Correction to: Oncology practitioners' perspectives and practice patterns of post-treatment cancer survivorship care in the Asia-Pacific region: results from the STEP study.

It has been highlighted that the original manuscript [1] contains a typesetting error in the surname of Jesson Butcon. This was incorrectly captured as Jessica Butcon in the original manuscript which has since been updated.

Oncology practitioners' perspectives and practice patterns of post-treatment cancer survivorship care in the Asia-Pacific region: results from the STEP study.

BACKGROUND: Most efforts to advance cancer survivorship care have occurred in Western countries. There has been limited research towards gaining a comprehensive understanding of survivorship care provision in the Asia-Pacific region. This study aimed to establish the perceptions of responsibility, confidence, and frequency of survivorship care practices of oncology practitioners and examine their perspectives on factors that impede quality survivorship care. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of hospital-based oncology practitioners in 10 Asia-Pacific countries was undertaken between May 2015-October 2016. The participating countries included Australia, Hong Kong, China, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, Singapore, India, Myanmar, and The Philippines. The survey was administered using paper-based or online questionnaires via specialist cancer care settings, educational meetings, and professional organisations. RESULTS: In total, 1501 oncology practitioners participated in the study. When comparing the subscales of responsibility perception, frequency and confidence, Australian practitioners had significantly higher ratings than practitioners in Hong Kong, Japan, Thailand, and Singapore (all p < 0.05). Surprisingly, practitioners working in Low- and Mid- Income Countries (LMICs) had higher levels of responsibility perception, confidence and frequencies of delivering survivorship care than those working in High-Income Countries (HICs) (p < 0.001), except for the responsibility perception of care coordination where no difference in scores was observed (p = 0.83). Physicians were more confident in delivering most of the survivorship care interventions compared to nurses and allied-health professionals. Perceived barriers to survivorship care were similar across the HICs and LMICs, with the most highly rated items for all practitioners being lack of time, dedicated educational resources for patients and family members, and evidence-based practice guidelines informing survivorship care. CONCLUSIONS: Different survivorship practices have been observed between HICs and LMICs, Australia and other countries and between the professional disciplines. Future service planning and research efforts should take these findings into account and overcome barriers identified in this study.

Health Insurance for Cancer Care in Asia: Thailand.

Thailand has a universal multi-payer system with two main types of health insurance: National Health Security Office or public health insurance and private insurance. National health insurance is designed for people who are not eligible to be members of any employment-based health insurance program. Although private health insurance is also available, all Thai citizens are required to be enrolled in either national health insurance or employees' health insurance. There are many differences between the public health insurance and private insurance. Public health insurance, therefore, initiates programs that offer many sets of benefit packages for high-cost care. For cancer care, cover screening, curative treatment such as surgery, chemotherapy, radiation together with supportive and palliative care.

Role of the nurse in patient education and follow-up of people receiving oral chemotherapy treatment: an international survey.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to explore the nursing role in education and follow-up of patients who were taking oral chemotherapy (CT) and to identify the worldwide gap in patient education about oral CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer members were invited to participate in a survey on oral CT. Nurse coordinators collected data via a 16-item questionnaire. Respondents totaled 1115 oncology nurses from 15 countries. RESULTS: Findings showed that about half of subjects work in outpatient/ambulatory clinics and had given at least two or more oral CT drugs. Although 52% had some type of guidelines/protocols, 47% reported not having received any education about oral CT drugs. While 64% report being involved in patient education, 58% of subjects indicated lack of patient education materials that are specific for oral CT agents. Only 27% stated that they gave all necessary information such as when and how to take the drugs, drug safety and storage, side effects, and symptom management. Reasons for not being involved in oral CT education and follow-up included beliefs that the physician plans the oral CT and gives patients necessary instructions (34%), that nurses only see patients who receive intravenous chemotherapy (16%), that nurses have lack of knowledge about oral agents (15%), and belief that physicians are responsible for patient follow-up. The nurses suggested better education and follow-up of patients to include the written patient education materials (33%) and professional education for nurses (30%). CONCLUSIONS: Findings revealed the need for professional education for nurses to ensure comprehensive, consistent patient education and development of written materials for patients receiving oral CT treatment.