Effectiveness of interventions to improve cancer treatment and follow-up care in socially disadvantaged groups

Immunomodulator adherence in multiple myeloma patients with lower socioeconomic status: a retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

Poor adherence to oral chemotherapy adversely impacts clinical outcomes and escalates overall healthcare costs. Despite barriers to medication adherence, a significant gap remains in assessing adherence to oral chemotherapy among multiple myeloma (MM) patients with lower socioeconomic status. Hence, our study aims to evaluate immunomodulator adherence in MM patients at a county hospital, primarily serving underrepresented and indigent individuals with low socioeconomic status across the greater Houston area.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria composed of patients diagnosed with MM, aged at least 18 years, and treated with lenalidomide or pomalidomide-two widely used immunomodulators-for a minimum of 2 months or having two or more records of dispensation between May 2019 and May 2021. Adherence was gauged using an adjusted version of the medication possession ratio (MPR).

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients were enrolled, yielding a mean MPR value of 88% (SD, ± 18.9). Of these, 43 patients (69.3%) demonstrated adherence with an MPR of ≥ 0.90. A significant difference was found in treatment duration between the adherent (mean 8.8 months; SD, ± 7.2) and non-adherent (mean 13.4 months; SD, ± 7.9) groups (p = 0.027). Notably, race/ethnicity demonstrated a significant difference (p = 0.048), driven by disparities in African American and Hispanic representation across adherence levels.

CONCLUSION

In summary, our findings highlight race and treatment duration to be predictors of immunomodulator adherence among MM patients with lower socioeconomic status. Further research is imperative to devise and test innovative interventions aimed at enhancing medication adherence, thereby contributing to improved survival and healthcare quality in this population.

Patient Navigation in Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Patient navigation promotes access to timely treatment of chronic diseases by eliminating barriers to care. Patient navigation programs have been well-established in improving screening rates and diagnostic resolution. This systematic review aimed to characterize the multifaceted role of patient navigators within the realm of cancer treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

A comprehensive electronic literature review of PubMed and Embase databases was conducted to identify relevant studies investigating the role of patient navigators in cancer treatment from August 1, 2009 to March 27, 2023. Fifty-nine articles were included in this review. Amongst studies focused on cancer treatment initiation, 70% found a significant improvement in treatment initiation amongst patients who were enrolled in patient navigation programs, 71% of studies focused on treatment adherence demonstrated significant improvements in treatment adherence, 87% of studies investigating patient satisfaction showed significant benefits, and 81% of studies reported a positive impact of patient navigators on quality care indicators. Three palliative care studies found beneficial effects of patient navigation. Thirty-seven studies investigated disadvantaged populations, with 76% of them concluded that patient navigators made a positive impact during treatment. This systematic review provides compelling evidence supporting the value of patient navigation programs in cancer treatment. The findings suggest that patient navigation plays a crucial role in improving access to care and optimizing treatment outcomes, especially for disadvantaged cancer patients. Incorporating patient navigation into standard oncology practice can reduce disparities and improve the overall quality of cancer care.

Effectiveness of care models for chronic disease management: A scoping review of systematic reviews

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a scoping review of models of care for chronic disease management to identify potentially effective components for management of chronic traumatic brain injury (TBI).

METHODS

Information sources: Systematic searches of three databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) from January 2010 to May 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses reporting on the effectiveness of the Chronic Care Model (CCM), collaborative/integrated care, and other chronic disease management models.

DATA

Target diseases, model components used (n = 11), and six outcomes (disease-specific, generic health-related quality of life and functioning, adherence, health knowledge, patient satisfaction, and cost/health care use).

SYNTHESIS

Narrative synthesis, including proportion of reviews documenting outcome benefits.

