A randomized controlled trial of shared decision-making treatment planning process to enhance shared decision-making in patients with MBC

PURPOSE

Opportunities exist for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) to engage in shared decision-making (SDM). Presenting patient-reported data, including patient treatment preferences, to oncologists before or during a treatment plan decision may improve patient engagement in treatment decisions.

METHODS

This randomized controlled trial evaluated the standard-of-care treatment planning process vs. a novel treatment planning process focused on SDM, which included oncologist review of patient-reported treatment preferences, prior to or during treatment decisions among women with MBC. The primary outcome was patient perception of shared decision-making. Secondary outcomes included patient activation, treatment satisfaction, physician perception of treatment decision-making, and use of treatment plans.

RESULTS

Among the 109 evaluable patients from December 2018 to June 2022, 28% were Black and 12% lived in a highly disadvantaged neighborhood. Although not reaching statistical significance, patients in the intervention arm perceived SDM more often than patients in the control arm (63% vs. 59%; Cramer's V = 0.05; OR 1.19; 95% CI 0.55-2.57). Among patients in the intervention arm, 31% were at the highest level of patient activation compared to 19% of those in the control arm (V = 0.18). In 82% of decisions, the oncologist agreed that the patient-reported data helped them engage in SDM. In 45% of decision, they reported changing management due to patient-reported data.

CONCLUSIONS

Oncologist engagement in the treatment planning process, with oncologist review of patient-reported data, is a promising approach to improve patient participation in treatment decisions which should be tested in larger studies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03806738.

Pelvic floor dysfunction survivorship needs and referrals in the gynecologic oncology population: a narrative review

The population of survivors of gynecologic malignancies continues to grow. The population of gynecologic oncology survivors has a high prevalence of pelvic floor disorders. Gynecologic oncology patients identify several survivorship needs, including a need for more focused pelvic floor disorder sequelae care. The increasing focus on patient needs following cancer treatment has led to the development of survivorship care plans and other strategies for addressing post-treatment transitions and sequelae. Common themes in patient survivorship care are patient needs for flexible and integrated care, and it is unclear if survivorship care plans in their current state improve patient outcomes. Patient referrals, specifically to urogynecologists, may help address the gaps in survivorship care of pelvic floor dysfunction.The objective of this review is to discuss the burden of pelvic floor disorders in the gynecologic population and to contextualize these needs within broader survivorship needs. The review will then discuss current strategies of survivorship care, including a discussion of whether these methods meet survivorship pelvic floor disorder needs. This review addresses several gaps in the literature by contextualizing pelvic floor disorder needs within other survivorship needs and providing a critical discussion of current survivorship care strategies with a focus on pelvic floor disorders.

A Learning Health System Approach to Cancer Survivorship Care Among LGBTQ+ Communities

PURPOSE

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) individuals who receive primary care services at community health centers are often referred to external specialty care centers after cancer diagnosis, upon which primary care services are disrupted and may be discontinued because of gaps in communication between primary and oncologic care providers. This qualitative study evaluated barriers and facilitators to effective care coordination for LGBTQ+ patients with cancer and the utility of a novel cancer care coordination tool to mitigate identified barriers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Semistructured interviews with LGBTQ+ cancer survivors, caregivers to LGBTQ+ persons, clinical team members who provide care to LGBTQ+ patients, and members of community-based organizations that work with LGBTQ+ patients were conducted. Interview analysis was a multistage process, wherein a constant comparison approach was used. Transcripts were reviewed and coded using Atlas.ti Cloud.

RESULTS

A total of 26 individuals were interviewed: 10 patients, four caregivers, 10 clinical care team members, and two community organization representatives. Interview analysis yielded insight regarding (1) LGBTQ+ patient experiences engaging with primary and oncologic care at the clinic level and (2) perceptions of patient-provider and provider-provider communication and coordination.

CONCLUSION

Interview findings indicate a need for further development of interventions aimed at improving care coordination, patient experience, and outcomes in the cancer care continuum for LGBTQ+ patients. Learning health systems, like the one studied, show great potential for contributing to the development of such interventions.

Building Sustainable Practice Transformation Through Payment Reform Initiatives

PURPOSE

Novel value-based payment approaches provide an opportunity to deploy and sustain health care delivery interventions, such as treatment planning documentation. However, limited data are available on implementation costs.

METHODS

We described key factors affecting the cost of implementing care improvements under value-based payments, using treatment planning and Medicare's Oncology Care Model as examples. We estimated expected costs of implementing treatment plans for years 1 and 2-6 under (1) different staffing models, (2) use of technology, and (3) differences in the patients engaged. We compared costs to the payment amounts under the Oncology Care Model.

RESULTS

Team-based models where staffing is aligned with skills needed for key tasks (eg, a combination of lay navigator, nurse, and physician) are more financially feasible when compared with using physicians or nurses alone. When existing staff are at or near capacity, hiring new staff focused on practice transformation activities allows adequate time for new initiatives without negative impacts on existing services. Investments in information technology can enhance staff productivity, but initial costs may be high. Interventions may not be financially feasible if implemented for a small patient volume or only for patients insured by a particular payer. Finally, costs may be higher for disadvantaged populations, and equity in care delivery may require higher payments from payers.

CONCLUSION

Estimating the cost of implementing an intervention in different types of practice settings with various types of patients is essential to ensure that a value-based payment system will adequately support desired improvements in quality of care for all patients.

