Do survivorship care plans impact patients' evaluations of care? A randomized evaluation with gynecologic oncology patients

The Polaris Oncology Survivorship Transition (POST) System: A Patient- and Provider-Driven Cancer Survivorship Planning Program

BACKGROUND

It is strongly recommended that individuals ending treatment for cancer have a "survivorship plan," and new standards require survivorship planning for accreditation, However, a comprehensive plan is often neglected.

OBJECTIVE

To present the development and field test results of a web-based, breast cancer survivorship care planning system.

METHODS

The Polaris Oncology Survivorship Transition (POST) blends input from the electronic health record (EHR), oncology care providers (OCPs), and patients to create a survivorship care plan (SCP). The content of the POST program was created with the assistance of end-user input (patients, oncologists, and primary care providers (PCPs)) and the full program was piloted on women ending treatment for breast cancer. This paper presents the pilot study that field-tested the POST In a clinical setting. Patients were recruited from outpatient care clinics and chemotherapy units in a comprehensive care center. The study included 25 women ending treatment for breast cancer in the past year, 4 OCPs, and PCPs. Patients received the POST computeπzed assessment and a tailored SCP.

RESULTS

The POST assists providers in crafting efficient and comprehensive SCPs and was rated highly satisfactory by all end-users.

DISCUSSION

The POST program can be used as a cancer survivorship planning program to assist OCPs in care planning for their patients ending treatment for breast cancer.

CONCLUSION

This study provides support for Incorporating computerized SCP programs into clinical practice. Use of the POST in clinical practice has the potential to improve survivorship planning.

Factors influencing implementation of a survivorship care plan-a quantitative process evaluation of the ROGY Care trial

Purpose

The aim of this study is to investigate the factors that influence implementation of Survivorship Care Plans (SCPs) in the intervention arm of the ROGY Care trial by (1) assessing the level of SCP receipt in the ROGY Care trial and (2) identifying patient- and provider-level factors that influence SCP receipt.

Methods

Between 2011 and 2015, a pragmatic cluster randomized-controlled-trial was conducted on the effects of automatically generated SCPs. Endometrial (N = 117) and ovarian (N = 61) cancer patients were allocated to ‘SCP care’, as provided by their SCP care providers (N = 10). Associations between SCP receipt (self-reported SCP receipt and actually generated SCPs), patient-factors (socio-demographic-, clinical-, and personality factors), and care provider factors (profession and a-priori motivation regarding SCP provision) were tested in univariate analysis. The odds ratios of factors influencing self-reported SCP receipt were estimated with a multivariate regression model.

Results

Of all patients in the SCP care arm (N = 178), SCPs were generated by the care provider for 90 % of the patients and 70 % of the patients reported that they had received an SCP. Patients with older age, ovarian cancer, type D (distressed) personality, and patients that completed the questionnaire a longer period of time after the SCP consult were more likely to report no SCP receipt.

Conclusions

SCP receipt was influenced by patient- but not care-provider factors.

Implications for cancer survivors

Certain patient groups were less likely to report SCP receipt. Whether all patients are in need of an SCP, requires further investigation. If they do, more efforts need to be made towards the implementation of SCPs.

Paper-Based Survivorship Care Plans May be Less Helpful for Cancer Patients Who Search for Disease-Related Information on the Internet: Results of the Registrationsystem Oncological Gynecology (ROGY) Care Randomized Trial

Background

The Institute of Medicine recommends Survivorship Care Plans (SCPs) for all cancer survivors. However, it is unclear whether certain patient groups may or may not benefit from SCPs.

Objective

The aim was to assess whether the effects of an automatically generated paper SCP on patients’ satisfaction with information provision and care, illness perceptions, and health care utilization were moderated by disease-related Internet use.

