Patient Perspectives on Nurse Practitioner Care in Oncology in Canada.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to add to what is known about patient satisfaction with nurse practitioner (NP) care, from the perspective of breast cancer patients who were followed by an NP. METHODS AND DESIGN: This study utilized Interpretive Description, a qualitative method aimed at making sense of the experiential aspects of health care and developing practical knowledge for improved care. Nine patients receiving NP-led care in an outpatient breast cancer clinic were interviewed about their perspectives on and experiences with NP-led care. Interview transcripts were thematically analyzed. FINDINGS: The NP role has long been regarded as a way of addressing many contemporary health system problems, although there continue to be barriers to the effective utilization of the role, including public and patient misunderstandings. This study revealed that, despite persistent traditional role understandings about health professionals, the patient participants appreciated the benefits of NP care and were highly satisfied with both the physical care and holistic support they received during the course of their treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Today's healthcare system is characterized by accessibility issues, unmet patient need, workforce issues, and funding pressures. This research supports and enriches what is known about the benefits and usefulness of NP-provided care from the viewpoint of those receiving the care. The findings offer guidance to NPs in the clinical setting regarding patient needs and optimal care strategies.

Top 10 research priorities for early-stage colorectal cancer: a Canadian patient-oriented priority-setting partnership.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer, one of the most commonly diagnosed cancers, is now being detected earlier and treatments are improving, which means that patients are living longer. Partnering with Canadian clinicians, patients and researchers, we aimed to determine research priorities for those living with early-stage colorectal cancer in Canada. METHODS: We followed the well-established priority-setting partnership outlined by the James Lind Alliance to identify and prioritize unanswered questions about early-stage (i.e., stages I-III) colorectal cancer. The study was conducted from September 2018 to September 2020. We surveyed patients, caregivers and clinicians from across Canada between June 2019 and December 2019. We categorized the responses using thematic analysis to generate a list of unique questions. We conducted an interim prioritization survey from April 2020 to July 2020, with patients, caregivers and clinicians, to determine a shorter list of questions, which was then reviewed at a final meeting (involving patients, caregivers and clinicians) in September 2020. At that meeting, we used a consensus-based process to determine the top 10 priorities. RESULTS: For the initial survey, 370 responses were submitted by 185 individuals; of the 98 individuals who provided demographic information, 44 (45%) were patients, 16 (16%) were caregivers, 7 (7%) were members of an advocacy group, 26 (27%) were health care professionals and 5 (5%) were categorized as "other." The responses were refined to create a list of 66 unique unanswered questions. Twenty-five respondents answered the interim prioritization survey: 13 patients (52%), 2 caregivers (8%), 3 advocacy group members (12%) and 7 health care professionals (28%). This led to a list of the top 30 questions. The final consensus meeting involved 20 individuals (10 patients [50%], 3 caregivers [15%] and 7 health care professionals [35%]), who agreed to the top 10 research priorities. The priorities covered a range of topics, including screening, treatment, recurrence, management of adverse effects and decision-making. INTERPRETATION: We determined the top research priorities for early-stage colorectal cancer using a collaborative partnership of stake-holders from across Canada. The priorities covered a broad range of topics that could be addressed by future research, including improved screening practices, the role of personalized medicine, the management of adverse effects of treatment, decision-making and prevention of recurrence.

Virtual Cancer Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Alberta: Evidence From a Mixed Methods Evaluation and Key Learnings.

PURPOSE: This study reports on a mixed methods evaluation conducted within a provincial cancer program in Alberta, Canada. The purpose was to capture key learnings from a rapid virtual care implementation because of the COVID-19 pandemic and to understand the impact on patient and staff experiences. METHODS: Administrative data were collected for 21,362 patients who had at least one virtual or in-person visit to any provincial cancer center from April 1, 2020, to June 10, 2020. Patient surveys were conducted with 397 randomly selected patients who had received a virtual visit. Surveys were also conducted with 396 Cancer Care Alberta staff. RESULTS: 14,906 virtual visits took place in this period, and about 40% of weekly visits were virtual. Significant differences were observed in both patient-reported symptom questionnaire completion rates and referrals to supportive care services between patients seen in-person and virtually. Patients receiving active treatments reported significantly lower levels of satisfaction with virtual visits than those seen for follow-up, but overall 90% of patients indicated interest in receiving virtual care in the future. Staff thought virtual visits increased patients' access to care but less than one third (31.5%) felt confident meeting patients' emotional needs and having conversations about disease progression and/or end of life virtually. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has driven the rapid implementation of virtual visits for cancer care delivery in health care settings. The findings from this mixed methods evaluation provide a concrete set of considerations for organizations looking to develop a large-scale, enduring virtual care strategy.

