A pilot randomized controlled trial to evaluate a survivorship care planning intervention for head and neck cancer survivor-caregiver dyads.

PURPOSE: Head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors and caregivers face significant challenges after treatment. This study's objective was to evaluate the effects of a dyadic survivorship care planning (SCP) intervention on survivor and caregiver outcomes. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial enrolled HNC survivors and caregivers within 18 months post-treatment, randomized dyads to SCP (one-session with written SCP and follow-up telephone call) or usual care and administered baseline and 6-month surveys. Multivariable linear regression examined intervention effects on depression and unmet needs in dyads and burden on caregiverss and a set of secondary outcomes. Rating scales and open-ended questions assessed acceptability. RESULTS: We randomized 89 survivor-caregiver dyads (42 usual care, 47 SCP dyads). Fidelity to SCP was high for most survivorship domains except discussing care barriers (13%). The most commonly discussed referrals included nutrition (83%) and behavioral medicine (38%), but referral uptake was low. The SCP intervention did not improve depression or unmet needs among dyads or burden among caregivers at 6 months relative to usual care (p's > .05). Nurses and dyads rated SCP favorably with > 80% positive ratings for session length and care plan content. Qualitative findings highlighted that SCP helped consolidate complex clinical information and strengthened survivor-caregiver-clinician relationships. CONCLUSIONS: An HNC SCP intervention was acceptable but ineffective in improving dyads' outcomes. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Post-treatment SCP in HNC dyads was ineffective in improving outcomes in survivors and caregivers as delivered in this study. More research is needed to understand how to capitalize on the acceptability of the SCP approach and enhance its effectiveness to support dyads.

Evaluation of a survivorship needs assessment planning tool for head and neck cancer survivor-caregiver dyads.

PURPOSE: The objectives of this study were to test the acceptability and feasibility of a survivorship needs assessment planning (SNAP) tool for head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors and caregivers, evaluate short-term changes in psychosocial outcomes after completing the SNAP session, and develop strategies for system refinement. METHODS: We used a prospective one-group design and mixed methods with HNC survivors and caregivers (N = 25 dyads). Participants completed baseline and 6-week surveys before and after completing a SNAP clinic visit to assess psychosocial outcomes and acceptability. Intervention sessions included tablet-based needs assessments driving tailored care plans. Dyads' open-ended feedback and clinician interviews (N = 12) evaluated acceptability and feasibility. RESULTS: SNAP data collection time burden and technology challenges were minimal, and care plans included messages (M = 19), educational materials (M = 13), and referrals (M = 4.5; 86% behavioral medicine, 77% nutrition, 65% physical therapy). Participants reported high satisfaction with the session and care plan, highlighting the key strengths of pulling complex medical information together and the focus on caregiver well-being, with multiple suggestions to facilitate clinic workflow. Depression and unmet needs decreased and survivorship knowledge increased significantly in survivors and caregivers (p < .05) over the 6-week period. CONCLUSIONS: The SNAP tool is an innovative technology-based survivor-centered strategy to assess and manage needs in HNC survivors and caregivers. Results support its acceptability and ability to address dyads' needs; the tool merits further testing in a clinical trial. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Technology-enabled care planning may be a productive way to assess and address HNC dyads' dynamic needs after treatment.

Factors Influencing Adherence to Recommended Colorectal Cancer Surveillance: Experiences and Behaviors of Colorectal Cancer Survivors.

The number of colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors in the USA is increasing and factors associated with CRC surveillance require attention. This study examined the role of personal, provider, and practice-level factors on CRC survivor care surveillance experiences and outcomes. A telephone survey, informed by the Chronic Care Model, was conducted over a 1-year period with 150 CRC survivors identified via the South Carolina Central Cancer Registry. Participants were ages ≥ 21 years and diagnosed with stages I-III CRC within 1.5 years of study enrollment. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression. Adherence was defined as receipt of surveillance colonoscopy at 13 months post-CRC surgery, as recommended by evidence-based guidelines. The majority of participants were male (55%) and white (86%), with a median age of 65 years (range 25-89). Almost half (43%) had attained a high school degree or less. Cancer stage was fairly evenly distributed, and 58% had received treatment by surgery alone (provider-level factor). Few participants (56%) received a survivorship care plan (practice-level factor), and adherence to surveillance colonoscopy was lowest (36%) among participants with more than one comorbidity (personal-level factor). Logistic regression models showed that the only significant effect of personal, provider, or practice-level factors on CRC surveillance adherence was related to type of health insurance coverage (private/HMO vs. other; p = 0.04). This is one of the first studies to evaluate CRC surveillance in a socioeconomically diverse sample. The only associations found among the examined factors and adherence were related to type of health insurance coverage. Participants with private/HMO health insurance were significantly more likely than participants with "other" health insurance coverage types (i.e., none, Medicare without supplement, Medicare with supplement) to be adherent to the 13-month colonoscopy. Therefore, future education strategies and patient navigation interventions could focus on identifying and overcoming multi-level barriers to CRC surveillance services.