Methods

Twelve hospitals were randomized to either SCP care or usual care in the pragmatic cluster randomized Registrationsystem Oncological GYnecology (ROGY) Care trial. Newly diagnosed endometrial cancer patients completed questionnaires after diagnosis (N=221; response: 74.7%, 221/296), 6 months (n=158), and 12 months (n=147), including patients’ satisfaction with information provision and care, illness perceptions, health care utilization (how many times patients visited a medical specialist or primary care physician about their cancer in the past 6 months), and disease-related Internet use (whether patients used the Internet to look for information about cancer).

Results

In total, 80 of 221 (36.2%) patients used the Internet to obtain disease-related information. Disease-related Internet use moderated the SCP care effect on the amount of information received about the disease (P=.03) and medical tests (P=.01), helpfulness of the information (P=.01), and how well patients understood their illness (P=.04). All stratified analyses were not statistically significant. However, it appeared that patients who did not seek disease-related information on the Internet in the SCP care arm reported receiving more information about their disease (mean 63.9, SD 20.1 vs mean 58.3, SD 23.7) and medical tests (mean 70.6, SD 23.5 vs mean 64.7, SD 24.9), finding the information more helpful (76.7, SD 22.9 vs mean 67.8, SD 27.2; scale 0-100), and understanding their illness better (mean 6.6, SD 3.0 vs mean 6.1, SD 3.2; scale 1-10) than patients in the usual care arm did. In addition, although all stratified analyses were not significant, patients who did seek disease-related information on the Internet in the SCP care arm appeared to receive less information about their disease (mean 65.7, SD 23.4 vs mean 67.1, SD 20.7) and medical tests (mean 72.4, SD 23.5 vs mean 75.3, SD 21.6), did not find the information more helpful (mean 78.6, SD 21.2 vs mean 76.0, SD 22.0), and reported less understanding of their illness (mean 6.3, SD 2.8 vs mean 7.1, SD 2.7) than patients in the usual care arm did.

Conclusions

Paper SCPs appear to improve the amount of information received about the disease and medical tests, the helpfulness of the information, and understanding of the illness for patients who do not search for disease-related information on the Internet. In contrast, paper SCPs do not seem beneficial for patients who do seek disease-related information on the Internet.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01185626; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01185626 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6fpaMXsDn)

Patient-centered support in the survivorship care transition: Outcomes from the Patient-Owned Survivorship Care Plan Intervention

BACKGROUND

To the authors' knowledge, few studies to date have evaluated the effects of survivorship care planning on the care transition process from specialty cancer care to self-management and primary care, patient experience, or health outcomes. The Patient-owned Survivorship Transition Care for Activated, Empowered survivors (POSTCARE) is a single coaching encounter based on the Chronic Care Model that uses motivational interviewing techniques to engage survivors of breast cancer. The current study examined the effects of the POSTCARE intervention on patient outcomes and care coordination.

METHODS

A total of 79 survivors of American Joint Commision on Cancer TNM System stage 0 to IIIB breast cancer were randomized to POSTCARE (40 patients) or usual care (39 patients). Patient outcomes were assessed using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), Social/Role Activities Limitations, Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease 6-Item Scale, the Patient Activation Measure-Short Form, and Patient Health Questionnaire depression scale at baseline and at 3-month follow-up. Care coordination was assessed using confirmed primary care physician visits and reported discussion of the survivorship care plan at the 3-month follow-up. Logistic and linear regression analyses were conducted to examine the effect of POSTCARE on selected outcomes.

RESULTS

Participants in the intervention group versus those receiving usual care demonstrated significantly higher self-reported health (F-statistic (3,71), 3.63; P =.017) and lower social role limitations (F (3,70), 3.82; P =.014) and a trend toward greater self-efficacy (F (3,69), 2.51; P = .07). Three quality-of-life domains reached clinically meaningful improvement at the 3-month follow-up, including physical role (P =.0009), bodily pain (P =.03), and emotional role (P =.04).

