Barriers and facilitators associated with implementing interventions to support oral anticancer agent adherence in academic and community cancer center settings.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study is to determine barriers and facilitators to the implementation of medication adherence interventions to support cancer patients taking novel, targeted oral anticancer agents (OAAs). METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews using a semi-structured guide from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We used purposive sampling to identify clinicians (physicians, pharmacists, nurse practitioners, nurses) and administrators (leadership from medicine, pharmacy, and nursing) who delivered care and/or oversee care delivery for patients with chronic leukemia prescribed an OAA. RESULTS: A total of 19 individuals participated in an interview (12 clinicians and 7 administrators), with 10 primarily employed by an academic cancer center; 5 employed by the community cancer center; and 4 employed by the integrated health-system specialty pharmacy. Barriers identified included low awareness of adherence interventions, difficulty in adherence measurement, complexity of designing and implementing a structured adherence intervention, and competing priorities. Facilitators identified included support of hospital administrators, value for pharmacists, and willingness to embrace change. Participants also made recommendations moving forward including standardizing workflow, designating champions, iterating implementation strategies, and improving communication between clinicians and with patients. CONCLUSION: Individual and system level factors were identified as determinants of implementation effectiveness of medication adherence interventions. A multidisciplinary advisory panel will be assembled to design comprehensive and actionable strategies to refine and implement a structured intervention to improve medication adherence in cancer patients.

Veterans Health Administration National TeleOncology Service.

PURPOSE: As the largest integrated health care system in the United States, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) is a leader in telehealth-delivered care. All 10 million Veterans cared for within the VA are eligible for telehealth. The VA cares for approximately 46,000 Veteran patients with newly diagnosed cancer and an estimated 400,000 prevalent cases annually. With nearly 38% of VA health care system users residing in rural areas and only 44% of rural counties having an oncologist, many Veterans lack local access to specialized cancer services. METHODS: We describe the VA's National TeleOncology (NTO) Service. NTO was established to provide Veterans with the opportunity for specialized treatment regardless of geographical location. Designed as a hub-and-spoke model, VA oncologists from across the country can provide care to patients at spoke sites. Spoke sites are smaller and rural VA medical centers that are less able to independently provide the full range of services available at larger facilities. In addition to smaller rural spoke sites, NTO also provides subspecialized oncology care to Veterans located in larger VA medical facilities that do not have subspecialties available or that have limited capacity. RESULTS: As of fiscal year 2021, 23 clinics are served by or engaged in planning for delivery of NTO and there are 24 physicians providing care through the NTO virtual hub. Most NTO physicians continue to provide patient care in separate traditional in-person clinics. Approximately 4,300 unique Veterans have used NTO services. Approximately half (52%) of Veterans using NTO lived in rural areas. Most of these Veterans had more than one remote visit through NTO. CONCLUSION: NTO is a state-of-the-art model that has the potential to revolutionize the way cancer care is delivered, which should improve the experience of Veterans receiving cancer care.

Protocol for a mixed methods feasibility and implementation study of a community-based integrated care model for home-dwelling older adults: The INSPIRE project.

