A qualitative study of healthcare providers’ perceptions and suggestions for developing cancer survivorship care models in South Korea

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. e12613 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.W. Lim ◽  
E.J. Shon ◽  
E.J. Yang
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
South Korea ◽  
Cancer Survivorship ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Models

Novel approaches to support breast cancer survivorship care models

The Breast ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 36 ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly C. Gast ◽  
Summer V. Allen ◽  
Kathryn J. Ruddy ◽  
Tufia C. Haddad
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Survivorship ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Breast Cancer Survivorship ◽  
Care Models ◽  
Novel Approaches

Models of Cancer Survivorship Care: Overview and Summary of Current Evidence

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e19-e27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael T. Halpern ◽  
Meera Viswanathan ◽  
Tammeka S. Evans ◽  
Sarah A. Birken ◽  
Ethan Basch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Survivorship ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Substantial Variation ◽  
Care Models

There is substantial variation in survivorship care models. The authors conclude that the optimal nature, timing, intensity, format, and outcomes of survivorship care models are uncertain and require further research.

Providing cancer survivorship care plans for Spanish language speakers: Overall use and satisfaction patterns.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20671-e20671
Author(s):  
Christine Hill-Kayser ◽  
Carolyn Vachani ◽  
Margaret K. Hampshire ◽  
Gloria A. Di Lullo ◽  
James M. Metz
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Survivorship ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Spanish Version ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Cancer Information ◽  
Survivorship Care Plans ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Spanish Speaking ◽  
The Us

e20671 Background: Cancer survivorship care plans may be communication aides to assist healthcare providers and empower survivors. A paucity of information exists regarding the provision of survivorship care plans to the Spanish speaking population. Methods: The LIVESTRONG Care Plan is an Internet-based tool for creation of survivorship care plans, originally launched in 5/07. It is available at www.livestrongcareplan.org, and via OncoLink, a cancer information website based at the University of Pennsylvania, serving over 3.9 million pages/ month to 185,000 unique IP addresses. A direct link on the homepage directs users to the Spanish version. All information is provided and translated by oncology nurses and physicians. Results: Since launch of the tool, 293 Spanish care plans have been created (1% of total care plans). Care plans in Spanish have been created by survivors in 78% of cases, and healthcare providers in 22%. This differs from the entire user population, in which use by HCP approaches 50% (p=< 0.001). Spanish-speaking users are 52% female, and 82% Latino/a, and less likely from the US (60% vs 87% , p=0.02), also being from Mexico (15%), Spain (10%), Chile (9%), Puerto Rico (5%) and Venezuela (3%). Spanish users were most often survivors of breast (20%) GU (33%) and GI (20%) cancers (vs general population 50%, p = 0.03; 10%, p = 0.04; 11%, p = 0.03, respectively). Only 8% of Spanish-speaking users report having received previous survivorship information vs 13% in the overall group (p=0.07). All users (100%) of the Spanish version rate experience and satisfaction with the care plan as “very good” or “excellent.” Average time for completion of Spanish plans was 9:28 min. Conclusions: Most users of the Spanish plan are survivors who have not received this information before, from the US and several Central/South American countries. They are highly satisfied with the information provided. Healthcare providers are proportionally less likely to use the Spanish version of the plan than survivors are.

A comparison of primary care providers’ and oncologists’ preferences for different models of cancer survivorship care.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6006-6006
Author(s):  
Winson Y. Cheung ◽  
Anne Michelle Noone ◽  
Noreen Aziz ◽  
Julia Howe Rowland ◽  
Arnold L. Potosky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Survivorship ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Shared Care ◽  
Physician Attitudes ◽  
Primary Role ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Care Models ◽  
Care System

6006 Background: There is increasing interest in developing more efficient and effective strategies for coordinating and delivering cancer and non-cancer related follow-up care to survivors. The objectives of this nationwide survey were to describe and compare US physician preferences for different cancer survivorship care models. Methods: The Survey of Physician Attitudes Regarding the Care of Cancer Survivors (SPARCCS) was mailed to PCPs and oncologists in order to evaluate their views regarding physician responsibilities, knowledge levels about survivorship, and cancer follow-up testing. Using weighted univariate and multivariate models, we analyzed PCPs’ and oncologists’ preferences for different cancer survivorship care models (PCP/shared vs. oncologist vs. non-physician provider) and examined how physician attitudes towards and self-efficacy with their own skills during breast and colorectal cancer follow-up affected these preferences. Results: Of 3,434 physicians surveyed, 2,202 (64%) responded of whom 2,026 (59%) provided eligible outcomes for this study: 938 (46%) PCPs and 1,088 (54%) oncologists. In unadjusted analyses, most PCPs (51%) supported a PCP/shared care system whereas the majority of specialists (59%) strongly endorsed an oncologist-based model (p<0.001). A number of PCPs and oncologists (23% for both) preferred to involve non-physician providers. A significant proportion of cancer specialists (87%) did not feel that PCPs can take on the primary role for cancer follow-up. Many PCPs believed that they have the skills to perform breast and colorectal cancer follow-up (57%), detect recurrent cancers (74%), and offer psychosocial support (50%), but only a minority (32%) were willing to assume exclusive responsibility. In adjusted analyses, PCPs already involved with cancer surveillance (43%) were more likely to prefer a PCP/shared care system than an oncologist-based survivorship care model (OR 2.08, 95%CI 1.34-3.23, p<0.001). Conclusions: PCPs and oncologists have different preferences for models of cancer survivorship care. Prior involvement with cancer follow-up was one of the strongest predictors of PCPs' willingness to assume this responsibility.

scholarly journals Identifying factors influencing sustainability of innovations in cancer survivorship care: a qualitative study

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e042503
Author(s):  
Robin Urquhart ◽  
Cynthia Kendell ◽  
Evelyn Cornelissen ◽  
Byron J Powell ◽  
Laura L Madden ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Cancer Survivorship ◽  
System Level ◽  
Management Support ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Positive Health ◽  
Implementation Outcomes ◽  
Factors Influencing ◽  
Canadian Provinces ◽  
Constant Comparative Analysis

ObjectivesMoving innovations into healthcare organisations to increase positive health outcomes remains a significant challenge. Even when knowledge and tools are adopted, they often fail to become integrated into the long-term routines of organisations. The objective of this study was to identify factors and processes influencing the sustainability of innovations in cancer survivorship care.DesignQualitative study using semistructured, in-depth interviews, informed by grounded theory. Data were collected and analysed concurrently using constant comparative analysis.Setting25 cancer survivorship innovations based in six Canadian provinces.ParticipantsTwenty-seven implementation leaders and relevant staff from across Canada involved in the implementation of innovations in cancer survivorship.ResultsThe findings were categorised according to determinants, processes and implementation outcomes, and whether a factor was necessary to sustainability, or important but not necessary. Seven determinants, six processes and three implementation outcomes were perceived to influence sustainability. The necessary determinants were (1) management support; (2) organisational and system-level priorities; and (3) key people and expertise. Necessary processes were (4) innovation adaptation; (5) stakeholder engagement; and (6) ongoing education and training. The only necessary implementation outcome was (7) widespread staff and organisational buy-in for the innovation.ConclusionsFactors influencing the sustainability of cancer survivorship innovations exist across multiple levels of the health system and are often interdependent. Study findings may be used by implementation teams to plan for sustainability from the beginning of innovation adoption initiatives.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document