Evaluation of the Novel 4R Oncology Care Planning Model in Breast Cancer: Impact on Patient Self-Management and Care Delivery in Safety-Net and Non-Safety-Net Centers

PURPOSE

Optimal cancer care requires patient self-management and coordinated timing and sequence of interdependent care. These are challenging, especially in safety-net settings treating underserved populations. We evaluated the 4R Oncology model (4R) of patient-facing care planning for impact on self-management and delivery of interdependent care at safety-net and non-safety-net institutions.

METHODS

Ten institutions (five safety-net and five non-safety-net) evaluated the 4R intervention from 2017 to 2020 with patients with stage 0-III breast cancer. Data on self-management and care delivery were collected via surveys and compared between the intervention cohort and the historical cohort (diagnosed before 4R launch). 4R usefulness was assessed within the intervention cohort.

RESULTS

Survey response rate was 63% (422/670) in intervention and 47% (466/992) in historical cohort. 4R usefulness was reported by 79.9% of patients receiving 4R and was higher for patients in safety-net than in non-safety-net centers (87.6%, 74.2%, P = .001). The intervention cohort measured significantly higher than historical cohort in five of seven self-management metrics, including clarity of care timing and sequence (71.3%, 55%, P < .001) and ability to manage care (78.9%, 72.1%, P = .02). Referrals to interdependent care were significantly higher in the intervention than in the historical cohort along all six metrics, including primary care consult (33.9%, 27.7%, P = .045) and flu vaccination (38.6%, 27.9%, P = .001). Referral completions were significantly higher in four of six metrics. For safety-net patients, improvements in most self-management and care delivery metrics were similar or higher than for non-safety-net patients, even after controlling for all other variables.

CONCLUSION

4R Oncology was useful to patients and significantly improved self-management and delivery of interdependent care, but gaps remain. Model enhancements and further evaluations are needed for broad adoption. Patients in safety-net settings benefited from 4R at similar or higher rates than non-safety-net patients, indicating that 4R may reduce care disparities.

Use and impact of breast cancer survivorship care plans: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Survivorship care plan (SCP) comprising a treatment summary and plan for follow-up care is recommended by various organizations to address long-term needs of an increasing number of breast cancer survivors. Although there have been previous systematic reviews of SCPs in cancer, none has focused on breast cancer exclusively. This systematic review evaluates the use and impact of SCP in breast cancer survivors.

METHODS

Randomized (RCTs) and non-randomized (non-RCT) studies evaluating health care and patient-related outcomes after implementation of SCPs for survivors were identified by searching databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL, and Scopus). Data were extracted, quality assessed, and summarized on the basis of qualitative synthesis.

RESULTS

Ten non-RCTs and 14 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Although the overall quality of RCTs was superior to non-RCTs with mean quality score of 81.5% vs 64.3%, two mixed-methods non-RCTs which were individualized and included both provider and patient perspectives had comparable scores like RCTs. Several models of SCP were evaluated (paper based/online, oncologist/nurse/primary-care physician-delivered, and different templates). Descriptive information from non-RCTs suggests improvement in survivorship knowledge, satisfaction with care, and improved communication with providers. Findings from RCTs were variable. Potential gaps existed in content of SCP including unclear recommendation on frequency and ownership of follow-up. Levels of survivor satisfaction with, and self-reported understanding of, their SCP were high. Distal outcomes like health care delivery measures including costs and efficiency were mostly mixed, but heterogeneous study designs make interpretation difficult.

CONCLUSIONS

Existing research provides positive impact of SCPs on more proximal outcomes of patient experience and care delivery but mixed results for health outcomes in breast cancer survivors. Future research should focus on better defining SCP content and ensuring follow-up recommendations are acted upon, and provider feedback is included and use of novel tools to empower stakeholders.

Developing a survivorship care plan (SCP) delivery process for patients and primary care providers serving poor, rural, and minority patients with cancer

Background

Survivorship care plans (SCPs) summarize patients’ treatment and act as an education and communication tool between oncologists and primary care providers (PCPs). But creation and delivery of SCPs are challenging, labor intensive, and costly. The University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center (UNM CCC) treats a poor, rural, and minority patient population, and our purpose was to implement and evaluate a process to create and deliver SCPs to patients and PCPs.

Methods

Providers placed an electronic SCP order, basic information was imported, and staff compiled treatment details. Flagged SCPs were then ready for delivery, providers approved of and delivered the SCP at the next encounter, and the SCP was sent to the PCP.

Results

By April 2020, 283 SCPs were ordered, 241 (85.2%) were created by the designated staff, and 97 (34.2%) were given to patients after definitive therapy for breast cancer (59.1%), gynecological cancers (10.8%), prostate cancer (7.4%), colorectal cancer (5.1%), and lymphomas (4.8%). Of 97 SCPs eligible to be sent to PCPs, 75 (77.3%) were mailed or sent via EMR. Of the 41 (48.9%) SCPs sent via mail or fax, only 8 (8.3%) were received and 5 (5.2%) integrated.

Conclusions

This study shows that SCPs can be delivered to patients in a poor, rural, and minority patient population but that PCP receipt and integration of SCPs are poor. Future efforts need to ensure that an oncologist to PCP education and communication tool is able reach and be integrated by PCPs.