Using Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) Modelling to Forecast Symptom Complexity in an Ambulatory Oncology Clinic: Harnessing Predictive Analytics and Patient-Reported Outcomes.

An increasing incidence of cancer has led to high patient volumes and time challenges in ambulatory oncology clinics. By knowing how many patients are experiencing complex care needs in advance, clinic scheduling and staff allocation adjustments could be made to provide patients with longer or shorter timeslots to address symptom complexity. In this study, we used predictive analytics to forecast the percentage of patients with high symptom complexity in one clinic population in a given time period. Autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) modelling was utilized with patient-reported outcome (PRO) data and patient demographic information collected over 24 weeks. Eight additional weeks of symptom complexity data were collected and compared to assess the accuracy of the forecasting model. The predicted symptom complexity levels were compared with observation data and a mean absolute predicting error of 5.9% was determined, indicating the model's satisfactory accuracy for forecasting symptom complexity levels among patients in this clinic population. By using a larger sample and additional predictors, this model could be applied to other clinics to allow for tailored scheduling and staff allocation based on symptom complexity forecasting and inform system level models of care to improve outcomes and provide higher quality patient care.

Partners in research: building academic-practice partnerships to educate and mentor advanced practice nurses.

RATIONALE: Clinical practice is the primary focus of advanced practice nursing (APN) roles. However, with unprecedented needs for health care reform and quality improvement (QI), health care administrators are seeking new ways to utilize all dimensions of APN expertise, especially related to research and evidence-based practice. International studies reveal research as the most underdeveloped and underutilized aspect of these roles. AIMS: To improve patient care by strengthening the capacity of advanced practice nurses to integrate research and evidence-based practice activities into their day-to-day practice. METHODS: An academic-practice partnership was created among hospital-based advanced practice nurses, nurse administrators, and APN researchers to create an innovative approach to educate and mentor advanced practice nurses in conducting point-of-care research, QI, or evidence-based practice projects to improve patient, provider, and/or system outcomes. A practice-based research course was delivered to 2 cohorts of advanced practice nurses using a range of teaching strategies including 1-to-1 academic mentorship. All participants completed self-report surveys before and after course delivery. RESULTS: Through participation in this initiative, advanced practice nurses enhanced their knowledge, skills, and confidence in the design, implementation, and/or evaluation of research, QI, and evidence-based practice activities. CONCLUSION: Evaluation of this initiative provides evidence of the acceptability and feasibility of academic-practice partnerships to educate and mentor point-of-care providers on how to lead, implement, and integrate research, QI and evidence-based activities into their practices.

The Nurse Practitioner Role in Oncology: Advancing Patient Care.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To explore and describe the characteristics of the nurse practitioner (NP) role in cancer care in a Canadian province, identify the ways in which NPs add value to cancer care, and suggest ways in which organizations can better support the NP role.
. RESEARCH APPROACH: Exploratory, qualitative design.
. SETTING: Three cancer care facilities in a western Canadian province.
. PARTICIPANTS: 12 NPs in cancer care, 12 physicians working with NPs, and 5 administrators responsible for implementing the role.
. METHODOLOGIC APPROACH: Interpretive description, a qualitative method aimed at systematically exploring and analyzing a topic and applying the findings back into practice.
. FINDINGS: Each group had a different perspective on the role and its value. Physicians regarded these high-level practitioners as "help" within their own practices. Administrators tended to use NPs to manage patient workload within the traditional physician-focused system, but they could see value in NP-led innovation. The NPs themselves envisioned a nontraditional, holistic, patient-centered approach to care that challenged the interventionist focus of the medical model. Suggestions for enhancing the potential of the role were offered by all groups. 
. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of clarity about the NP role persists. Traditional professional hierarchies and expectations about care delivery continue to affect role implementation.
. INTERPRETATION: Nursing leaders must be proactive about NP role implementation to maximize its potential. Additional research is needed about the outcomes of the role and the process of implementation.

The use of low-dose warfarin as prophylaxis for central venous catheter thrombosis in patients with cancer: a meta-analysis.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To determine whether the use of low-dose warfarin could reduce the incidence of thrombosis in patients with cancer who have a central venous catheter (CVC). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL, CANCERLIT, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. DATA SYNTHESIS: Meta-analysis of four studies (N = 1,236 patients) revealed that 6.4% of warfarin-treated patients experienced a thrombotic event compared with 7.5% in the control (no treatment) group. The risk difference for thrombus formation was not significant (2.0%, confidence interval = -9.0% to 5.0%). CONCLUSIONS: The administration of warfarin did not reduce the incidence of symptomatic or asymptomatic CVC-associated thrombosis in patients with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Using research findings to inform clinical nursing practice is important in caring for patients and providing optimal and improved patient outcomes. Prophylactic use of low-dose warfarin may not prevent thrombus formation and is associated with potentially adverse patient outcomes.