Causal attributions and their impact on psychosocial functioning in head and neck cancer patient-caregiver dyads: a preliminary, longitudinal study.

PURPOSE: This longitudinal study explores causal attributions in newly diagnosed head/neck cancer (HNC) patients and their caregivers. METHODS: Perceptions of causal attributions and associated level of responsibility regarding each patient's HNC diagnosis at baseline (n = 72 dyads) were described and then tested as predictors of depressive symptoms, cancer worry, and perceived support 6 months later. RESULTS: When causes were reported, tobacco and alcohol use topped the list of both patients and caregivers. Three-quarters of dyads agreed about perceptions of the patients' responsibility in causing their HNC. Some dyad-level patterns of causal attribution were associated with patients' and caregivers' cancer worry (p < 0.05) and caregivers' perceived support (p < 0.05) in unadjusted models. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study indicates that causal attributions warrant further exploration in HNC patient-caregiver dyads specifically, as well as studies of quality of life in patient-caregiver dyads more broadly considered.

Availability of patient-centered cancer support services: A statewide survey of cancer centers.

The Institute of Medicine recommended in their landmark report "From Cancer Patient to Cancer Survivor: Lost in Transition" that services to meet the needs of cancer patients should extend beyond physical health issues to include functional and psychosocial consequences of cancer. However, no systems exist in the US to support state-level data collection on availability of support services for cancer patients. Developing a mechanism to systematically collect these data and document service availability is essential for guiding comprehensive cancer control planning efforts. This study was carried out to develop a protocol for implementing a statewide survey of all Commission on Cancer (CoC) accredited cancer centers in South Carolina and to implement the survey to examine availability of patient support services within the state. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of CoC-certified cancer centers in South Carolina. An administrator at each center completed a survey on availability of five services: 1) patient navigation; 2) distress screening; 3) genetic risk assessment and counseling, 4) survivorship care planning; and 5) palliative care. Completed surveys were received from 16 of 17 eligible centers (94%). Of the 16 centers, 44% reported providing patient navigation; 31% reported conducting distress screening; and 44% reported providing genetic risk assessment and counseling. Over 85% of centers reported having an active palliative care program, palliative care providers and a hospice program, but fewer had palliative outpatient services (27%), palliative inpatient beds (50%) or inpatient consultation teams (31%). This was a small, yet systematic survey in one state. This study demonstrated a practical method for successfully monitoring statewide availability of cancer patient support services, including identifying service gaps.

Physical and emotional well-being and support in newly diagnosed head and neck cancer patient-caregiver dyads.

The purpose of this study was to examine the physical and emotional well-being and social support in newly diagnosed head and neck cancer (HNC) patients and caregivers and identify sociodemographic, clinical, and behavioral risk factors associated with compromised well-being in patients and caregivers. Newly diagnosed HNC patients and their primary caregivers (N = 72 dyads) completed questionnaires before treatment assessing physical and mental well-being, depression, cancer worry, and open-ended support questions. Patients reported worse physical well-being than caregivers (p < 0.05) but similar levels of mental well-being. Caregivers reported providing emotional and instrumental support most frequently with an emphasis on nutrition and assistance with speech, appearance, and addictions. Both patients and their caregivers reported suboptimal mental well-being and depression. Smoking was associated with compromised well-being in patients, caregivers, and dyads. Compromised well-being in patients and their caregivers was more likely when patients were younger, had worse symptoms, and smoked/consumed alcohol (p < 0.05). While patients face more physical strain than caregivers, both equally confront emotional challenges. Results highlight risk factors for compromised well-being in both patients and their caregivers that should be assessed at diagnosis to guide identification of needed dyadic-focused supportive care resources.