Improvement of the experience of colorectal cancer patients in Sweden with a regional cancer plan

AIM

The Stockholm-Gotland Regional Cancer Plan was launched in 2012 to improve cancer care. A personal contact nurse (CN), an individual written care plan (IWCP) and a standardized care pathway (SCP) were introduced. The aim of the current study was to evaluate whether these efforts have resulted in an improved experience for patients treated for colorectal cancer.

METHOD

Patients treated with bowel resection for colorectal cancer in the Stockholm-Gotland region between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2017 were identified through the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. Six to eight months postoperatively, the patients received a patient-reported experience questionnaire. Patients were classified as 'satisfied' or 'not satisfied'.

RESULTS

The questionnaire was sent to 4465 patients, and 3154 (70.64%) responded. The proportion of patients assigned a CN increased over time (79.84%-88.44%) and so did the proportion of patients receiving an IWCP (39.36%-70.00%). The waiting times were significantly shortened during the study period. In multivariable analysis, access to a CN and an IWCP was independently associated with increased patient satisfaction (OR 3.03, 95% CI 2.28-4.02 and OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.38-1.94). Patients with a long waiting time were significantly less satisfied than patients with a short waiting time (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.60-0.88).

CONCLUSION

Implementation of a CN, IWCP and SCP has been successful, measured by a higher proportion of patients gaining access to these assets and shortened waiting times. This has led to an improved patient experience in patients treated for colorectal cancer in the Stockholm-Gotland region.

Development and evaluation of a bladder Cancer specific survivorship care plan by patients and clinical care providers: a multi-methods approach

BACKGROUND, CONTEXT AND PURPOSE

In spite of the mixed evidence for their impact, survivorship Care Plans (SCPs) are recommended to enhance quality of care for cancer survivors. Data on the feasibility of SCPs in bladder cancer (BC) is sparse. Using a mixed-methods approach, this study describes the iterative development, acceptability and feasibility of BC specific SCP (BC-SCP) in clinical settings.

METHODS

In Phase I, we developed the BC-SCP. In Phase II, we conducted four focus groups with 19 patients and 15 providers to examine its acceptability and usability challenges. Data analyses using the Atlas.ti program, informed refinement of the BC-SCP. In Phase III, we conducted feasibility testing of the refined BC-SCP with 18 providers from 12 health-centers. An encounter survey was completed after each assessment to examine the feasibility of the BC-SCP. Chi-square and Fisher Exact tests were used for comparative analyses.

RESULTS

During phase I, we observed high patient and provider acceptability of the BC-SCP and substantial engagement in improving its content, design, and structure. In Phase II, providers completed 59 BC-SCPs. Mean time for BC-SCP completion was 12.3 min. Providers reported that BC-SCP content was clear, did not hamper clinic flow and was readily completed with easy-to-access information. Comparative analyses to examine differences in SCP completion time by patient clinico-demographic characteristics and provider type revealed no significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Our BC-SCP has clinical relevance, and can be used in an active practice setting. However, considerable progress will be necessary to achieve implementation of and sharing the BC-SCP with patients and care providers, particularly within the electronic medical record. In summary, BC-SCPs are essential to improve the follow up care of BC survivors. Clinical resources are required to ensure appropriate implementation of BC-SCPs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Study HUM00056082.

Patient and Provider Use of Electronic Care Plans Generated From Patient-Reported Outcomes

OBJECTIVES

To determine if patients and providers perceived improved care processes through the delivery of personalized, electronic care plans (CPs) generated from the Carevive Care Planning System™.

SAMPLE & SETTING

121 women (51 with gynecologic cancer from Billings Clinic and 70 with breast cancer from Moffit Cancer Center) completed electronic patient-reported outcome assessments and were given electronically generated, personalized supportive CPs tailored to individual symptoms and local healthcare resources.

METHODS & VARIABLES

Quantitative instruments evaluated feasibility, usability, acceptability, and satisfaction of the CPs from patient and provider perspectives. Qualitative interviews described patient perceptions of the CPs.

RESULTS

Patients with cancer reported the CPs to be useful. Most perceived that CPs improved team communication, helped find needed resources, and helped manage symptoms. Provider satisfaction was highest with the platform's ability to customize patient recommendations. Interviews indicated that patients with cancer used their CP as a resource, preferred delivery at treatment initiation, and valued information to manage symptoms.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

Nurses play an integral role in patient education and in discussing individual care. Tailored CPs can be used as a teaching tool that patients with cancer can refer to for self-care.

A structural equation modeling approach to understanding pathways linking survivorship care plans to survivor-level outcomes

PURPOSE

Several high-profile organizations have mandated the delivery of survivorship care plans (SCPs) despite mixed evidence regarding the effectiveness of SCPs on key survivor-level outcomes. There is a need to understand the types of survivor-level outcomes the SCPs are likely to change. Informed by existing frameworks and the literature, the objective of this study was to understand the pathways linking the receipt of a SCP to key survivor-level outcomes including patient-centered communication (PCC), health self-efficacy, changes in health behaviors, and improvements in overall health.

METHODS

We used structural equation modeling to test the direct and indirect pathways linking the receipt of an SCP to patient-centered communication (PCC), health self-efficacy, and latent measures of health behaviors and physical health in a nationally representative sample of breast and colorectal cancer survivors from the Health Information National Trends Survey.

