI), cancer stage, or surgical complications. However, patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy had higher incidence rates of long-term complications than other patients. Patients with infection or partial necrosis had a heightened risk of implant loss. CONCLUSION The clinical results obtained in this study suggest that among synthetic meshes used in immediate BR, 3DMax™ is not inferior to TIGR Matrix Surgical Mesh regarding complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Nahid Nafissi
- Department of General Surgery, Rasool Akram Medical Complex Clinical Research Development Center (RCRDC), Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
| | - Mina Zolnouri
- Department of General Surgery, school of medicine, rasool-e Akram Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Mehdi Khosravi
- Department of General Surgery, Rasool Akram Medical Complex Clinical Research Development Center (RCRDC), Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Soheila Sayad
- Department of Surgery, Firoozgar Clinical Research Development Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Petermann VM, Biddell CB, Planey AM, Spees LP, Rosenstein DL, Manning M, Gellin M, Padilla N, Samuel-Ryals CA, Birken SA, Reeder-Hayes K, Deal AM, Cabarrus K, Bell RA, Strom C, Young TH, King S, Leutner B, Vestal D, Wheeler SB. Assessing the pre-implementation context for financial navigation in rural and non-rural oncology clinics. Front Health Serv 2023; 3:1148887. [PMID: 37941608 PMCID: PMC10627810 DOI: 10.3389/frhs.2023.1148887] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2023] [Accepted: 09/25/2023] [Indexed: 11/10/2023]
Abstract
Background Financial navigation (FN) is an evidence-based intervention designed to address financial toxicity for cancer patients. FN's success depends on organizations' readiness to implement and other factors that may hinder or support implementation. Tailored implementation strategies can support practice change but must be matched to the implementation context. We assessed perceptions of readiness and perceived barriers and facilitators to successful implementation among staff at nine cancer care organizations (5 rural, 4 non-rural) recruited to participate in the scale-up of a FN intervention. To understand differences in the pre-implementation context and inform modifications to implementation strategies, we compared findings between rural and non-rural organizations. Methods We conducted surveys (n = 78) and in-depth interviews (n = 73) with staff at each organization. We assessed perceptions of readiness using the Organizational Readiness for Implementing Change (ORIC) scale. In-depth interviews elicited perceived barriers and facilitators to implementing FN in each context. We used descriptive statistics to analyze ORIC results and deductive thematic analysis, employing a codebook guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), to synthesize themes in barriers and facilitators across sites, and by rurality. Results Results from the ORIC scale indicated strong perceptions of organizational readiness across all sites. Staff from rural areas reported greater confidence in their ability to manage the politics of change (87% rural, 76% non-rural) and in their organization's ability to support staff adjusting to the change (96% rural, 75% non-rural). Staff at both rural and non-rural sites highlighted factors reflective of the Intervention Characteristics (relative advantage) and Implementation Climate (compatibility and tension for change) domains as facilitators. Although few barriers to implementation were reported, differences arose between rural and non-rural sites in these perceived barriers, with non-rural staff more often raising concerns about resistance to change and compatibility with existing work processes and rural staff more often raising concerns about competing time demands and limited resources. Conclusions Staff across both rural and non-rural settings identified few, but different, barriers to implementing a novel FN intervention that they perceived as important and responsive to patients' needs. These findings can inform how strategies are tailored to support FN in diverse oncology practices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victoria M. Petermann
- School of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Caitlin B. Biddell
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Arrianna Marie Planey
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Lisa P. Spees
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Donald L. Rosenstein
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
- Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
- Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Michelle Manning
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Mindy Gellin
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Neda Padilla
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Cleo A. Samuel-Ryals
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Sarah A. Birken
- Wake Forest School of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC, United States
- Wake Forest Baptist Comprehensive Cancer Center, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC, United States
| | - Katherine Reeder-Hayes
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
- Division of Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Allison M. Deal
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Kendrel Cabarrus
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Ronny A. Bell
- Wake Forest School of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC, United States
- Wake Forest Baptist Comprehensive Cancer Center, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC, United States
| | - Carla Strom
- Wake Forest School of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC, United States
- Wake Forest Baptist Comprehensive Cancer Center, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC, United States
| | - Tiffany H. Young