Recruiting colorectal cancer survivors to a surveillance study: Barriers and successful strategies.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) survival rates are increasing. Effective strategies to recruit CRC survivors to surveillance studies are needed. OBJECTIVE: We analyzed the barriers encountered while recruiting CRC survivors to a study assessing their surveillance care experiences. METHODS: The study included three phases: (I) focus groups/key informant interviews; (II) cognitive interviews; and (III) a statewide population-based telephone survey. PARTICIPANTS: In Phases I-II, clinic-based data and cancer center registries were used to identify CRC survivors who had received CRC resection within the past 18 months. In Phase III, survivors who had received CRC resection within the past two years were identified via a statewide, population-based cancer registry. RESULTS: In Phase I, 16 survivors participated in focus groups at two National Cancer Center-affiliated sites (response rate=29.6%). Eighteen additional survivors participated in individual interviews (response rate=50%). In Phase II, 11 survivors participated in cognitive interviews (response rate=81.8%). In Phase III, 150 survivors participated in the statewide survey (response rate=62.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Group-based/in-person recruitment efforts were unsuccessful due to scheduling barriers, lack of transportation, and remaining discomfort from previous resection surgery. Telephone-based data collection strategies produced higher response rates. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: To enhance CRC surveillance research, future studies could incorporate CRC survivor-centered recruitment strategies.

Patient participation in cancer clinical trials: A pilot test of lay navigation.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials (CT) represent an important treatment option for cancer patients. Unfortunately, patients face challenges to enrolling in CTs, such as logistical barriers, poor CT understanding and complex clinical regimens. Patient navigation is a strategy that may help to improve the delivery of CT education and support services. We examined the feasibility and initial effect of one navigation strategy, use of lay navigators. METHODS: A lay CT navigation intervention was evaluated in a prospective cohort study among 40 lung and esophageal cancer patients. The intervention was delivered by a trained lay navigator who viewed a 17-minute CT educational video with each patient, assessed and answered their questions about CT participation and addressed reported barriers to care and trial participation. RESULTS: During this 12-month pilot project, 85% (95% CI: 72%-93%) of patients eligible for a therapeutic CT consented to participate in the CT navigation intervention. Among navigated patients, CT understanding improved between pre- and post-test (means 3.54 and 4.40, respectively; p-value 0.004), and 95% (95% CI: 82%-98%) of navigated patients consented to participate in a CT. Navigated patients reported being satisfied with patient navigation services and CT participation. CONCLUSIONS: In this formative single-arm pilot project, initial evidence was found for the potential effect of a lay navigation intervention on CT understanding and enrollment. A randomized controlled trial is needed to examine the efficacy of the intervention for improving CT education and enrollment.

Racial and Ethnic Group Knowledge, Perceptions and Behaviors about Human Papillomavirus, Human Papillomavirus Vaccination, and Cervical Cancer among Adolescent Females.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines provide an opportunity to greatly reduce the burden of cervical cancer. Although there has been improvement in uptake, there are notable ethnic/racial disparities. This qualitative study was conducted to better understand factors related to vaccine uptake among female adolescents from 3 racial/ethnic groups: African American (AA), Hispanic, and Caucasian. Findings can inform the development of optimal messages and strategies for clinical and population-based interventions. DESIGN AND SETTING: This mixed-methods descriptive study included completion of a brief structured survey and focus group discussion. Six focus groups were conducted with female adolescents, 2 each in the AA, Hispanic, and Caucasian groups. Brief structured survey questions and the focus group protocol addressed knowledge, perceptions, and behaviors related to HPV, HPV vaccination, and cervical cancer. PARTICIPANTS, INTERVENTIONS, AND MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants were 60 female adolescents (ages 13-19, mean age = 16.6 years) recruited from high schools, public health clinics, and churches. RESULTS: Themes across questions were remarkably similar among AA, Hispanic, and Caucasian participants. Each group had high awareness of the terms HPV, HPV vaccination, and cervical cancer, but with little in-depth knowledge about these topics. There was a high acceptance of HPV vaccination. Misperceptions about optimal cervical cancer prevention strategies such as simply knowing one's partner and good hygiene were most common among Hispanic adolescents. Awareness about Pap testing was most common among Caucasian adolescents. CONCLUSION: Predominantly uniform perceptions of HPV vaccines across racial/ethnic groups suggest a "one size fits all" approach will likely have greater reach with cervical cancer prevention messaging than culturally tailored interventions.