RESULTS

The receipt of an SCP did not have a significant effect on key survivor-level outcomes and was removed from the final structural model. The final structural model fit the data adequately well (Chi-square p value = 0.03, RMSEA = 0.07, CFI = .88, and WRMR = 0.73). PCC had a significant direct effect on physical health but not on health behaviors. Health self-efficacy had a significant direct effect on physical health and health behaviors.

CONCLUSION

The receipt of an SCP alone is unlikely to facilitate changes in PCC, health self-efficacy, health behaviors, or physical health.

IMPLICATION FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

A SCP is a single component of a larger model of survivorship care and should be accompanied by ongoing efforts that promote PCC, health self-efficacy, and changes in health behaviors resulting in improvements to physical health.

Factors Influencing Delivery of Cancer Survivorship Care Plans: A National Patterns of Care Study

Nearly half of all Americans will develop cancer at least once in their lifetime. Through improved screening and treatments, the number of cancer survivors is reaching all-time highs. However, survivorship care plans (SCPs) are inconsistently used, denying many survivors access to critical information. This study used 46,408 SCPs generated from 2007 to 2016 and applied machine learning to identify predictors of SCP creation, including cancer type, type of physician, and healthcare center where they received care, as well as regional variations in care plan creation. Identifying these disparities in SCP use is a critical first step in efforts toward expanding access to survivorship care planning. Using a convenience sample of survivors, it is possible to model the factors that predict generation of SCPs either by the survivor or by a healthcare provider. This study identifies several important disparities both survivor intrinsic such as cancer type, as well as treatment associated and geographic differences in SCP generation. Identifying these disparities at the national level across cancer types will allow for more targeted recommendations to improve SCP creation and dissemination in underserved groups.

Randomized Trial of the Impact of Empowering Childhood Cancer Survivors With Survivorship Care Plans

Background

A survivorship care plan (SCP), that is, individualized treatment summary and schedule of off-therapy surveillance, will be mandated by January 2019. It is unclear whether SCPs improve adherence to recommended follow-up care in the community. In this trial, we evaluated the impact of randomly assigning childhood cancer survivors to 1) SCPs to be taken to their primary care physician (PCP) to implement or 2) survivorship clinic (SC) on health care quality measures.

Methods

Eligibility included cancer diagnosis younger than age 18 years (2000-2012), cancer free, one or more years off therapy, and no prior survivorship clinic attendance. At 12 months, the random assignment groups were compared (SCP+PCP vs SC) by intent-to-treat analysis with two-sided statistical tests in terms of patient adherence to guideline-recommended surveillance tests (eg, echocardiogram) and number of newly identified late complications of therapy.

Results

From 2011 to 2013, 96 participants (46.9% female, mean age = 15.9 ± 6.1 years) were randomly assigned. Adherence to 14 evaluated guideline-recommended surveillance tests ranged from 0% to 46.9% in the SCP+PCP group (n = 47) and from 50.0% to 86.4% in the SC group (n = 47). Adherence to 10 tests was statistically significantly different between the groups (all P < .05). One mild new late complication was identified in the SCP+PCP group compared with 21 late complications, ranging from mild to severe, identified in 11 patients in the SC group (2.1% vs 23.4% of patients, respectively, P = .003).

Conclusions

Our randomized trial suggests that empowering childhood cancer survivors with SCPs to be implemented by their PCPs is not sufficient to meet consensus follow-up recommendations.

Implications for patient-provider communication and health self-efficacy among cancer survivors with multiple chronic conditions: results from the Health Information National Trends Survey

PURPOSE

Cancer survivors with multiple chronic conditions experience significant challenges managing their health. The six core functions of patient-centered communication (PCC)-fostering healing relationships, exchanging information, responding to emotions, managing uncertainty, making decisions, and enabling patient self-management-represent a central component to facilitating a survivor's confidence to manage their health that has not been investigated in cancer survivors with multiple chronic conditions.

METHOD

Nationally representative data across two iterations of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) were merged with combined replicate weights using the jackknife replication method. Adjusted linear regression examined the association between PCC and health self-efficacy in a sample of breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer survivors and by multiple chronic conditions.

RESULTS

53.9% reported that providers did not always respond to their emotions and 48.9% reported that they could not always rely on their providers to help them manage uncertainty. In the adjusted linear regression models, there was a significant positive association between PCC and health self-efficacy (β = 0.2, p = 0.01) for the entire sample. However, the association between PCC and health self-efficacy was attenuated in cancer survivors with multiple chronic conditions (β = 0.1, p = 0.53).

CONCLUSION

PCC alone is not enough to improve a cancer survivor's confidence in their ability to manage their health in the presence of multiple chronic conditions.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Cancer survivors with multiple chronic conditions need ongoing support, in addition to PCC, that render them prepared to manage their health after cancer.

Feasibility of a Mobile Phone App and Telephone Coaching Survivorship Care Planning Program Among Spanish-Speaking Breast Cancer Survivors

BACKGROUND

Spanish-speaking Latina breast cancer survivors experience disparities in knowledge of breast cancer survivorship care, psychosocial health, lifestyle risk factors, and symptoms compared with their white counterparts. Survivorship care planning programs (SCPPs) could help these women receive optimal follow-up care and manage their condition.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a culturally and linguistically suitable SCPP called the Nuevo Amanecer (New Dawn) Survivorship Care Planning Program for Spanish-speaking breast cancer patients in public hospital settings, approaching the end of active treatment.