- Buddy Kemp Support Center, Novant Health Cancer Institute, Charlotte, NC, United States
| | - Sherry King
- Carteret Health Care Cancer Center, Carteret, NC, United States
| | - Brian Leutner
- Pardee UNC Health Care, Hendersonville, NC, United States
| | - Derek Vestal
- UNC Lenoir Health Care, Kinston, NC, United States
| | - Stephanie B. Wheeler
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Reeder-Hayes KE, Biddell CB, Manning ML, Rosenstein DL, Samuel-Ryals CA, Spencer JC, Smith S, Deal A, Gellin M, Wheeler SB. Knowledge, Attitudes, and Resources of Frontline Oncology Support Personnel Regarding Financial Burden in Patients With Cancer. JCO Oncol Pract 2023; 19:654-661. [PMID: 37294912 DOI: 10.1200/op.22.00631] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2022] [Revised: 12/16/2022] [Accepted: 03/03/2023] [Indexed: 06/11/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Financial navigation services support patients with cancer and address the direct and indirect financial burden of cancer diagnosis and treatment. These services are commonly delivered through a variety of frontline oncology support personnel (FOSP) including navigators, social workers, supportive care providers, and other clinic staff, but the perspective of FOSPs is largely absent from current literature on financial burden in oncology. We surveyed a national sample of FOSPs to understand their perspectives on patient financial burden, resource availability, and barriers and facilitators to assisting patients with cancer-related financial burden. METHODS We used Qualtrics online survey software and recruited participants using multiple professional society and interest group mailing lists. Categorical responses were described using frequencies, distributions of numeric survey responses were described using the median and IQR, and two open-ended survey questions were categorized thematically using a priori themes, allowing additional emergent themes. RESULTS Two hundred fourteen FOSPs completed this national survey. Respondents reported a high awareness of patient financial burden and felt comfortable speaking to patients about financial concerns. Patient assistance resources were commonly available, but only 15% described resources as sufficient for the observed needs. A substantial portion of respondents reported moral distress related to this lack of resources. CONCLUSION FOSPs, who already have requisite knowledge and comfort in discussing patient financial needs, are a critical resource for mitigating cancer-related financial burden. Interventions should leverage this resource but prioritize transparency and efficiency to reduce the administrative and emotional toll on the FOSP workforce and reduce the risk of burnout.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katherine E Reeder-Hayes
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Caitlin B Biddell
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Michelle L Manning
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Donald L Rosenstein
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
- Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Cleo A Samuel-Ryals
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
- Current Address: Flatiron Health, New York, NY
| | - Jennifer C Spencer
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
- Current Address: Department of Population Health, Dell Medical School, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX
| | | | - Allison Deal
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Mindy Gellin
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Stephanie B Wheeler
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Kajimoto Y, Honda K, Suzuki S, Mori M, Tsubouchi H, Nakao K, Azuma A, Shibutani T, Nagao S, Koyanagi T, Kohara I, Tamaki S, Yabuki M, Teng L, Fujiwara K, Igarashi A. Association between financial toxicity and health-related quality of life of patients with gynecologic cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 2023; 28:454-467. [PMID: 36648710 DOI: 10.1007/s10147-023-02294-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2022] [Accepted: 01/03/2023] [Indexed: 01/18/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Patients often struggle with their financial situation during cancer treatment due to treatment-related costs or loss of income. This resulting negative effect is called financial toxicity, which is a known as a side effect of cancer care. This study aimed to evaluate the association between financial toxicity and health-related quality of life among patients with gynecologic cancer using validated questionnaires. METHODS In this multicenter study, patients with gynecologic cancer receiving anti-cancer drug treatment for > 2 months were recruited. Patients answered the COmprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) tool, EORTC-QLQ-C30, disease-specific tools (EORTC-QLQ-OV28/CX24/EN24), and EQ-5D-5L. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was used to determine associations. RESULTS Between April 2019 and July 2021, 109 cancer patients completed the COST questionnaire. The mean COST score was 19.82. Strong associations were observed between financial difficulty (r = - 0.616) in the EORTC-QLQ-C30 and body image (r = 0.738) in the EORTC-QLQ-CX24, while weak associations were noted between the global health status/quality of life (r = 0.207), EQ-5D-5L index score (r = 0.252), and several function and symptom scale scores with the COST score. CONCLUSIONS Greater financial toxicity was associated with worse health-related quality of life scores, such as financial difficulty in gynecologic cancer patients and body image in cervical cancer patients as strong associations, and weakly associated with general health-related quality of life scores and several function/symptom scales.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yusuke Kajimoto
- Department of Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan. .,Oncology Science Unit, MSD K.K., 1-13-12 Kudan-Kita, Chiyodaku, Tokyo, 102-8667, Japan.