RESULTS

More than half (55%) of the 186 eligible reviews focused on collaborative/integrated care models, with 25% focusing on CCM and 20% focusing on other chronic disease management models. The most common health conditions were diabetes (n = 22), depression (n = 16), heart disease (n = 12), aging (n = 11), and kidney disease (n = 8). Other single medical conditions were the focus of 22 reviews, multiple medical conditions of 59 reviews, and other or mixed mental health/behavioral conditions of 20 reviews. Some type of quality rating for individual studies was conducted in 126 (68%) of the reviews. Of reviews that assessed particular outcomes, 80% reported disease-specific benefits, and 57% to 72% reported benefits for the other five types of outcomes. Outcomes did not differ by the model category, number or type of components, or target disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there is a paucity of evidence for TBI per se, care model components proven effective for other chronic diseases may be adaptable for chronic TBI care.

Nurse navigation, symptom monitoring and exercise in vulnerable patients with lung cancer: feasibility of the NAVIGATE intervention

We developed the Navigate intervention to improve survival among vulnerable lung cancer patients. In this intervention-only study, we examined feasibility in terms of recruitment, retention, attendance, adherence, and acceptability to specify adjustments to study procedures and intervention components prior to a randomized trial. The Navigate intervention includes nurse navigation, patient-reported outcomes, and physical exercise. Patients ≥ 18 years old, diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer at any stage, with performance status ≤ 2, eligible for cancer treatment and vulnerable according to a screening instrument were included. The recruitment goal of eligible patients was 40% while the retention goal was 85%. The predefined cut-offs for sufficient attendance and adherence were ≥ 75%. Acceptability was evaluated by semi-structured interviews with participants, nurse navigators, and physiotherapists. Seventeen (56%) out of 30 screened patients were considered vulnerable and eligible for the study, 14 (82%) accepted participation, and 3 (21%) were subsequently excluded due to ineligibility, leaving 11 patients. Four patients dropped out (36%) and four patients died (36%) during follow-up and 3 (27%) were retained. All 11 patients participated in nurse sessions (mean 16, range 1-36) with 88% attendance and dialogue tools being applied in 68% of sessions. Ninety-one percent of patients responded to PROs (mean of 9 PROs, range 1-24) with 76% of the PRO questionnaires used (attendance) and 100% adherence (completion of all questions in PRO questionnaires), and 55% participated in exercise sessions with 58% attendance and 85% adherence. We identified important barriers primarily related to transportation, but overall acceptability was high. The Navigate intervention was feasible with high participation, acceptability and satisfactory adherence. Retention and exercise attendance were low, which resulted in adjustments.Trial registration: The feasibility study was initiated prior to the multicenter randomized controlled trial registered by ClinicalTrials.gov (number: NCT05053997; date 23/09/2021).

A support nurse may strengthen the participation of patients with low socio-economic status in treatment pathways of head and neck cancer: A theory-based evaluation

AIM

To test and evaluate a support nurse intervention within the head and neck cancer (HNC) pathway.

BACKGROUND

Even though interventions aiming to support patients with a low socio-economic status have been a focus for development and implementation in several countries, research still shows that these patients often have unmet needs and encounter challenges in communicating with health professionals during their treatment pathways. Furthermore, support interventions are few in Denmark and none of the existing interventions target patients with HNC receiving radiation therapy of whom the majority have a low socio-economic status and therefore potentially carry a high risk of being challenged during their treatment pathways.

DESIGN

A theory-based evaluation was used as framework. A support nurse intervention was designed to offer patients with a low socio-economic status help and support in the initial part of the HNC pathway. Eleven patients were included in the trial period.

METHODS

The evaluation of the intervention was based on interviews, a questionnaire survey and field notes.

RESULTS

The expected outputs were achieved, thus: (1) the patients felt supported and assisted, (2) the support nurse was capable of supporting, helping and accompanying the patients, (3) the patients were informed as relevant and understood the information provided. Unexpected outputs were that the support nurse was capable of co-ordinating the pathway in line with the patient's needs and that she facilitated the interaction between patients and health professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

Support for patients with a low socio-economic status improves their ability to engage in their cancer treatment pathway. This, in turn, increases their preparedness for participation and, hence, strengthens their choice of treatment.