BACKGROUND: Evaluations of integrated care models for home-dwelling frail older adults have shown inconclusive results on health and service outcomes. However, limited research has focused on the implementation of integrated care models. Applying implementation science methods may facilitate uptake of integrated care models, thus generating positive outcomes e.g., reduced hospital admissions. This paper describes the protocol to assess the feasibility of an integrated care model (featuring a four-step comprehensive geriatric assessment: screening, a multi-dimensional assessment, a coordinated individualized care plan and follow-up) designed for a new community-based center for home-dwelling older adults in Switzerland. The study includes the following objectives: 1) to assess implementation by a) monitoring respondents to the outreach strategies and describing the Center's visitors; b) assessing implementation outcomes related to the care model (i.e., adoption, acceptability, feasibility, fidelity) and implementation processes related to collaboration; and 2) assessing implementation costs. METHODS: For objective 1a, we will use a descriptive design to assess respondents to the outreach strategies and describe the Center's visitors. We will use a parallel convergent mixed methods design for objective 1b. Implementation outcomes data will be collected from meetings with the Center's staff, interviews with older adults and their informal caregivers, and reviewing older adults' health records at the Center. Implementation processes related to collaboration will be assessed through a questionnaire to external collaborators (e.g., GPs) towards the end of the study. For objective 2, implementation costs will be calculated using time-driven activity-based costing methods. Data collection is anticipated to occur over approximately six months. DISCUSSION: This study of a contextually adapted integrated care model will inform adaptations to the outreach strategies, care model and implementation strategies in one community center, prior to evaluating the care model effectiveness and potentially scaling out the intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Feasibility study registration ID with clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05302310; registration ID with BMC: ISRCTN12324618.

Addressing Hypertension Outcomes Using Telehealth and Population Health Managers: Adaptations and Implementation Considerations.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There is a growing evidence base describing population health approaches to improve blood pressure control. We reviewed emerging trends in hypertension population health management and present implementation considerations from an intervention called Team-supported, Electronic health record-leveraged, Active Management (TEAM). By doing so, we highlight the role of population health managers, practitioners who use population level data and to proactively engage at-risk patients, in improving blood pressure control. RECENT FINDINGS: Within a population health paradigm, we discuss telehealth-delivered approaches to equitably improve hypertension care delivery. Additionally, we explore implementation considerations and complementary features of team-based, telehealth-delivered, population health management. By leveraging the unique role and expertise of a population health manager as core member of team-based telehealth, health systems can implement a cost-effective and scalable intervention that addresses multi-level barriers to hypertension care delivery. We describe the literature of telehealth-based population health management for patients with hypertension. Using the TEAM intervention as a case study, we then present implementation considerations and intervention adaptations to integrate a population health manager within the health care team and effectively manage hypertension for a defined patient population. We emphasize practical considerations to inform implementation, scaling, and sustainability. We highlight future research directions to advance the field and support translational efforts in diverse clinical and community contexts.

Accelerating Implementation of Virtual Care in an Integrated Health Care System: Future Research and Operations Priorities.

BACKGROUND: Virtual care is critical to Veterans Health Administration (VHA) efforts to expand veterans' access to care. Health care policies such as the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability (CHOICE) Act and the Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks (MISSION) Act impact how the VHA provides care. Research on ways to refine virtual care delivery models to meet the needs of veterans, clinicians, and VHA stakeholders is needed. OBJECTIVE: Given the importance of virtual approaches for increasing access to high-quality VHA care, in December 2019, we convened a Think Tank, Accelerating Implementation of Virtual Care in VHA Practice, to consider challenges to virtual care research and practice across the VHA, discuss novel approaches to using and evaluating virtual care, assess perspectives on virtual care, and develop priorities to enhance virtual care in the VHA. METHODS: We used a participatory approach to develop potential priorities for virtual care research and activities at the VHA. We refined these priorities through force-ranked prioritization and group discussion, and developed solutions for selected priorities. RESULTS: Think Tank attendees (n = 18) consisted of VHA stakeholders, including operations partners (e.g., Office of Rural Health, Office of Nursing Services, Health Services Research and Development), clinicians (e.g., physicians, nurses, psychologists, physician assistants), and health services researchers. We identified an initial list of fifteen potential priorities and narrowed these down to four. The four priorities were (1) scaling evidence-based practices, (2) centralizing virtual care, (3) creating high-value care within the VHA with virtual care, and (4) identifying appropriate patients for virtual care. CONCLUSION: Our Think Tank took an important step in setting a partnered research agenda to optimize the use of virtual care within the VHA. We brought together research and operations stakeholders and identified possibilities, partnerships, and potential solutions for virtual care.