METHODS

The 2-month intervention was delivered via a written bilingual survivorship care plan and booklet, Spanish-language mobile phone app with integrated activity tracker, and telephone coaching. This single-arm feasibility study used mixed methods to evaluate the intervention. Acceptability and feasibility were examined via tracking of implementation processes, debriefing interviews, and postintervention satisfaction surveys. Preliminary efficacy was assessed via baseline and 2-month interviews using structured surveys and pre- and postintervention average daily steps count based on activity tracker data. Primary outcomes were self-reported fatigue, health distress, knowledge of cancer survivorship care, and self-efficacy for managing cancer follow-up health care and self-care. Secondary outcomes were emotional well-being, depressive and somatic symptoms, and average daily steps.

RESULTS

All women (n=23) were foreign-born with limited English proficiency; 13 (57%) had an elementary school education or less, 16 (70%) were of Mexican origin, and all had public health insurance. Coaching calls lasted on average 15 min each (SD 3.4). A total of 19 of 23 participants (83%) completed all 5 coaching calls. The majority (n=17; 81%) rated the overall quality of the app as "very good" or "excellent" (all rated it as at least "good"). Women checked their daily steps graph on the app between 4.2 to 5.9 times per week. Compared with baseline, postintervention fatigue (B=-.26; P=.02; Cohen d=0.4) and health distress levels (B=-.36; P=.01; Cohen d=0.3) were significantly lower and knowledge of recommended follow-up care and resources (B=.41; P=.03; Cohen d=0.5) and emotional well-being improved significantly (B=1.42; P=.02; Cohen d=0.3); self-efficacy for managing cancer follow-up care did not change. Average daily steps increased significantly from 6157 to 7469 (B=1311.8; P=.02; Cohen d=0.5).

CONCLUSIONS

We found preliminary evidence of program feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy, with significant 2-month improvements in fatigue, health distress, and emotional well-being and increased knowledge of recommended follow-up care and average daily steps. Tailored mobile phone and health coaching SCPPs could help to ensure equitable access to these services and improve symptoms and physical activity levels among Spanish-speaking Latina breast cancer survivors.

Survivorship care plan experiences among childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia patients and their families

BACKGROUND

As survivorship care plan (SCP) use among childhood cancer survivors and their families has not been extensively researched, we report on their experiences with receiving an SCP after the completion of therapy.

METHODS

Eligible patients had acute lymphoblastic leukemia, completed therapy, and had no evidence of disease at enrollment. Patients aged 7 or older (N = 13) and at least one parent (N = 23 for 20 total patients) were surveyed and completed assessments at enrollment (Time 1, T1), SCP delivery (Time 2, T2), and follow-up (Time 3, T3) (retention 90.9%). Surveys assessed the delivery process and SCP format. McNemar tests were used to assess change from T2-T3.

RESULTS

Satisfaction with the SCP was generally high among parents. At T1 the majority of parents (69.6%) thought the SCP should be delivered after treatment but by T3 most preferred the plan to be delivered before the end of treatment (60.9%). While 95.7% of parents intended to share their child's SCP with another provider, family, or school at T2, only 60.9% had done so by T3 (P < 0.01). At both T2 and T3, 100% of parents agreed that the SCP would help make decisions about their child's future health care. Most patients at T3 (83.3%) felt they had learned something new from their SCP.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric oncology patients and families feel SCPs are useful and will help them make decisions about health care in the future.

Developing a Novel Model to Improve Research and care for Cancer Survivors: a Feasibility Study

Despite a growing number of clinical trials and supportive care programs for cancer survivors, recruitment of patients for these opportunities during the survivorship phase of care is challenging. We piloted a novel process to systematically educate patients about available research studies and supportive care programs as part of a survivorship care visit. Between 3/2015 and 8/2015, patients seen in the Adult Survivorship Program who had not previously received a treatment summary and survivorship care plan (TS/SCP) were provided with one accompanied by a list of survivorship research studies and care programs tailored to their diagnosis. Survivorship providers discussed the opportunities and recorded whether the patient was interested in relevant studies and placed referrals to study staff. Following the visit, we tracked study enrollment and surveyed patients about their experience. Fifty of 56 (89%) pilot participants completed the survey. Almost all (98%) reported that the TS/SCP visit and document helped with knowledge of research opportunities and supportive care interventions. Following receipt of the TS/SCP, 44% were interested in at least one study and in further follow-up with research staff. Of the 30 survivors eligible for at least one study, 6 (20%) have enrolled in at least one study to date. This pilot program demonstrates that the systematic sharing of available clinical studies and supportive care programming as part of a survivorship care plan visit is feasible and well received by cancer survivors and may facilitate and enhance accrual to clinical trials in the survivorship phase of care.

Evaluating the Impact of Treatment Care Planning on Quality Measures

PURPOSE:

The Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation Oncology Care Model (OCM) requires documentation of a 13-point Institute of Medicine care management plan for Medicare patients. In addition, OCM includes evaluation of quality using key performance measures that align with the ASCO Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI). Both efforts are designed to improve patient-centered care and foster patients’ engagement in their care plan.

METHODS:

A multicenter quality improvement project was conducted to develop a strategy to meet the OCM treatment planning (TP) requirement (Plan), pilot clinician education coupled with use of electronic TP in early-stage breast cancer (Do), evaluate the impact of TP on QOPI measures (Study), and develop recommendations for future implementation (Act).