CONCLUSIONS

The POSTCARE intervention appeared to have a positive impact on patient outcomes and demonstrated promise as a strategy with which to improve survivors' experience, care coordination, and health outcomes. Cancer 2016;122:3232-42. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Moving survivorship care plans forward: focus on care coordination

After completing treatment for cancer, the coordination of oncology and primary care presents a challenge for cancer survivors. Many survivors need continued oncology follow-up, and all survivors require primary care. Coordinating the shared care of a cancer survivor, or facilitating an informed handoff from oncology to primary care, is essential for cancer survivors. Survivorship care plans are personalized documents that summarize cancer treatment and outline a plan of recommended ongoing care, with the goal of facilitating the coordination of post-treatment care. Despite their face validity, five trials have failed to demonstrate the effectiveness of survivorship care plans. We posit that these existing trials have critical shortcomings and do not adequately address whether survivorship care plans improve care coordination. Moving forward, we propose four criteria for future trials of survivorship care plans: focusing on high-needs survivor populations, tailoring the survivorship care plan to the care setting, facilitating implementation of the survivorship care plan in clinical practice, and selecting appropriate trial outcomes to assess care coordination. When trials meet these criteria, we can finally assess whether survivorship care plans help cancer survivors receive optimal oncology and primary care.

Cancer survivorship care-planning: Practice, research, and policy implications for social work

Increasing numbers of cancer survivors are living longer than 5 years from their diagnosis date. This has resulted in a growing population of cancer survivors, expected to reach 19 million by 2024. Survivors frequently experience late effects caused by cancer and its treatment, reducing survivors' quality of life in multiple domains. Survivorship care-plans may aid the many physical, psychosocial, and financial needs that emerge posttreatment. However, the lack of reimbursement mechanisms, the limited amount of effectiveness research, and minimal guidelines for content and delivery are barriers to the widespread provision of survivorship care-plans. Challenges and opportunities for social work practice, research, and policy are identified and discussed.

American Cancer Society/American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline

The purpose of the American Cancer Society/American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline is to provide recommendations to assist primary care and other clinicians in the care of female adult survivors of breast cancer. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed through April 2015. A multidisciplinary expert workgroup with expertise in primary care, gynecology, surgical oncology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, and nursing was formed and tasked with drafting the Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline. A total of 1,073 articles met inclusion criteria; and, after full text review, 237 were included as the evidence base. Patients should undergo regular surveillance for breast cancer recurrence, including evaluation with a cancer-related history and physical examination, and should be screened for new primary breast cancer. Data do not support performing routine laboratory tests or imaging tests in asymptomatic patients to evaluate for breast cancer recurrence. Primary care clinicians should counsel patients about the importance of maintaining a healthy lifestyle, monitor for post-treatment symptoms that can adversely affect quality of life, and monitor for adherence to endocrine therapy. Recommendations provided in this guideline are based on current evidence in the literature and expert consensus opinion. Most of the evidence is not sufficient to warrant a strong evidence-based recommendation. Recommendations on surveillance for breast cancer recurrence, screening for second primary cancers, assessment and management of physical and psychosocial long-term and late effects of breast cancer and its treatment, health promotion, and care coordination/practice implications are made.

This guideline was developed through a collaboration between the American Cancer Society and the American Society of Clinical Oncology and has been published jointly by invitation and consent in both CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians and Journal of Clinical Oncology. Copyright © 2015 American Cancer Society and American Society of Clinical Oncology. All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission by the American Cancer Society or the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Outcomes and satisfaction after delivery of a breast cancer survivorship care plan: results of a multicenter trial