Awareness of Cancer Risk Factors and Its Signs and Symptoms in Northern Tanzania: a Cross-Sectional Survey in the General Population and in People Living with HIV.

An important component of cancer control programs for the growing burden in sub-Saharan Africa is a population's awareness of risk factors. Studies thereof have focused on single rather than multiple cancers and carcinogens. During March and April 2015, we undertook a survey to assess awareness of multiple cancer risk factors and symptoms in the Kilimanjaro Region, North Tanzania. General population (n = 620) and attendees at HIV care-and-treatment clinics (CTCs) were included (n = 207). Participants' mean age was 43.8 (interquartile range 30-52) years; 58% were female. Awareness of cancer risk was highest for tobacco (90%) and alcoholic spirits (67%), but tended to be lower for infections (41% for HIV (42.2% and 41.4% for CTC and community group, respectively) and 16% for HPV (16.0% and 16.6% for CTC and community group, respectively)), while that of moldy maize and peanuts was 35% for both. Awareness of specific cancer signs and symptoms ranged between 70% and 90%. Awareness of alcohol and tobacco was higher in men than women (odds ratio = 1.82 (1.38, 2.40) and 3.96 (2.14, 7.31), respectively). In relation to cancer treatment, 70% preferred modern medicine and 10% preferred traditional medicine alone. Sixty percent was not aware of any local cancer early detection services. Only 20% had ever been examined for cancer, and of those screened, CTC group was 1.5 times more likely to screen than community participants. Awareness did not differ by age or HIV status. There are good levels of cancer risk factor awareness for certain lifestyle-related carcinogens in Tanzania; however, increased awareness is needed especially for infections and cancer warning symptom both in the general and HIV-positive population, as well as some myths to be dispelled.

Validation and Quality Assessment of the Kilimanjaro Cancer Registry.

PURPOSE: Global cancer burden has increasingly shifted to low- and middle-income countries and is particularly pronounced in Africa. There remains a lack of comprehensive cancer information as a result of limited cancer registry development. In Moshi, Tanzania, a regional cancer registry exists at Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Center. Data quality is unknown. Our objective was to evaluate the completeness and quality of the Kilimanjaro Cancer Registry (KCR). METHODS: In October 2015, we conducted a retrospective review of KCR by validating the internal consistency of registry records with medical and pathology records. We randomly sampled approximately 100 total registry cases. Four reviewers not associated with the KCR manually collected data elements from medical records and compared them with KCR data. RESULTS: All 100 reviewed registry cases had complete cancer site and morphology included in the registry. Six had a recorded stage. For the majority (n = 92), the basis of diagnosis was pathology. Pathology reports were found in the medical record for 40% of patients; for the remainder, these were stored separately in the pathology department. Of sampled registry cases, the KCR and medical records were 98% and 94% concordant for primary cancer site and morphology, respectively. For 28%, recorded diagnosis dates were within 14 days of what was found in the medical record, and for 32%, they were within 30 days. CONCLUSION: The KCR has a high level of concordance for classification and coding when data are retrieved for validation. This parameter is one of the most important for measuring data quality in a regional cancer registry.

Behavioral interventions to improve hypertension control in the Veterans Affairs healthcare system.

Hypertension is a common and costly disease among US veterans. The Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system is the largest integrated healthcare provider in the United States and reviewing hypertension interventions developed in the VA may inform interventions delivered in other integrated healthcare systems. This review describes behavioral interventions to improve hypertension control that have been conducted in the VA since 1970. The authors identified 27 articles representing 15 behavioral interventional trials. Studies were heterogeneous across patients, providers, interventionist, and intervention components. The VA bridges services related to diagnosis, treatment, medication management, and behavioral counseling in a unified approach that supports collaboration and provides infrastructure for hypertension management.

Patient-reported quality of supportive care among patients with colorectal cancer in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System.