RESULTS:

Thirty-three clinical providers and 171 women with breast cancer were included. Improved performance on several QOPI measures was observed for the intervention group compared with the historical control group.

CONCLUSION:

Meeting the OCM TP requirement through incorporating a technology solution provided an opportunity for quality improvement and preparation for full-scale TP within the OCM. TP delivery was associated with improved performance on select ASCO QOPI measures, which is likely to correspond with improved performance on quality measures within OCM.

Systematic Review of the Impact of Cancer Survivorship Care Plans on Health Outcomes and Health Care Delivery

Purpose Numerous organizations recommend that patients with cancer receive a survivorship care plan (SCP) comprising a treatment summary and follow-up care plans. Among current barriers to implementation are providers' concerns about the strength of evidence that SCPs improve outcomes. This systematic review evaluates whether delivery of SCPs has a positive impact on health outcomes and health care delivery for cancer survivors. Methods Randomized and nonrandomized studies evaluating patient-reported outcomes, health care use, and disease outcomes after delivery of SCPs were identified by searching MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Library. Data extracted by independent raters were summarized on the basis of qualitative synthesis. Results Eleven nonrandomized and 13 randomized studies met inclusion criteria. Variability was evident across studies in cancer types, SCP delivery timing and method, SCP recipients and content, SCP-related counseling, and outcomes assessed. Nonrandomized study findings yielded descriptive information on satisfaction with care and reactions to SCPs. Randomized study findings were generally negative for the most commonly assessed outcomes (ie, physical, functional, and psychological well-being); findings were positive in single studies for other outcomes, including amount of information received, satisfaction with care, and physician implementation of recommended care. Conclusion Existing research provides little evidence that SCPs improve health outcomes and health care delivery. Possible explanations include heterogeneity in study designs and the low likelihood that SCP delivery alone would influence distal outcomes. Findings are limited but more positive for proximal outcomes (eg, information received) and for care delivery, particularly when SCPs are accompanied by counseling to prepare survivors for future clinical encounters. Recommendations for future research include focusing to a greater extent on evaluating ways to ensure SCP recommendations are subsequently acted on as part of ongoing care.

Patient-reported experiences on supportive care strategies following the introduction of the first Swedish national cancer strategy and in accordance with the new patient act

INTRODUCTION

Several supportive care strategies are described in Swedish legislation and policy documents, such as the National Cancer Strategy and the Patient act. No previous systematic evaluation from a patient perspective has been performed. The aim of this study was to evaluate how these supportive care strategies are experienced by patients treated for cancer in the Stockholm-Gotland region.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, we identified patients (diagnosed with gynaecological, haematological, upper gastrointestinal and head and neck cancer during 2014) from the Swedish Cancer Register. The European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer, EORTC, Quality of Life Questionnaires, QLQ-C30, Information QLQ-INFO25 and a study-specific questionnaire was used to collect data during follow-up after cancer treatment. We collected data on 869 cancer patients' perception of availability and access to supportive care strategies and how they were experienced.

RESULTS

Among the supportive care strategies suggested in the legislation and policy documents, just over half of the patients (n = 393, 53%) reported that they had access to a contact nurse, while 43% (n = 312) had received an individual written care plan and 16% (n= 137) had been referred to palliative care. Only 29% (n = 218) of the patients reported that they had received information about patient advocacy groups and 8% (n= 62) on medical second opinions from their cancer care team.

DISCUSSION

The supportive care strategies suggested in Swedish legislation and policy documents may be useful but are only available for some patients. The implementation goals for the National Cancer Strategy and the Swedish Patient act have not been reached.

Providing written information increases patient satisfaction: a web-based questionnaire survey of Japanese cancer survivors

Purpose

The Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the United States recommends that all cancer survivors be provided with a survivorship care plan (SCP), which includes a patient treatment summary and a follow-up care plan. However, SCPs have not been widely adopted in Japan. To provide basic data necessary for implementing SCPs in Japan, we aimed to investigate the forms of clinical and survivorship-related information that Japanese cancer survivors receive from their healthcare providers, and to examine whether written information increases their satisfaction.

Methods

We performed a cross-sectional online survey of cancer survivors who underwent acute cancer treatment and had at least one follow-up with a physician in the past year. Cancer survivors provided the elements and forms (verbally and/or written) of information they received, as well as the degree of satisfaction with the information provided.

Results

Responses were obtained from 545 cancer survivors. Information elements such as surgical procedure (98.3%), surgical outcome (98.1%), and names of administered chemotherapy agents (97.8%) were commonly provided, whereas mental care resources and providers (29.7%), effects on marital relationship and sexual health (35.7%), and effects on fertility (43.4%) were less common. A large proportion of cancer survivors received verbal information only. For 18 of 20 elements, except for effects on fertility and duration of hormonal therapy, satisfaction was significantly higher when both forms of information were provided (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Providing written and verbal explanations of clinical and survivorship-related information can better meet the needs of Japanese cancer survivors.

Survivorship care planning in skin cancer: An unbiased statistical approach to identifying patterns of care-plan use

BACKGROUND

Nearly 1 in 5 Americans will develop skin cancer, and as a result, survivors of skin cancer compose one of the largest groups of cancer survivors. Survivorship care plans (SCPs) are an important tool for improving patient outcomes and provide critical information to both survivors and health care professionals. Recent efforts have been made to expand SCP utilization; however, which patients currently receive SCPs is poorly understood.