PURPOSE

Survivorship care plans (SCPs) have been suggested to reduce fragmentation of care experienced by cancer survivors. Acceptance of SCPs is high, but trials in the United States are few. This pilot study used a quasiexperimental design to examine the outcomes achieved by breast cancer survivors receiving a standardized SCP visit at one of seven comprehensive cancer centers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Outcomes were assessed before and again 3 months after delivery of an SCP and included survivors' use of and satisfaction with SCPs, perceived knowledge about survivorship, and assessment of the quality and coordination of survivorship care.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-nine survivors of breast cancer completed baseline and follow-up measures and received a standardized SCP visit. Participants most commonly used SCP materials to make decisions about exercise (64%), which tests to receive and when (62%), and dietary changes (62%). Only 21% shared the SCP with their primary care provider during that time. Satisfaction with the SCP was high, with 90% of participants reporting being at least satisfied with the SCP. Perceived knowledge about survivorship improved after SCP delivery, as did perceived care coordination and the provider's knowledge of the effects of cancer on survivors (all P < .001). Individuals closer to the time of diagnosis reported greater satisfaction with and use of SCPs.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates improvements in perceived knowledge and quality of survivorship care after receipt of a comprehensive SCP. Survivors were satisfied with their SCP, and those closer to diagnosis reported greater satisfaction with and use of the materials.

American Cancer Society/American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE The purpose of the American Cancer Society/American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline is to provide recommendations to assist primary care and other clinicians in the care of female adult survivors of breast cancer. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed through April 2015. A multidisciplinary expert workgroup with expertise in primary care, gynecology, surgical oncology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, and nursing was formed and tasked with drafting the Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline. A total of 1073 articles met inclusion criteria; and, after full text review, 237 were included as the evidence base. Patients should undergo regular surveillance for breast cancer recurrence, including evaluation with a cancer-related history and physical examination, and should be screened for new primary breast cancer. Data do not support performing routine laboratory tests or imaging tests in asymptomatic patients to evaluate for breast cancer recurrence. Primary care clinicians should counsel patients about the importance of maintaining a healthy lifestyle, monitor for post-treatment symptoms that can adversely affect quality of life, and monitor for adherence to endocrine therapy. Recommendations provided in this guideline are based on current evidence in the literature and expert consensus opinion. Most of the evidence is not sufficient to warrant a strong evidence-based recommendation. Recommendations on surveillance for breast cancer recurrence, screening for second primary cancers, assessment and management of physical and psychosocial long-term and late effects of breast cancer and its treatment, health promotion, and care coordination/practice implications are made.

Impact of an Automatically Generated Cancer Survivorship Care Plan on Patient-Reported Outcomes in Routine Clinical Practice: Longitudinal Outcomes of a Pragmatic, Cluster Randomized Trial

Purpose

This study was conducted to longitudinally assess the impact of an automatically generated survivorship care plan (SCP) on patient-reported outcomes in routine clinical practice. Primary outcomes were patient satisfaction with information and care. Secondary outcomes included illness perceptions and health care use.

Methods

Twelve hospitals were randomly assigned to SCP care or usual care in a pragmatic, cluster randomized trial. Newly diagnosed patients with endometrial cancer completed questionnaires after diagnosis (n = 221; 75% response), 6 months (n = 158), and 12 months (n = 147). An SCP application was built in the Web-based ROGY (Registration System Oncological Gynecology). By clicking the SCP button, a patient-tailored SCP was generated.

Results

In the SCP care arm, 74% of patients received an SCP. They reported receiving more information about their treatment (mean [M] = 57, standard deviation [SD] = 20 v M = 47, SD = 24; P = .03), other services (M = 35, SD = 22 v M = 25, SD = 22; P = .03), and different places of care (M = 27, SD = 25 v M = 23, SD = 26; P = .04) than the usual care arm (scales, 0 to 100). However, there were no differences regarding satisfaction with information or care. Patients in the SCP care arm experienced more symptoms (M = 3.3, SD = 2.0 v M = 2.6, SD = 1.6; P = .03), were more concerned about their illness (M = 4.4, SD = 2.3 v M = 3.9, SD = 2.1; P = .03), were more affected emotionally (M = 4.0, SD = 2.2 v M = 3.7, SD = 2.2; P = .046), and reported more cancer-related contact with their primary care physician (M = 1.8, SD = 2.0 v M = 1.1, SD = 0.9; P = .003) than those in the usual care arm (scale, 1 to 10). These effects did not differ over time.