PURPOSE: High-quality supportive care is an essential component of comprehensive cancer care. We implemented a patient-centered quality of cancer care survey to examine and identify predictors of quality of supportive care for bowel problems, pain, fatigue, depression, and other symptoms among 1,109 patients with colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with new diagnosis of colorectal cancer at any Veterans Health Administration medical center nationwide in 2008 were ascertained through the Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry and sent questionnaires assessing a variety of aspects of patient-centered cancer care. We received questionnaires from 63% of eligible patients (N = 1,109). Descriptive analyses characterizing patient experiences with supportive care and binary logistic regression models were used to examine predictors of receipt of help wanted for each of the five symptom categories. RESULTS: There were significant gaps in patient-centered quality of supportive care, beginning with symptom assessment. In multivariable modeling, the impact of clinical factors and patient race on odds of receiving wanted help varied by symptom. Coordination of care quality predicted receipt of wanted help for all symptoms, independent of patient demographic or clinical characteristics. CONCLUSION: This study revealed substantial gaps in patient-centered quality of care, difficult to characterize through quality measurement relying on medical record review alone. It established the feasibility of collecting patient-reported quality measures. Improving quality measurement of supportive care and implementing patient-reported outcomes in quality-measurement systems are high priorities for improving the processes and outcomes of care for patients with cancer.

Examining potential colorectal cancer care disparities in the Veterans Affairs health care system.

PURPOSE: Racial disparities in cancer treatment and outcomes are a national problem. The nationwide Veterans Affairs (VA) health system seeks to provide equal access to quality care. However, the relationship between race and care quality for veterans with colorectal cancer (CRC) treated within the VA is poorly understood. We examined the association between race and receipt of National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline-concordant CRC care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was an observational, retrospective medical record abstraction of patients with CRC treated in the VA. Two thousand twenty-two patients (white, n = 1,712; African American, n = 310) diagnosed with incident CRC between October 1, 2003, and March 31, 2006, from 128 VA medical centers, were included. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine associations between race and receipt of guideline-concordant care (computed tomography scan, preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen, clear surgical margins, medical oncology referral for stages II and III, fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III, and surveillance colonoscopy for stages I to III). Explanatory variables included demographic and disease characteristics. RESULTS: There were no significant racial differences for receipt of guideline-concordant CRC care. Older age at diagnosis was associated with reduced odds of medical oncology referral and surveillance colonoscopy. Presence of cardiovascular comorbid conditions was associated with reduced odds of medical oncology referral (odds ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.89). CONCLUSION: In these data, we observed no evidence of racial disparities in CRC care quality. Future studies could examine causal pathways for the VA's equal, quality care and ways to translate the VA's success into other hospital systems.

An examination of racial differences in process and outcome of colorectal cancer care quality among users of the veterans affairs health care system.

BACKGROUND: Veterans Affairs (VA) manages the largest US integrated health care system. Although quality of VA colorectal cancer (CRC) care is well chronicled, there is a paucity of research examining racial differences in this care. This study examines racial differences in 2 dimensions of quality of VA CRC care: processes (time to treatment) and outcomes (survival). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective data were from the VA External Peer Review Program (EPRP), a nationwide VA quality-monitoring program. Study patients were white and African American men diagnosed with nonmetastatic CRC between 2003 and 2006 who received definitive CRC surgery. We examined 3 quality indicators: time from (1) surgery to initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy (stages II-III disease), (2) surgery to surveillance colonoscopy (stages I-III disease), and (3) surgery to death (stages I-III disease). Unadjusted analyses used log-rank and Wilcoxon tests. Adjusted analyses used Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: In unadjusted analyses, there was no evidence of racial differences across the 3 quality measures. In adjusted Cox regression, there were no racial differences in time to initiation of chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; P = .61) or surgery to death (HR, 0.94; P = .49). In adjusted Cox regression, among those receiving colonoscopy within 7 to 18 months after surgery, white patients experienced slightly shorter median times to surveillance colonoscopy than did African American patients (367 vs. 383 days; HR, 0.63; P = .02). CONCLUSION: Other than a small racial difference in timing of surveillance colonoscopy, there was little evidence of racial differences in quality of CRC care among VA health care system users.

