scholarly journals Cancer survivors’ receipt of treatment summaries and implications for patient-centered communication and quality of care

2015 ◽  
Vol 98 (10) ◽  
pp. 1274-1279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle Blanch-Hartigan ◽  
Neetu Chawla ◽  
Ellen I. Beckjord ◽  
Laura P. Forsythe ◽  
Janet S. de Moor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Treatment Summaries

Improving quality of care and health outcomes for cancer survivors: Insights from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute’s (PCORI) cancer portfolio.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neeraj K. Arora ◽  
Christopher Gayer ◽  
William Lawrence ◽  
Vadim Gershteyn ◽  
Carly Parry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Comparative Effectiveness ◽  
Post Treatment ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Cancer Studies

10 Background: PCORI funds comparative effectiveness research (CER) which aims to produce evidence-based information to help people make informed health care decisions and improve outcomes that matter to patients. Cancer studies form one of the largest disease-specific PCORI-funded portfolios. Methods: We conducted a systematic analysis of PCORI’s cancer portfolio overall and of the subset of studies that focus on post-treatment survivorship. Results: As of June 2015, PCORI has funded 47 cancer projects totaling $125 million. Cancer studies account for 17% of PCORI’s dollar investment in CER research. These studies have focused on breast, lung, prostate, colorectal, cervical, ovarian, and pancreatic cancers as well as leukemia. A majority of PCORI-funded cancer studies are randomized trials (60% of studies, 72% of dollar investment). One-in-four studies address post-treatment survivorship (n = 12, $23 million). The 12 CER studies on post-treatment survivorship address a range of patient-centered issues. Four studies are evaluating different post-treatment surveillance approaches for breast (2 studies), colorectal, and lung cancer survivors respectively. Three studies are focusing on optimizing the care planning process for cancer survivors while another is evaluating the impact of an oncology medical home model on patient-centered outcomes. Four studies are addressing quality of life (QOL) issues, one is evaluating approaches for incorporating patient reported outcomes data in the clinical encounter, a second is evaluating a multi-component intervention to improve the QOL of cancer survivors, a third study is evaluating the comparative effectiveness of complementary therapies to treat symptoms, and another is addressing distress among caregivers of stem cell transplant survivors. Conclusions: PCORI-funded CER studies are rigorously evaluating the real world impact of a range of interventions aimed at optimizing the quality of care delivered to and outcomes experienced by cancer survivors. Our analysis of the cancer portfolio will inform future funding priorities aimed at improving patient-centered outcomes for cancer survivors.

scholarly journals Parental Involvement Policies for Minors Seeking Abortion in the Southeast and Quality of Care

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kari White ◽  
Subasri Narasimhan ◽  
Sophie A. Hartwig ◽  
Erin Carroll ◽  
Alexandra McBrayer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Parental Involvement ◽  
Service Delivery ◽  
Quality Care ◽  
Health Service Delivery ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Patient Centeredness ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Staff Members

Abstract Introduction Thirty-seven states require minors seeking abortion to involve a parent, either through notification or consent. Little research has examined how implementation of these laws affect service delivery and quality of care for those who involve a parent. Methods Between May 2018 and September 2019, in-depth interviews were conducted with 34 staff members involved in scheduling, counseling, and administration at abortion facilities in three Southeastern states. Interviews explored procedures for documenting parental involvement, minors’ and parents’ reactions to requirements, and challenges with implementation and compliance. Both inductive and deductive codes, informed by the Institute of Medicine’s healthcare quality framework, were used in the thematic analysis. Results Parental involvement laws adversely affected four quality care domains: efficiency, patient-centeredness, timeliness, and equity. Administrative inefficiencies stemmed from the extensive documentation needed to prove an adult’s relationship to a minor, increasing the time and effort needed to comply with state reporting requirements. If parents were not supportive of their minor’s decision, participants felt they had a duty to intervene to ensure the minor’s decision and needs remained centered. Staff further noted that delays to timely care accumulated as minors navigated parental involvement and other state mandates, pushing some beyond gestational age limits. Lower income families and those with complex familial arrangements had greater difficulty meeting state requirements. Conclusions Parental involvement mandates undermine health service delivery and quality for minors seeking abortion services in the Southeast. Policy Implications Removing parental involvement requirements would protect minors’ reproductive autonomy and support the provision of equitable, patient-centered healthcare.

scholarly journals Quality of Care for Comorbid Conditions During the Transition to Survivorship: Differences Between Cancer Survivors and Noncancer Controls

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (9) ◽  
pp. 1140-1148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire F. Snyder ◽  
Kevin D. Frick ◽  
Robert J. Herbert ◽  
Amanda L. Blackford ◽  
Bridget A. Neville ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Breast Cancer Survivors ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Comorbid Condition ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
Fee For Service ◽  
To Receive