Conclusion

The present trial showed no evidence of a benefit of SCPs on satisfaction with information and care. Furthermore, SCPs increased patients' concerns, emotional impact, experienced symptoms, and the amount of cancer-related contact with the primary care physician. Whether this may ultimately lead to more empowered patients should be investigated further.

Development of a standard survivorship care plan template for radiation oncologists

PURPOSE

In response to a need expressed by members of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), the ASTRO Board of Directors approved an initiative to create a radiation oncology-specific survivorship care plan (SCP) template.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Members of the ASTRO Health Services Research Committee (which was subsequently renamed the Clinical, Translational, and Basic Science Advisory Committee) were charged with this task. Creation of the ASTRO SCP template was informed by existing SCP templates published by other organizations and modified to add radiation treatment details felt to be important by committee members. An emphasis was placed on describing diagnostic and treatment details in ways that patients and referring physicians can understand. The resulting template subsequently underwent ASTRO committee review, public comment, and was ultimately approved by the ASTRO Board of Directors.

RESULTS

The standardized template includes 2 components: the first 2 pages represent an SCP that is to be given to the patient and referring physicians, whereas page 3 includes additional technical radiation therapy details which are usually included in a traditional radiation treatment summary. That is, the template serves two purposes - obviating the need for radiation oncologists to create an SCP for patients and a separate treatment completion note.

CONCLUSIONS

The standardized ASTRO SCP template serves an immediate need of practicing radiation oncologists to have a template that is radiation-specific and meets current requirements for SCP and radiation treatment summary. Potential future work may include development of disease-specific templates that will include more granular details regarding expected toxicities and follow-up care recommendations and working with electronic medical record system vendors to facilitate autocreation of SCP documents to reduce the burden on physicians and other staff. These future developments can make this intervention more helpful to patients, and further reduce the burden of creating SCPs.

The expanding role of primary care in cancer control

The nature of cancer control is changing, with an increasing emphasis, fuelled by public and political demand, on prevention, early diagnosis, and patient experience during and after treatment. At the same time, primary care is increasingly promoted, by governments and health funders worldwide, as the preferred setting for most health care for reasons of increasing need, to stabilise health-care costs, and to accommodate patient preference for care close to home. It is timely, then, to consider how this expanding role for primary care can work for cancer control, which has long been dominated by highly technical interventions centred on treatment, and in which the contribution of primary care has been largely perceived as marginal. In this Commission, expert opinion from primary care and public health professionals with academic and clinical cancer expertise—from epidemiologists, psychologists, policy makers, and cancer specialists—has contributed to a detailed consideration of the evidence for cancer control provided in primary care and community care settings. Ranging from primary prevention to end-of-life care, the scope for new models of care is explored, and the actions needed to effect change are outlined. The strengths of primary care—its continuous, coordinated, and comprehensive care for individuals and families—are particularly evident in prevention and diagnosis, in shared follow-up and survivorship care, and in end-of-life care. A strong theme of integration of care runs throughout, and its elements (clinical, vertical, and functional) and the tools needed for integrated working are described in detail. All of this change, as it evolves, will need to be underpinned by new research and by continuing and shared multiprofessional development.

Evidence-based psychosocial treatment in the community: considerations for dissemination and implementation

BACKGROUND

In psycho-oncology care, steps toward dissemination and implementation of evidence-based treatments (EBTs) have not been made. For this to change, factors associated with real-world dissemination and implementation must be identified. In the community, providers, their organizations, and patients are key stakeholders.

METHOD

A focused review of literatures in continuing education, dissemination, and implementation of mental health services is provided.

