Developing a survivorship care plan (SCP) delivery process for patients and primary care providers serving poor, rural, and minority patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Survivorship care plans (SCPs) summarize patients' treatment and act as an education and communication tool between oncologists and primary care providers (PCPs). But creation and delivery of SCPs are challenging, labor intensive, and costly. The University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center (UNM CCC) treats a poor, rural, and minority patient population, and our purpose was to implement and evaluate a process to create and deliver SCPs to patients and PCPs. METHODS: Providers placed an electronic SCP order, basic information was imported, and staff compiled treatment details. Flagged SCPs were then ready for delivery, providers approved of and delivered the SCP at the next encounter, and the SCP was sent to the PCP. RESULTS: By April 2020, 283 SCPs were ordered, 241 (85.2%) were created by the designated staff, and 97 (34.2%) were given to patients after definitive therapy for breast cancer (59.1%), gynecological cancers (10.8%), prostate cancer (7.4%), colorectal cancer (5.1%), and lymphomas (4.8%). Of 97 SCPs eligible to be sent to PCPs, 75 (77.3%) were mailed or sent via EMR. Of the 41 (48.9%) SCPs sent via mail or fax, only 8 (8.3%) were received and 5 (5.2%) integrated. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that SCPs can be delivered to patients in a poor, rural, and minority patient population but that PCP receipt and integration of SCPs are poor. Future efforts need to ensure that an oncologist to PCP education and communication tool is able reach and be integrated by PCPs.

"Care needs to be integrated" Patient and provider perspectives on a cancer shared-care model.

PURPOSE: Current early-stage breast and gynecological cancer care models often begin with a referral from a primary care provider (PCP) or gynecologist (OB/Gyn) and end with a patient being transitioned back to the referring provider at the completion of treatment. There is frequently little communication between oncologists and the referring provider during treatment, and this pattern continues after the patient completes their treatment. METHODS: We convened a diverse Patient Advisory Board (PAB) to identify areas where breast or gynecological cancer patients felt they could benefit from additional support during and after their cancer care. PAB members attended five Zoom meetings and completed four online surveys. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with primary care or OB/Gyn physicians to collect information on current practices. RESULTS: Patients identified multiple areas in which they needed additional support from their PCP. Providers also identified topics on which they could use additional training. However, there was little overlap between patient and provider priority topics. Both patients and providers agreed that there was inadequate communication between the cancer center and PCPs before, during, and after cancer treatment. CONCLUSIONS: A shared-care model that emphasizes communication between primary care providers, the oncology care team, and patients is urgently needed. Patients indicated the need for additional support from their PCP on specific topics, and PCPs were interested in continuing their education to better serve their patients with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: The importance of consistent communication among all parties during the entire cancer journey was emphasized as a key area for improvement.

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.

Cancer-Related Psychological Distress: A Concept Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cancer-related psychological distress, as a concept, has limited research literature substantiation. Several studies report that patients with cancer suffer from significant psychological distress; however, the description of the concept of cancer-related psychological distress has not been clearly described. Theoretical work based on the concept is also unclear. OBJECTIVES: This article is a report on the concept of cancer-related psychological distress to clarify the concept as separate from non-cancer-related psychological distress and promote the use of the term in nursing practice and research across the cancer trajectory. METHODS: This article used a content analysis to examine the literature. The literature review for this article used CINAHL®, PsycINFO®, and PubMed to search publications from 1999-2016. FINDINGS: Content analysis of the literature revealed that the term psychological distress was used often with regard to distress in patients with cancer, but the concept of cancer-related psychological distress was not clearly defined. Four attributes encompass the concept of cancer-related psychological distress.