Purpose Building on previous research documenting differences in preventive care quality between cancer survivors and noncancer controls, this study examines comorbid condition care. Methods Using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) –Medicare database, we examined comorbid condition quality of care in patients with locoregional breast, prostate, or colorectal cancer diagnosed in 2004 who were age ≥ 66 years at diagnosis, who had survived ≥ 3 years, and who were enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare. Controls were frequency matched to cases on age, sex, race, and region. Quality of care was assessed from day 366 through day 1,095 postdiagnosis using published indicators of chronic (n = 10) and acute (n = 19) condition care. The proportion of eligible cancer survivors and controls who received recommended care was compared by using Fisher's exact tests. The chronic and acute indicators, respectively, were then combined into single logistic regression models for each cancer type to compare survivors' care receipt to that of controls, adjusting for clinical and sociodemographic variables and controlling for within-patient variation. Results The sample matched 8,661 cancer survivors to 17,322 controls (mean age, 75 years; 65% male; 85% white). Colorectal cancer survivors were less likely than controls to receive appropriate care on both the chronic (odds ratio [OR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.81 to 0.95) and acute (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.85) indicators. Prostate cancer survivors were more likely to receive appropriate chronic care (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.38) but less likely to receive quality acute care (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.87). Breast cancer survivors received care equivalent to controls on both the chronic (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.17) and acute (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.13) indicators. Conclusion Because we found differences by cancer type, research exploring factors associated with these differences in care quality is needed.

scholarly journals Ready for prime time: role for geriatric assessment to improve quality of care in hematology practice

Hematology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heidi D. Klepin
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Geriatric Assessment ◽  
Hematologic Malignancies ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Functional Reserve ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
Assessment Measures

Abstract Older adults represent the growing majority of patients diagnosed with hematologic disorders, yet they remain underrepresented on clinical trials. Older patients of the same chronologic age differ from one another with varying comorbidity and functional reserve. The concepts of frailty and resilience are important to patient-centered care and are patient and setting specific. The use of geriatric assessment to inform tailored decision making and management can personalize care for older adults with hematologic malignancies. This article will highlight available evidence to support the role of geriatric assessment measures to enhance quality of care for older adults diagnosed with hematologic malignancies.

scholarly journals An Environmental Scan and Evaluation of Home Dialysis Quality Indicators Currently Used in Canada

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 205435812097739
Author(s):  
Lisa Dubrofsky ◽  
Ali Ibrahim ◽  
Karthik Tennankore ◽  
Krishna Poinen ◽  
Sachin Shah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Peritoneal Dialysis ◽  
Quality Indicators ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Home Dialysis ◽  
Environmental Scan ◽  
Starting Point

Background: Quality indicators are important tools to measure and ultimately improve the quality of care provided. Performance measurement may be particularly helpful to grow disciplines that are underutilized and cost-effective, such as home dialysis (peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis). Objective: To identify and catalog home dialysis quality indicators currently used in Canada, as well as to evaluate these indicators as a starting point for future collaboration and standardization of quality indicators across Canada. Design: An environmental scan of quality indicators from provincial organizations, quality organizations, and stakeholders. Setting: Sixteen-member pan-Canadian panel with expertise in both nephrology and quality improvement. Patients: Our environmental scan included indicators relevant to patients on home dialysis. Measurements: We classified existing indicators based on the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and Donabedian frameworks. Methods: To evaluate the indicators, a 6-person subcommittee conducted a modified version of the Delphi consensus technique based on the American College of Physicians/Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality criteria. We shared these consensus ratings with the entire 16-member panel for further examination. We rated items from 1 to 9 on 6 domains (1-3 does not meet criteria to 7-9 meets criteria) as well as a global final rating (1-3 unnecessary to 7-9 necessary) to distinguish high-quality from low-quality indicators. Results: Overall, we identified 40 quality indicators across 7 provinces, with 22 (55%) rated as “necessary” to distinguish high quality from poor quality care. Ten indicators were measured by more than 1 province, and 5 of these indicators were rated as necessary (home dialysis prevalence, home dialysis incidence, anemia target achievement, rates of peritonitis associated with peritoneal dialysis, and home dialysis attrition). None of these indicators captured the IOM domains of timely, patient-centered, or equitable care. Limitations: The environmental scan is a nonexhaustive list of quality indicators in Canada. The panel also lacked representation from patients, administrators, and allied health professionals. Conclusions: These results provide Canadian home dialysis programs with a starting point on how to measure quality of care along with the current gaps. This work is an initial and necessary step toward future collaboration and standardization of quality indicators across Canada, so that home dialysis programs can access a smaller number of highly rated balanced indicators to motivate and support patient-centered quality improvement initiatives.

scholarly journals Problems in transition and quality of care: perspectives of breast cancer survivors

2010 ◽  
Vol 19 (12) ◽  
pp. 1921-1929 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aimee Kendall Roundtree ◽  
Sharon H. Giordano ◽  
Andrea Price ◽  
Maria E. Suarez-Almazor
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Breast Cancer Survivors
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document