Quality of Life in Head and Neck Cancer Patient-Caregiver Dyads: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: As we learn about patient experiences with head and neck cancer, it is also important to consider caregivers so that family-centered care can be improved. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this systematic review was to (a) identify the research questions, methods, and measures that have been examined in quality-of-life studies with head and neck cancer patients and their caregivers (dyads) and (b) identify gaps and future directions for research and practice. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of electronic databases using keywords (head and neck cancer, caregiver, quality of life) and included studies that assessed quality of life-related constructs in both patients and caregivers. A dyadic quality-of-life conceptual model guided the summary of observations. RESULTS: Thirteen studies met eligibility criteria. The most common research questions included comparing patient and caregiver quality of life, examining relationships between personal and clinical factors in 1 dyad member and a quality-of-life outcome in the other, and exploring relationships between interpersonal processes and quality of life. Psychological quality-of-life constructs were most commonly studied. There was substantial variability in study findings, in part due to differences in study questions and samples. CONCLUSIONS: Future research is needed to examine longitudinal interpersonal processes in head and neck cancer. Unique caregiving tasks should be inventoried, and dyadic data analysis techniques should be used. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Head and neck cancer dramatically affects quality of life in patients and caregivers, and quality clinical care requires a dyadic focus. Oncology nurses have a unique opportunity to develop and implement dyadic illness management models for head and neck cancer.

Physician perspectives on colorectal cancer surveillance care in a changing environment.

The purpose of this formative qualitatively driven mixed-methods study was to refine a measurement tool for use in interventions to improve colorectal cancer (CRC) surveillance care. We employed key informant interviews to explore the attitudes, practices, and preferences of four physician specialties. A national survey, literature review, and expert consultation also informed survey development. Cognitive pretesting obtained participant feedback to improve the survey's face and content validity and reliability. Results showed that additional domains were needed to reflect contemporary interdisciplinary trends in survivorship care, evolving practice changes and current health policy. Observed dissonance in specialists' perspectives poses challenges for the development of interventions and psychometrically sound measurement. Implications for future research include need for a flexible care model with enhanced communication and role definitions among clinical specialists, improvements in surveillance at multilevels (patients, providers, and systems), and measurement tools that focus on multispecialty involvement and the changing practice and policy environment.

Colorectal Cancer Screening in US Seniors Ages 76-84 Years.

The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends patient-physician discussions about the appropriateness of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among adults ages 76-84 years who have never been screened. In this study, we used data from the 2010 National Health Interview Survey to examine patterns of CRC screening and provider recommendation among seniors ages 76-84 years, and made some comparisons to younger adults. Nationally-representative samples of 1379 adults ages 76-84 years and 8797 adults ages 50-75 years responded to questions about CRC screening status, receipt of provider recommendation, and discussion of test options; 22.7% (95% CI 20.1-25.3) of seniors ages 76-84 had never been tested for CRC and therefore were not up-to-date with guidelines; 3.9% (95% CI 2.0-7.6) of these individuals reported a recent provider recommendation for screening. In multivariate analyses, the likelihood of never having been tested was significantly greater for seniors of other/multiple race or Hispanic ethnicity; with high school or less education; without private health insurance coverage; who had ≤ 1 doctor visit in the past year; without recent screening for breast, cervical, or prostate cancer; with no or unknown CRC family history; or with ≤ 1 chronic disease. Among the minority of respondents ages 50-75 and 76-84 reporting a provider recommendation, 73.2% indicated that the provider recommended particular tests, which was overwhelmingly colonoscopy (≥ 89 %). Nearly one-quarter of adults 76-84 have never been screened for CRC, and rates of provider recommendation in this group are very low. Greater attention to informed CRC screening discussions with screening-eligible seniors is needed.

A Formative Study of Colon Cancer Surveillance Care: Implications for Survivor-Centered Interventions.

Colon cancer is one of the most commonly diagnosed cancers in the United States, and an increasing number of survivors has underscored the need for improved colon cancer surveillance care quality. Post-treatment surveillance includes follow-up care visits and tests as well as psychosocial support and lifestyle counseling. This formative study explored the individual, interpersonal, and organizational-level factors related to adherence to surveillance care guidelines to identify modifiable factors for potential educational intervention strategies. A convenience sample of 22 survivors (12 women and 10 men) from two cancer centers were recruited to participate in focus groups or key informant telephone interviews to explore their experiences with care after completing treatment and complete a brief survey. Content analysis was used to identify themes. Results confirmed that survivors navigated a complex surveillance care schedule and described a strong trust in their health care providers that guided their follow-up care experiences. Participants defined the terms "survivorship" and "follow-up" in a variety of different ways. Individual-level themes critical to survivors' experiences included having a positive attitude, relying on one's faith, and coping with fears. Interpersonal-level themes centered around interactions and communication with family and health care providers in follow-up care. While organizational-level factors were highlighted infrequently, participants rated office reminder systems and communication among their multiple providers as valuable. Educational interventions capitalizing on survivors' connections with their physicians and focusing on preparing survivors for what to expect in the next phase of their cancer experience, could be beneficial at the end of treatment to activate survivors for the transition to the post-treatment period.

