Comparing the Maryland Comprehensive Cancer Control Plan With Federal Cancer Prevention and Control Recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: Since the introduction of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2012, 11 million more Americans now have access to preventive services via health care coverage. Several prevention-related recommendations issued by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) are covered under the ACA. State cancer plans often provide prevention strategies, but whether these strategies correspond to federal evidence-based recommendations is unclear. The objective of this article is to assess whether federal evidence-based recommendations, including those covered under the ACA, are included in the Maryland Comprehensive Cancer Control Plan (MCCCP). METHODS: A total of 19 federal recommendations pertaining to cancer prevention and control were identified. Inclusion of federal cancer-related recommendations by USPSTF, CDC, and ACIP in the MCCCP's goals, objectives, and strategies was examined. RESULTS: Nine of the federal recommendations were issued after the MCCCP's publication. MCCCP recommendations corresponded completely with 4 federal recommendations and corresponded only partially with 3. Reasons for partial correspondence included specification of less restrictive at-risk populations or different intervention implementers. Three federal recommendations were not mentioned in the MCCCP's goals, objectives, and strategies. CONCLUSION: Many cancer-related federal recommendations were released after the MCCCP's publication and therefore do not appear in the most current version. We recommend that the results of this analysis be considered in the update of the MCCCP. Our findings underscore the need for a periodic scan for changes to federal recommendations and for adjusting state policies and programs to correspond with federal recommendations, as appropriate for Marylanders.

An Assessment of Hospital-Based Palliative Care in Maryland: Infrastructure, Barriers, and Opportunities.

CONTEXT: Maryland recently passed legislation mandating that hospitals with more than 50 beds have palliative care (PC) programs. Although the state's health agency can play a key role in ensuring successful implementation of this measure, there is little actionable information from which it can guide resource allocation for enhancing PC delivery statewide. OBJECTIVES: To assess the PC infrastructure at Maryland's 46 community-based nonspecialty hospitals and to describe providers' perspectives on barriers to PC and supports that could enhance PC delivery. METHODS: Data on PC programs were collected using two mechanisms. First, a survey was sent to all 46 community-based hospital chief executive officers by the Maryland Cancer Collaborative. The Maryland Health Care Commission provided supplementary survey and semistructured interview data. RESULTS: Twenty-eight hospitals (60.9%) provided information on their PC services. Eighty-nine percent of these hospitals reported the presence of a structured PC program. The profile of services provided by PC programs was largely conserved across hospital geography and size. The most common barriers reported to PC delivery were lack of knowledge among patients and/or families and lack of physician buy-in; most hospitals reported that networks and/or conferences to promote best practice sharing in PC would be useful supports. CONCLUSION: Systematic collection of state-level PC infrastructure data can be used to guide state health agencies' understanding of extant resources and challenges, using those data to determine resource allocation to promote the timely receipt of PC for patients and families.