| | - Kazunori Honda
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, 1-1 Kanokoden, Chikusa-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 464-8681, Japan
| | - Shiro Suzuki
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, 1-1 Kanokoden, Chikusa-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 464-8681, Japan
| | - Masahiko Mori
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, 1-1 Kanokoden, Chikusa-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 464-8681, Japan
| | - Hirofumi Tsubouchi
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, 1-1 Kanokoden, Chikusa-Ku, Nagoya, Aichi, 464-8681, Japan
| | - Kohshiro Nakao
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-39-22 Showa-Machi, Maebashi City, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan
| | - Anri Azuma
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-39-22 Showa-Machi, Maebashi City, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan
| | - Takashi Shibutani
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Hyogo Cancer Center, 13-70 Kitaoujicho, Akashi, Hyogo, 673-8558, Japan
| | - Shoji Nagao
- Department of Gynecologic oncology, Hyogo Cancer Center, 13-70 Kitaoujicho, Akashi, Hyogo, 673-8558, Japan.,Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, 2-5-1 Shikata-Cho, Kita-Ku, Okayama, 700-8558, Japan
| | - Takahiro Koyanagi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jichi Medical University, 3311-1 Yakushiji, Shimotsuke, Tochigi, 329-0498, Japan
| | - Izumi Kohara
- School of Nursing, Jichi Medical University, 3311-1 Yakushiji, Shimotsuke, Tochigi, 329-0498, Japan
| | - Shuko Tamaki
- Nursing Department, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1 Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama, 350-1298, Japan
| | - Midori Yabuki
- Nursing Department, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1 Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama, 350-1298, Japan
| | - Lida Teng
- Department of Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan
| | - Keiichi Fujiwara
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1 Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama, 350-1298, Japan
| | - Ataru Igarashi
- Department of Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan.,Department of Public Health, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-Ku, Yokohama, 236-0004, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Dellen M, Flanagan M, Pfafman R, Drouin M, Pater J, Pei KY. Factors Potential Patients Deem Important for Decision-Making in High-Risk Surgical Scenarios. J Am Coll Surg 2023; 236:93-98. [PMID: 36519912 DOI: 10.1097/xcs.0000000000000418] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Surgical futility and shared decision-making to proceed with high-risk surgery are challenging for patients and surgeons alike. It is unknown which factors contribute to a patient's decision to undergo high-risk and potentially futile surgery. The clinical perspective, founded in statistical probabilities of survival, could be misaligned with a patient's determination of worthwhile surgery. This study assesses factors most important to patients in pursuing high-risk surgery. STUDY DESIGN Via anonymous survey, lay participants recruited through Amazon's Mturk were presented high-risk scenarios necessitating emergency surgery. They rated factors (objective risk and quality-of-life domains) in surgical decision-making (0 = not at all, 4 = extremely) and made the decision to pursue surgery based on clinical scenarios. Repeated observations were accounted for via a generalized mixed-effects model and estimated effects of respondent characteristics, scenario factors, and likelihood to recommend surgery. RESULTS Two hundred thirty-six participants completed the survey. Chance of survival to justify surgery averaged 69.3% (SD = 21.3), ranking as the highest determining factor in electing for surgery. Other factors were also considered important in electing for surgery, including the average number of days the patient lived if surgery were and were not completed, functional and pain status after surgery, family member approval, and surgery cost. Postoperative independence was associated with proceeding with surgery (p < 0.001). Recommendations by patient age was moderated by respondent age (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION Patients highly value likelihood of survival and postoperative independence in shared decision-making for high-risk surgery. It is important to improve the understanding of surgical futility from a patient's perspective.