A pilot randomized controlled trial testing a minimal intervention to prepare breast cancer survivors for recovery.

BACKGROUND: Interventions addressing cancer survivors' posttreatment concerns can be time-intensive and require specialized staff. Research is needed to identify feasible minimal intervention strategies to improve survivors' quality of life after treatment. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and short-term impact of a minimal clinic intervention on breast cancer survivors' quality of life, unmet needs, distress, and cancer worry. INTERVENTIONS/METHODS: In this randomized controlled pilot trial, we enrolled breast cancer survivors at the end of treatment and administered baseline surveys. Participants were randomized to study arm (4-week video plus educational booklet intervention group and usual care group) and completed follow-up surveys at 10 weeks. Linear regression was used to examine intervention effects on quality of life outcomes controlling for clinical and demographic factors. Open-ended questions were used to examine program satisfaction and obtain feedback to improve the intervention. RESULTS: We enrolled 92 survivors in the trial. Participants rated the intervention highly and reported feeling less isolated and having more realistic expectations about their recovery after completing the program. Despite positive qualitative findings, no significant intervention effects were observed for quality of life, unmet needs, distress, or cancer worry in unadjusted or adjusted analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Future research is needed to define optimal intervention elements to prepare breast cancer survivors for the posttreatment period. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Effective survivorship interventions may require more intensive components such as clinical input and longer follow-up periods.

Follow-up to abnormal cancer screening tests: considering the multilevel context of care.

The call for multilevel interventions to improve the quality of follow-up to abnormal cancer screening has been out for a decade, but published work emphasizes individual approaches, and conceptualizations differ regarding the definition of levels. To investigate the scope and methods being undertaken in this focused area of follow-up to abnormal tests (breast, colon, cervical), we reviewed recent literature and grants (2007-2012) funded by the National Cancer Institute. A structured search yielded 16 grants with varying definitions of "follow-up" (e.g., completion of recommended tests, time to diagnosis); most included minority racial/ethnic group participants. Ten grants concentrated on measurement/intervention development and 13 piloted or tested interventions (categories not mutually exclusive). All studies considered patient-level factors and effects. Although some directed interventions at provider levels, few measured group characteristics and effects of interventions on the providers or levels other than the patient. Multilevel interventions are being proposed, but clarity about endpoints, definition of levels, and measures is needed. The differences in the conceptualization of levels and factors that affect practice need empirical exploration, and we need to measure their salient characteristics to advance our understanding of how context affects cancer care delivery in a changing practice and policy environment.

"We both just trusted and leaned on the Lord": a qualitative study of religiousness and spirituality among African American breast cancer survivors and their caregivers.

PURPOSE: Most breast cancer (BC) survivorship research focuses on the general population of survivors. Scant research investigates the potentially unique experiences of minorities, especially during and after the difficult transition from primary treatment to post-treatment. This qualitative study explored African American BC survivors' and caregivers' quality-of-life in the post-treatment period with a focus on social and spiritual well-being. METHODS: Participants included a convenience sample of African American women with stage I-III BC (N = 23) who completed treatment 6-24 months before enrollment. Primary caregivers (N = 22) included friends, spouses and other family members (21 complete dyads). Participants completed separate semi-structured telephone interviews. Template analysis was used to evaluate themes related to religiousness and spirituality, both across and within dyads. RESULTS: After treatment, religiousness and spirituality played a major role in both survivors' and caregivers' lives by: (1) providing global guidance, (2) guiding illness management efforts and (3) facilitating recovery. Participants described a spiritual connectedness with God and others in their social networks. Dyad members shared the goal of keeping a positive attitude and described positive growth from cancer. Few future concerns were expressed due to the belief that survivors were healed and "done" with cancer. Beyond practical and emotional support, provision of spiritual assistance was common. CONCLUSIONS: Results highlight the principal, positive role of religiousness and spirituality for African American BC survivors and caregivers after treatment. Findings emphasize the need to assess the importance of religious and spiritual beliefs and practices, and if appropriate, to provide resources that promote spiritual well-being.