RESULTS

Early-career providers are most ready to implement as they have greater openness and more positive attitudes toward EBTs. Current continuing education practices to teach EBTs have limited effectiveness. Instruction using interactive strategies tailored to therapists' clinical needs and the provision of post-education consultation is needed. There is tension between EBT delivery with fidelity and the necessity for adaptation. EBT service provision is the key outcome of implementation, and documenting such is important to patients, providers, and organizations.

CONCLUSION

A multilevel conceptual framework, Setting, Therapist, Education, imPlementation, and Sustainability, is offered and provides directions for dissemination and sustainable implementation. Guidelines from the Commission on Cancer of the American College of Surgeons and the American Society of Clinical Oncology underscore the timeliness of the proposed framework to move EBTs from the research settings where they were developed to the practice settings where they are needed.

Summing it up: an integrative review of studies of cancer survivorship care plans (2006-2013)

In 2006, the Institute of Medicine recommended that cancer survivors who are completing primary treatment receive a survivorship care plan (SCP) based on face validity. The state of scientific knowledge regarding the SCP is unclear. The authors conducted an integrative review of existing evidence regarding SCPs. The MEDLINE/PubMed database, the Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) database were searched for relevant studies published between 2006 and 2013 using a combination of keywords: "survivors," "survivorship," "care plans," "care planning," "treatment summaries," and "cancer." Articles were included if they 1) reported results from an empirical study, 2) included cancer survivors who were diagnosed at age ≥ 18 years, 3) related to SCP, and 4) were published in English. In total, 781 records were retrieved; 77 were identified as duplicates, and 665 were abstracts or presentations that did not relate to SCPs for adults or were not empirical, which left 42 articles for inclusion in this review. Studies regarding SCP fell into 3 categories: 1) content (n=14), 2) dissemination and implementation (n=14), and 3) survivor and provider outcomes (n=14). SCPs have been endorsed and are associated with improved knowledge, but SCP use remains sporadic. Only 4 studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that avoided many biases associated with observational studies. Other limitations included cross-sectional or pre-SCP-post-SCP ("pre-post") designs, limited generalizability caused by a lack of sample diversity, and a lack of systematic testing of data-collection tools. The quantity and quality of SCP research are limited. SCPs have been endorsed, but evidence of improved outcomes associated with SCP is limited. Future research that addresses the methodological concerns of extant studies is needed regarding SCP use, content, and outcomes.

Survivorship care planning and its influence on long-term patient-reported outcomes among colorectal and lung cancer survivors: the CanCORS disease-free survivor follow-up study

PURPOSE

This study aims to evaluate the relationship between survivorship care planning (SCP) and survivorship care and health outcomes reported by long-term lung and colorectal cancer survivors.

METHODS

Participants (n = 832) were diagnosed and enrolled during 2003-2005. In 2012, patient-reported outcomes (survivorship care and health outcomes) and two patient-reported SCP measures (receipt of written summary of cancer treatment and receipt of instructions on who to see for routine cancer follow-up) were collected. Analyses controlled for SCP predictors collected from medical records and an interview 1 year after diagnosis.

RESULTS

One in four survivors reported receiving both SCP elements. Those receiving both were more certain which doctor was in charge (odds ratio (OR) 7.0; 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI) 3.9-12.5), more likely to report follow-up checkup (OR 5.1; 95 % CI 3.3-8.0), and had an MRI/PET/CT scan in the past 2 years (OR 2.8; 95 % CI 1.7-4.7) compared to those receiving neither. Physician communication experiences were significantly more positive and having physical exams (OR 2.0; 95 % CI 1.2-3.4) and meeting exercise guidelines (OR 1.6; 95 % CI 1.004-2.4) more likely. Physical health (p = 0.012) and good-to-excellent self-perceived health status (OR 2.2; 95 % CI 1.3-3.9) were better for those receiving both elements.

CONCLUSION

SCP may lead to better cancer follow-up care, long-term physical health, and physician-patient communication experiences.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

The positive association between outcomes and SCP suggests that efforts to implement SCP should be fruitful.