Collapse
|
9
|
Su CT, Shankaran V. Defining the Role of the Modern Oncology Provider in Mitigating Financial Toxicity. J Am Coll Radiol 2023; 20:51-56. [PMID: 36513257 PMCID: PMC9898149 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2022.10.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2022] [Revised: 10/19/2022] [Accepted: 10/20/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Financial toxicity, the cumulative financial hardships resulting from cancer diagnosis and treatment, is a growing problem in the United States. With the proliferation of costly novel therapeutics and improved cancer survival, financial toxicity will remain a major issue in cancer care delivery. Frontline oncology providers serve as gatekeepers in the medical system and, as such, could play essential roles in recognizing and addressing financial toxicity. Providers and health systems could help mitigate financial toxicity through routine financial toxicity screening, financial navigation, and advocacy. Specific strategies include developing and implementing financial screening instruments that can be integrated in electronic medical records and establishing team-based financial navigation programs to help patients with out-of-pocket medical costs, nonmedical spending, and insurance optimization. Finally, providers should continue to advocate for policies and legislation that decrease cost and promote value-based care. In this review, we examine opportunities for provider engagement in these areas and highlight gaps for future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher T Su
- Division of Hematology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington; and Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcome Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington.
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington; and Codirector, Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcome Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Kazzi B, Chino F, Kazzi B, Jain B, Tian S, Paguio JA, Yao JS, Muralidhar V, Mahal BA, Nguyen PL, Sanford NN, Dee EC. Shared burden: the association between cancer diagnosis, financial toxicity, and healthcare cost-related coping mechanisms by family members of non-elderly patients in the USA. Support Care Cancer 2022; 30:8905-8917. [PMID: 35877007 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-022-07234-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/24/2021] [Accepted: 06/14/2022] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE There has been little research on the healthcare cost-related coping mechanisms of families of patients with cancer. Therefore, we assessed the association between a cancer diagnosis and the healthcare cost-related coping mechanisms of participant family members through their decision to forego or delay seeking medical care, one of the manifestations of financial toxicity. METHODS Using data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) between 2000 and 2018, sample weight-adjusted prevalence was calculated and multivariable logistic regressions defined adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for participant family members who needed but did not get medical care or who delayed seeking medical care due to cost in the past 12 months, adjusting for relevant sociodemographic covariates, including participant history of cancer (yes vs. no) and participant age (18-45 vs. 46-64 years old). The analysis of family members foregoing or delaying medical care was repeated using a cancer diagnosis * age interaction term. RESULTS Participants with cancer were more likely than those without a history of cancer to report family members delaying (19.63% vs. 16.31%, P < 0.001) or foregoing (14.53% vs. 12.35%, P = 0.001) medical care. Participants with cancer in the 18 to 45 years old age range were more likely to report family members delaying (pinteraction = 0.028) or foregoing (pinteraction < 0.001) medical care. Other factors associated with cost-related coping mechanisms undertaken by the participants' family members included female sex, non-married status, poorer health status, lack of health insurance coverage, and lower household income. CONCLUSION A cancer diagnosis may be associated with familial healthcare cost-related coping mechanisms, one of the manifestations of financial toxicity. This is seen through delayed/omitted medical care of family members of people with a history of cancer, an association that may be stronger among young adult cancer survivors. These findings underscore the need to further explore how financial toxicity associated with a cancer diagnosis can affect patients' family members and to design interventions to mitigate healthcare cost-related coping mechanisms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bahaa Kazzi
- Department of Biology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Fumiko Chino
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 02446, USA
| | - Brigitte Kazzi
- Department of Internal Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Bhav Jain
- Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Sibo Tian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Joseph A Paguio
- Department of Medicine, Einstein Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - J Seth Yao
- Department of Medicine, Einstein Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | | | - Brandon A Mahal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami/Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Paul L Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Nina N Sanford
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern, 2280 Inwood Road, Dallas, TX, 75235, USA.
| | - Edward Christopher Dee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 02446, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Affiliation(s)
- Fantine Giap
- Fantine Giap, MD, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL; Fumiko Chino, MD, Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; and Arjun Gupta, MD, Department of Hematology, Oncology, and Transplantation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
| | - Fumiko Chino
- Fantine Giap, MD, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL; Fumiko Chino, MD, Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; and Arjun Gupta, MD, Department of Hematology, Oncology, and Transplantation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
| | - Arjun Gupta
- Fantine Giap, MD, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL; Fumiko Chino, MD, Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; and Arjun Gupta, MD, Department of Hematology, Oncology, and Transplantation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
| |
Collapse
|