Exploring dimensions of coping in advanced colorectal cancer: implications for patient-centered care.

Promoting patient-centered care from diagnosis to end of life requires a better understanding of physical, psychological, social, and spiritual coping factors in advanced cancer. Using qualitative methods, the authors explored diagnosis, care planning, and treatment experiences of individuals with metastatic colorectal cancer (N=26). The main physical factors salient to patients during all care phases included symptoms and physical functioning. Key psychological factors included persistent uncertainty and a range of emotions that varied by care phase. Participants also relied heavily on social and spiritual factors for guidance. Results highlight the complex nature of coping with advanced cancer and the resources needed to facilitate high-quality care.

Breast and colorectal cancer screening: U.S. primary care physicians' reports of barriers.

BACKGROUND: Primary care physicians (PCPs) play a key role in performing and referring patients for cancer screening. Understanding barriers to test use is critical to developing strategies that promote adherence to clinical guidelines, but current literature does not distinguish the extent to which barriers may be similar or unique across screening modalities. PURPOSE: To describe PCPs' self-reported perceptions of barriers to screening for breast and colorectal cancer (CRC) and compare the top three barriers associated with these screening modalities. METHODS: Cross-sectional data analyzed in 2011 from a nationally representative survey of 2478 PCPs in the U.S. in 2006-2007. RESULTS: PCPs reported greater barriers for CRC screening than for mammography. Lack of patient follow-through to complete recommended screening and the inability to pay for tests were the main barriers perceived by PCPs for both types of screening. Another major barrier cited was that patients do not perceive CRC as a threat. This was a lesser concern for the well-diffused message about the need for mammography. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first national study to provide a comparison of physician-perceived barriers to breast and CRC screening. Study results suggest that efforts to improve use of cancer screening, and CRC screening in particular, will require interventions at physician, practice, and health-system levels.

A multilevel research perspective on cancer care delivery: the example of follow-up to an abnormal mammogram.

In 1999, researchers and policy makers recognized the challenge of creating an integrated patient-centered cancer care process across the many types of care from risk assessment through end of life. More than a decade later, there has been limited progress toward that goal even though the standard reductionist approach to health services and medical research has resulted in major advances in tests, procedures, and individualized patient approaches to care. In this commentary, we propose that considering an entire care process within its multilevel context may increase progress toward an integrated experience and improvements in the quality of care. As an illustrative case, we describe the multilevel context of care delivery for the process of follow-up to an abnormal screening mammogram. By taking a multilevel perspective on this process, we identify a rich set of options for intervening and improving follow-up to abnormalities and, therefore, outcomes of screening. We propose that taking this multilevel perspective when designing interventions may improve the quality of cancer care in an effective and sustainable way.

Introduction: Understanding and influencing multilevel factors across the cancer care continuum.

Health care in the United States is notoriously expensive while often failing to deliver the care recommended in published guidelines. There is, therefore, a need to consider our approach to health-care delivery. Cancer care is a good example for consideration because it spans the continuum of health-care issues from primary prevention through long-term survival and end-of-life care. In this monograph, we emphasize that health-care delivery occurs in a multilevel system that includes organizations, teams, and individuals. To achieve health-care delivery consistent with the Institute of Medicine's six quality aims (safety, effectiveness, timeliness, efficiency, patient-centeredness, and equity), we must influence multiple levels of that multilevel system. The notion that multiple levels of contextual influence affect behaviors through interdependent interactions is a well-established ecological view. This view has been used to analyze health-care delivery and health disparities. However, experience considering multilevel interventions in health care is much less robust. This monograph includes 13 chapters relevant to expanding the foundation of research for multilevel interventions in health-care delivery. Subjects include clinical cases of multilevel thinking in health-care delivery, the state of knowledge regarding multilevel interventions, study design and measurement considerations, methods for combining interventions, time as a consideration in the evaluation of effects, measurement of effects, simulations, application of multilevel thinking to health-care systems and disparities, and implementation of the Affordable Care Act of 2010. Our goal is to outline an agenda to proceed with multilevel intervention research, not because it guarantees improvement in our current approach to health care, but because ignoring the complexity of the multilevel environment in which care occurs has not achieved the desired improvements in care quality outlined by the Institute of Medicine at the turn of the millennium.