ABSTRACT
Although lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the USA, there have been few studies on patient-centered advanced lung cancer treatment practices. As part of a larger research study on how to use a patient-inclusive approach in late-stage lung cancer treatment, this present study describes patient, caregiver, and provider perspectives on the role of the health care system in helping patients cope with an advanced stage lung cancer diagnosis. Four focus group sessions were conducted with six to eleven participants per group for a total of 36 participants. Two focus groups were held with patients and family members/caregivers and two with physicians and nurses. A major theme that emerged concerned coping with an advanced lung cancer diagnosis, which is the subject of this paper. The patients, caregivers, and providers spoke passionately about interactions with the health care system and volunteered examples of supportive and non-supportive relationships between patients and clinicians. They advocated for better patient-provider communication practices as well as the expanded use of patient navigation and new patient orientation programs. This study contributes additional knowledge by including the perspectives of caregivers and providers who live and work closely with patients with advanced lung cancer. The findings can inform the development of comprehensive patient-centered care plans for patients living with an advanced lung cancer diagnosis.
Subject(s)
Caregivers/psychology , Decision Making , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Health Personnel/psychology , Lung Neoplasms/diagnosis , Lung Neoplasms/psychology , Patient-Centered Care , Adaptation, Psychological , Communication , Female , Focus Groups , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/therapy , Male , Patient Outcome Assessment , Physician-Patient Relations , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Among cancers that affect both men and women, colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death in Michigan. The American Cancer Society estimates 4,730 new cases and 1,700 deaths due to colorectal cancer in Michigan for 2013. Screening can detect colorectal cancer earlier, when treatment is more successful. COMMUNITY CONTEXT: The Michigan Department of Community Health represents 1 of 25 states and 4 tribes to receive a multiyear grant from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to increase colorectal cancer screening rates through population health interventions and clinical services for the underserved. Michigan's Colorectal Cancer Control Program is implemented in partnership with its Comprehensive Cancer Control Program, which supports the Michigan's cancer control coalition composed of 114 partner organizations. METHODS: This project had 2 primary objectives: 1) develop a collaborative partnership with 1 Michigan Cancer Consortium organization in which to pilot the intervention and 2) increase colorectal cancer screening rates by implementing a client reminder intervention and measuring the increase in screening rates. OUTCOMES: A partnership was established with HealthPlus of Michigan. Of the 95 HealthPlus employees and spouses who received the intervention, 15 completed screening, accounting for a 16% increase in the screening rate. The project was considered successful because both of its objectives were achieved. INTERPRETATION: Translating evidence-based interventions into practice requires building a relationship with a partner organization, incorporating flexibility, and establishing a realistic timeline.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/prevention & control , Delivery of Health Care/methods , Reminder Systems , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Michigan/epidemiology , Reproducibility of ResultsABSTRACT
Participatory and patient-centered approaches to cancer research have been highlighted as the most appropriate means of engaging patients in the conduct of clinical research. However, there is a paucity of patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) on lung cancer. Previous studies seeking to define lung cancer treatment success have generally not included patients' and caregivers' perceptions and views in treatment decision-making. Additionally, little is known about effective strategies for the engagement of lung cancer patients in PCOR. We sought to gain insights into the perceptions of patients, caregivers, and providers on lung cancer treatment success, as well as on strategies for patient engagement in lung cancer PCOR. Four focus groups were conducted with provider, patient, and caregiver participants from four cancer centers in Nebraska and South Dakota. A total of 36 providers, patients, and caregivers participated in this study. Patients and caregivers confirmed that survival alone should not be the measure of lung cancer treatment success and that definitions of treatment success should emphasize factors such as effective clinical guidance throughout treatment, symptom management, functionality, and quality of life. Clinician participants noted that the definition of treatment success evolved over time and appeared to be linked to patients' experiences with chemotherapy. Participants identified barriers to and facilitators of research participation and suggested strategies for the recruitment and retention of research participants. Our study indicates that patients can successfully play active and engaged roles in clinical research, ranging from participant to partner. Judging from the enthusiasm of our focus group attendees, patients and caregivers want to participate and be engaged in clinical research.
Subject(s)
Caregivers , Decision Making , Health Personnel , Lung Neoplasms/prevention & control , Patient Outcome Assessment , Patient Participation , Patient-Centered Care/methods , Focus Groups , Humans , Palliative Care , Physician-Patient Relations , Quality of Life , South DakotaABSTRACT
PURPOSE: In the United States, lung cancer accounts for 14% of cancer diagnoses and 28% of cancer deaths annually. Because no cure exists for advanced lung cancer, the primary treatment goal is to prolong survival. OBJECTIVES: The study aim was to determine whether individual preferences, characteristics, and treatment experiences affect the meaning of treatment success. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A quantitative study using an observational, longitudinal cohort of patients with advanced stage non-small-cell lung cancer was conducted. Data sources included medical records and patient interviews. Data were analyzed using χ2, Fisher's exact, and McNemar's tests, as well as logistic regressions. RESULTS: At the first interview of 235 individuals, 12% considered survival alone as their definition of treatment success; others defined treatment success as survival plus other aspects, such as quality of life and reaching an important personal goal. As they moved through chemotherapy, 47% of the patients changed their definition of treatment success. Bivariate analysis showed that patients with lower incomes tended to be more likely to change their definition of treatment success compared with their counterparts with higher income (P = .0245). CONCLUSION: By taking chemotherapy, patients expect to increase their odds of survival and want to maintain the quality of life and functionality. A patient's definition of treatment success is often changing as treatment continues, making it appropriate to ensure patient-provider communication throughout their clinical care. The study results are limited to patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and drawn from a predominantly white patient population, mainly from the US Midwest.
Subject(s)
Lung Neoplasms/epidemiology , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Disease Management , Female , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/diagnosis , Lung Neoplasms/mortality , Lung Neoplasms/therapy , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Prognosis , Quality of Life , Socioeconomic Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Advances in medical technology are changing surgical standards for colon cancer treatment. The laparoscopic colectomy is equivalent to the standard open colectomy while providing additional benefits. It is currently unknown what factors influence utilization of laparoscopic surgery in rural areas and if treatment disparities exist. The objectives of this study were to examine demographic and clinical characteristics associated with receiving laparoscopic colectomy and to examine the differences between rural and urban patients who received either procedure. METHODS: This study utilized a linked data set of Nebraska Cancer Registry and hospital discharge data on colon cancer patients diagnosed and treated in the entire state of Nebraska from 2008 to 2011 (N = 1,062). Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of receiving the laparoscopic treatment. RESULTS: Rural colon cancer patients were 40% less likely to receive laparoscopic colectomy compared to urban patients. Independent predictors of receiving laparoscopic colectomy were younger age (<60), urban residence, ≥3 comorbidities, elective admission, smaller tumor size, and early stage at diagnosis. Additionally, rural patients varied demographically compared to urban patients. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic surgery is becoming the new standard of treatment for colon cancer and important disparities exist for rural cancer patients in accessing the specialized treatment. As cancer treatment becomes more specialized, the importance of training and placement of general surgeons in rural communities must be a priority for health care planning and professional training institutions.