Comparison of adverse events during 5-fluorouracil versus 5-fluorouracil/oxaliplatin adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer: a population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: In clinical trials, combined 5-fluorouracil (5FU) plus oxaliplatin improves the survival of patients who have resected, stage III colon cancer with manageable toxicity. However, the tolerability of this in the general population of patients with colon cancer is uncertain. METHODS: Adverse outcomes were compared in patients with stage III colon cancer who received either 5FU or 5FU/oxaliplatin within 120 days of undergoing resection versus a control group of patients with stage II colon cancer who did not receive chemotherapy in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database and in data from the New York State Cancer Registry linked to Medicare and Medicaid. Hospitalizations, emergency room (ER) visits, and outpatient adverse events (AEs) were measured in claims from 30 days to 9 months after patients underwent resection. Multiple logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios of events by treatment. Propensity score matching was used to minimize selection bias. RESULTS: Adverse outcomes were more frequent for chemotherapy recipients. AE rates were higher in patients who received 5FU/oxaliplatin (81%) compared with patients who received 5FU alone (72%), in the SEER-Medicare data. The effect of oxaliplatin on AEs was greater in older patients: The odds ratio was 2.10 (95% confidence interval, 1.53-2.87) for patients aged ≥ 75 years versus 1.75 (95% confidence interval, 1.39-2.21) for patients aged <75 years. ER use was high in Medicaid patients (83% of those who received chemotherapy), but neither ER use nor hospitalization was increased by oxaliplatin. The 60-day mortality rate was 1% to 3% for patients who received 5FU alone and 1% to 2% for patients who received combined 5FU/oxaliplatin. CONCLUSIONS: The incremental harms of adjuvant chemotherapy with 5FU/oxaliplatin versus 5FU alone were modest in patients with stage III colon cancer who were insured by Medicare and Medicaid. The additional harms in patients aged ≥ 75 years largely were restricted to outpatient events and did not extend to an increased rate of hospitalization or early death.

Quality of nonmetastatic colorectal cancer care in the Department of Veterans Affairs.

PURPOSE: The Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system treats approximately 3% of patients with cancer in the United States each year. We measured the quality of nonmetastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) care in VA as indicated by concordance with National Comprehensive Cancer Network practice guidelines (six indicators) and timeliness of care (three indicators). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective medical record abstraction was done for 2,492 patients with incident stages I to III CRC diagnosed between October 1, 2003, and March 31, 2006, who underwent definitive CRC surgery. Patients were treated at one or more of 128 VA medical centers. The proportion of patients receiving guideline-concordant care and time intervals between care processes were calculated. RESULTS: More than 80% of patients had preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen determination (ie, stages II to III disease) and documented clear surgical margins (ie, stages II to III disease). Between 72% and 80% of patients had appropriate referral to a medical oncologist (ie, stages II to III disease), preoperative computed tomography scan of the abdomen and pelvis (ie, stages II to III disease), and adjuvant fluorouracil-based chemotherapy (ie, stage III disease). Less than half of patients with stages I to III CRC (43.5%) had a follow-up colonoscopy 7 to 18 months after surgery. The mean number of days between major treatment events included the following: 26.6 days (standard deviation [SD], 38.2; median, 20 days) between diagnosis and initiation of treatment (in stages II to III disease); 64.8 [corrected] days (SD, 54.9; median, 50 days) between definitive surgery and start of adjuvant chemotherapy (in stages II to III disease); and 444.2 [corrected] days (SD, 182.1; median, 393 days) between definitive surgery and follow-up colonoscopies (in stages I to III disease). CONCLUSION: Although there is opportunity for improvement in the area of cancer surveillance, the VA performs well in meeting established guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of CRC.