METHODS

This study used 596 individuals with a diagnosis of melanoma (n = 391) or nonmelanoma skin cancer (n = 205) who had used an Internet-based SCP tool from May 2010 to December 2016 to model the patient and provider characteristics that determine SCP utilization.

RESULTS

Survivors were predominantly white (95.3%) and female (56.5%). Survivors who received a treatment summary were more likely to also receive an SCP. University and nonuniversity cancer centers used SCPs at a higher rate than other care settings. Survivors whose care was managed by a team rather than just an individual physician were also more likely to receive an SCP. Survivors older than 70 years at diagnosis were almost twice as likely to receive a plan as survivors who were diagnosed at a younger age.

CONCLUSIONS

With a convenience sample of skin cancer survivors, it is possible to model factors that predict the receipt of SCPs. Important variables include the diagnosis age, treatment setting, physician type, and treatment-summary utilization. A closer examination of these variables identified several disparities in care-plan use and, therefore, opportunities to improve the distribution of SCPs. Further validation in additional cohorts of survivors is necessary to confirm these conclusions. Cancer 2018;124:183-91. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Age and Cancer Treatment Are Related to Receiving Treatment Summaries and Survivorship Care Plans in Female Young Adult Cancer Survivors

The study determined factors associated with patient-reported receipt of survivorship care plans and/or treatment summaries (SCP/TS). Two hundred forty female young adult cancer survivors ages 18-44 completed a web-based survey that included self-report on receiving SCP/TS. Mean age was 32.8 (standard deviation 5.8) years; 20% were diagnosed with cancer at age <21. Only 47% reported receipt of SCP/TS. Age <21 at diagnosis (odds ratio [OR] 2.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-3.9), chemotherapy (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.2-4.6), central nervous system radiation (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.1-5.6), and bone marrow transplantation (OR 7.2, 95% CI 1.5-33.3) were significantly associated with higher odds of SCP/TS receipt. Improved integration of TS and SCP into cancer survivorship care is needed.

Advance care planning within survivorship care plans for older cancer survivors: A systematic review

Advances in the medical treatment of cancer have increased the number of survivors, particularly among older adults, who now represent the majority of these. Survivorship care plans (SCPs) are documents that cancer patients receive summarising their care, usually at the end of treatment but preferably from initial diagnosis. These may increase patient satisfaction and represent an opportunity to initiate preventative strategies and address future care needs. Advance care planning (ACP), incorporating advance healthcare decision-making, including formal written directives, increases satisfaction and end-of-life care. This paper systematically reviews evaluations of ACP within SCPs among older (≥65 years) cancer survivors. No studies meeting the inclusion criteria were identified by search strategies conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cochrane databases. One paper examined cancer survivors' mainly positive views of ACP. Another discussed the use of a SCP supported by a 'distress inventory' that included an advance care directive (living will) as an issue, though no formal evaluation was reported. Although ACP is important for older adults, no study was found that evaluated its role within survivorship care planning. Despite the risk of recurrence and the potential for morbidity and mortality, especially among older cancer survivors, ACP is not yet a feature of SCPs.

Interventions to improve care coordination between primary healthcare and oncology care providers: a systematic review

Coordination of patient care between primary care and oncology care providers is vital to care quality and outcomes across the cancer continuum, yet it is known to be challenging. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate current or new models of care and/or interventions aimed at improving coordination between primary care and oncology care providers for patients with adult breast and/or colorectal cancer. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination were searched for existing English language studies published between January 2000 and 15 May 2015. Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies were included if they evaluated a specific model/intervention that was designed to improve care coordination between primary care and oncology care providers, for any stage of the cancer continuum, for patients with adult breast and/or colorectal cancer. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Twenty-two studies (5 systematic reviews, 6 RCTs and 11 non-randomised studies) were included and varied with respect to the targeted phase of the cancer continuum, type of model or intervention tested, and outcome measures. The majority of studies showed no statistically significant changes in any patient, provider or system outcomes. Owing to conceptual and methodological limitations in this field, the review is unable to provide specific conclusions about the most effective or preferred model/intervention to improve care coordination. Imprecise results that lack generalisability and definitiveness provide limited evidence to base the development of future interventions and policies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42015025006.

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.

Health disparities across the breast cancer continuum

OBJECTIVES

To provide a brief overview of disparities across the spectrum of breast cancer incidence, treatment, and long-term care during the survivorship period.

DATA SOURCES

Review of the literature including research reports, review articles, and clinically based articles available through PubMed and CINAHL.

CONCLUSION

Minority women generally experience worse breast cancer outcomes despite a lower incidence of breast cancer than whites. A variety of factors contribute to this disparity, including advanced stage at diagnosis, higher rates of aggressive breast cancer subtypes, and lower receipt of appropriate therapies including surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation. Disparities in breast cancer care also extend into the survivorship trajectory, including lower rates of endocrine therapy use among some minority groups, as well as differences in follow-up and survivorship care.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Breast cancer research should include improved minority representation and analyses by race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. While we cannot yet change the biology of this disease, we can encourage adherence to screening and treatment and help address the many physical, psychological, spiritual, and social issues minority women face in a culturally sensitive manner.