Childhood cancer survivor care: development of the Passport for Care

Survivors of childhood cancer are at risk of long-term adverse effects and late effects of the disease and/or its treatment. In response to national recommendations to improve evidence-based follow-up care, a web-based support system for clinical decision making, the Passport for Care (PFC), was developed for use at the point of care to produce screening recommendations individualized to the survivor. To date, the PFC has been implemented in over half of the nearly 200 clinics affiliated with the Children's Oncology Group across the USA. Most clinician users report that the PFC has been integrated into clinic workflows, and that it fosters improved conversations with survivors about the potential late effects a survivor might experience and about the screening and/or behavioural interventions recommended to improve health status. Furthermore, clinicians using the PFC have indicated that they adhered more closely to follow-up care guidelines. Perspectives on the challenges encountered and lessons learned during the development and deployment of the PFC are reviewed and contrasted with other nationwide approaches to the provision of guidance on survivor follow-up care; furthermore, the implications for the care of childhood cancer survivors are discussed.

Survivorship care plans in cancer: a systematic review of care plan outcomes

BACKGROUND

Eight years after the Institute of Medicine recommended survivorship care plans (SCPs) for all cancer survivors, this study systematically reviewed the evidence for their use.

METHODS

Studies evaluating outcomes after implementation of SCPs for cancer survivors were identified by searching databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane). Data were extracted and summarised.

RESULTS

Ten prospective studies (2286 survivors) met inclusion criteria (5 randomised controlled trials (RCTs)). Study populations included survivors of breast, gynaecological, colorectal and childhood cancer. Several models of SCP were evaluated (paper based/on-line, oncologist/nurse/primary-care physician-delivered and different templates). No significant effect of SCPs was found on survivor distress, satisfaction with care, cancer-care coordination or oncological outcomes in RCTs. Breast cancer survivors with SCPs were better able to correctly identify the clinician responsible for their follow-up care. One study suggested a positive impact on reducing unmet needs. Levels of survivor satisfaction with, and self-reported understanding of, their SCP were very high. Feasibility was raised by health professionals as a significant barrier, as SCPs took 1-4 h of their time to develop.

CONCLUSIONS

Emerging evidence shows very few measurable benefits of SCPs. Survivors reported high levels of satisfaction with SCPs. Resource issues were identified as a significant barrier to implementation.

Patient-reported quality of life, unmet needs and care coordination outcomes: Moving toward targeted breast cancer survivorship care planning

AIM

Survivorship care plans (SCPs) have been proposed for universal use with the aim of addressing the many unmet needs of cancer survivors. Trials have failed to find a significant impact of SCPs on quality of life outcomes. This study evaluated quality of life, unmet needs, satisfaction with health care and perception of cancer care coordination at the end of treatment in a cohort of women at the end of treatment for early breast cancer. The aim was to identify specific needs to assist in the design of a tailored SCP.

METHODS

Women completed patient-reported measures of health-related quality of life (FACT-B [ES]), unmet needs (CaSUN), satisfaction with medical care and cancer care coordination. Total scores and subscale scores for the whole cohort and results of analysis comparing three age groups were reported.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight women (mean age 56) participated. Mean score for FACT-B = 108 and FACT-B (ES) = 167.4. Younger women (<51 years) reported a significantly lower quality of life (P = 0.001 for FACT-B, TOI and FACT-B [ES]). Using CaSUN, 76.1% of participants reported at least one unmet need; mean number of unmet needs = 6.2. Younger women reported more unmet needs than older women. The most frequently reported unmet need was fear of cancer recurrence. Overall, participants were very satisfied with medical care and cancer care coordination.

CONCLUSION

Younger women reported poorer quality of life and more unmet needs. SCPs should specifically target younger women and must include strategies to address fear of cancer recurrence if they are to lead to a measureable difference in outcomes.