Potential determinants of health-care professionals' use of survivorship care plans: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework

Background

Survivorship care plans are intended to improve coordination of care for the nearly 14 million cancer survivors in the United States. Evidence suggests that survivorship care plans (SCPs) have positive outcomes for survivors, health-care professionals, and cancer programs, and several high-profile organizations now recommend SCP use. Nevertheless, SCP use remains limited among health-care professionals in United States cancer programs. Knowledge of barriers to SCP use is limited in part because extant studies have used anecdotal evidence to identify determinants. This study uses the theoretical domains framework to identify relevant constructs that are potential determinants of SCP use among United States health-care professionals.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured interviews to assess the relevance of 12 theoretical domains in predicting SCP use among 13 health-care professionals in 7 cancer programs throughout the United States with diverse characteristics. Relevant theoretical domains were identified through thematic coding of interview transcripts, identification of specific beliefs within coded text units, and mapping of specific beliefs onto theoretical constructs.

Results

We found the following theoretical domains (based on specific beliefs) to be potential determinants of SCP use: health-care professionals’ beliefs about the consequences of SCP use (benefit to survivors, health-care professionals, and the system as a whole); motivation and goals regarding SCP use (advocating SCP use; extent to which using SCPs competed for health-care professionals’ time); environmental context and resources (whether SCPs were delivered at a dedicated visit and whether a system, information technology, and funding facilitated SCP use); and social influences (whether using SCPs is an organizational priority, influential people support SCP use, and people who could assist with SCP use buy into using SCPs). Specific beliefs mapped onto the following psychological constructs: outcome expectancies, intrinsic motivation, goal priority, resources, leadership, and team working.

Conclusions

Previous studies have explored a limited range of determinants of SCP use. Our findings suggest a more comprehensive list of potential determinants that could be leveraged to promote SCP use. These results are particularly timely as cancer programs face impending SCP use requirements. Future work should develop instruments to measure the potential determinants and assess their relative influence on SCP use.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-014-0167-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A patient-centered longitudinal care plan: vision versus reality

OBJECTIVE

As healthcare systems and providers move toward meaningful use of electronic health records, longitudinal care plans (LCPs) may provide a means to improve communication and coordination as patients transition across settings. The objective of this study was to determine the current state of communication of LCPs across settings and levels of care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted surveys and interviews with professionals from emergency departments, acute care hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, and home health agency settings in six regions in the USA. We coded the transcripts according to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) 'Broad Approaches' to care coordination to understand the degree to which current practice meets the definition of an LCP.

RESULTS

Participants (n=22) from all settings reported that LCPs do not exist in their current state. We found LCPs in practice, and none of these were shared or reconciled across settings. Moreover, we found wide variation in the types and formats of care plan information that was communicated as patients transitioned. The most common formats, even when care plan information was communicated within the same healthcare system, were paper and fax.

DISCUSSION

These findings have implications for data reuse, interoperability, and achieving widespread adoption of LCPs.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of LCPs to support care transitions is suboptimal. Strategies are needed to transform the LCP from vision to reality.

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.

Desired elements and timing of cancer survivorship care: one approach may not fit all

INTRODUCTION

Although survivorship care recommendations exist, there is limited evidence about current practices and patient preferences.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was completed by survivors of lymphoma, head and neck, and gastrointestinal cancers at an academic cancer center. The survey was designed to capture patients' reports of receipt of survivorship care planning and their attitudes, preferences, and perceived needs regarding content and timing of cancer survivorship care information. Elements of survivorship care were based on the Institute of Medicine recommendations, literature review, and clinical experience.

RESULTS

Eighty-five survivors completed the survey (response rate, 81%). More than 75% reported receiving a follow-up plan or appointment schedule, a monitoring plan for scans and blood tests, information about short- and long-term adverse effects, and a detailed treatment summary. These elements were reported as desired by more than 90% of responders. Approximately 40% of these elements were only verbally provided. Although more than 70% described not receiving information about employment, smoking cessation, sexual health, genetic counseling, fertility, or financial resources, these elements were not reported as desired. However, "strategies to cope with the fear of recurrence" was most often omitted, yet desired by most respondents. Survivors' preferences regarding optimal timing for information varied depending on the element.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that cancer survivorship care planning is heterogeneous and may not need to be comprehensive, but rather tailored to individual survivors' needs. Providers must assess patient needs early and continue to revisit them during the cancer care continuum.

Risk-based health care, the cancer survivor, the oncologist, and the primary care physician

Cancer survivors face substantial risks for morbidity, reduced quality of life, and premature mortality related to the cancer itself and/or the interventions undertaken to control cancer. Risk-based care that involves a personalized systematic plan of periodic screening, surveillance, and prevention relevant to the cancer experience is recommended to address the comprehensive health needs of the growing population of cancer survivors. Risk-based care and coordination between oncology and primary care providers have been identified as important metrics of quality cancer survivorship care. Various models of survivorship care, treatment summaries, and survivorship care plans have been promoted as methods to facilitate communication among providers across care transitions and improve survivor access to quality survivorship care. However, research supporting the feasibility of implementing these practices and their effectiveness in enhancing health outcomes is limited. This article reviews key concepts underpinning clinical and research initiatives endeavoring to improve access to quality care among long-term survivors and summarizes results of intervention studies implementing these elements in transitioning survivors from oncology to primary care providers for long-term follow-up care.