REPORTING METHOD

This study is reported using consolidated guideline for reporting interventions Template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR checklist). We used theory-based evaluation as described by Peter Dahler-Larsen.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No patient or public contribution.

Patient navigation across the cancer care continuum: An overview of systematic reviews and emerging literature

Patient navigation is a strategy for overcoming barriers to reduce disparities and to improve access and outcomes. The aim of this umbrella review was to identify, critically appraise, synthesize, and present the best available evidence to inform policy and planning regarding patient navigation across the cancer continuum. Systematic reviews examining navigation in cancer care were identified in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Epistemonikos, and Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) databases and in the gray literature from January 1, 2012, to April 19, 2022. Data were screened, extracted, and appraised independently by two authors. The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Review and Research Syntheses was used for quality appraisal. Emerging literature up to May 25, 2022, was also explored to capture primary research published beyond the coverage of included systematic reviews. Of the 2062 unique records identified, 61 systematic reviews were included. Fifty-four reviews were quantitative or mixed-methods reviews, reporting on the effectiveness of cancer patient navigation, including 12 reviews reporting costs or cost-effectiveness outcomes. Seven qualitative reviews explored navigation needs, barriers, and experiences. In addition, 53 primary studies published since 2021 were included. Patient navigation is effective in improving participation in cancer screening and reducing the time from screening to diagnosis and from diagnosis to treatment initiation. Emerging evidence suggests that patient navigation improves quality of life and patient satisfaction with care in the survivorship phase and reduces hospital readmission in the active treatment and survivorship care phases. Palliative care data were extremely limited. Economic evaluations from the United States suggest the potential cost-effectiveness of navigation in screening programs.

NAVIGATE: improving survival in vulnerable patients with lung cancer through nurse navigation, symptom monitoring and exercise - study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION AND AIM

Low socioeconomic position (SEP) has been shown to be strongly associated with impaired lung cancer survival. Barriers related to receiving recommended treatment among patients with lung cancer with low SEP may include adverse health behaviour and limited physical and psychosocial resources influencing the ability to react on high-risk symptoms and to navigate the healthcare system. To address the underlying factors that drive both decisions of treatment, adherence to treatment and follow-up in vulnerable patients with lung cancer, we developed the Navigate intervention. The aim of this randomised controlled trial is to investigate the effect of the intervention on survival (primary outcome), lung cancer treatment adherence, health-related quality of life and other psychosocial outcomes as well as health costs and process evaluation (secondary outcomes) in a study population of vulnerable patients with lung cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This two-armed multicentre randomised trial will recruit patients from five lung cancer clinics in Denmark identified as vulnerable according to a screening instrument with nine clinical and patient-reported vulnerability criteria developed for the study. We will enrol 518 vulnerable patients >18 years old diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer at all stages with a performance status <2. Participants will be randomly allocated to either standard treatment and intervention or standard treatment alone. The Navigate intervention is based on principles from motivational interviewing and includes three components of nurse navigation, systematic monitoring of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and physical exercise in a person-centred delivery model. Data will be collected at baseline and 3, 6, 12 months after randomisation using questionnaires, clinical data and physical function tests.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics Committee, Region Zealand (SJ-884/EMN-2020-37380) and the Data Protection Agency in Region Zealand (REG-080-2021) approved the trial. Participants will provide written informed consent. Results will be reported in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05053997.

Investigation of intervention solutions to enhance adherence to oral anti-cancer medicines in adults: an overview of reviews (Preprint)

Background

Adherence to anticancer medicines is critical for the success of cancer treatments; however, nonadherence remains challenging, and there is limited evidence of interventions to improve adherence to medicines in patients with cancer.

Objective

This overview of reviews aimed to identify and summarize available reviews of interventions to improve adherence to oral anticancer medicines in adult cancer survivors.

Methods

A comprehensive search of 7 electronic databases was conducted by 2 reviewers who independently conducted the study selection, quality assessment using the A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2, and data extraction. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 checklist was adapted to report the results.

Results

A total of 29 reviews were included in the narrative synthesis. The overall quality of the systematic reviews was low. The 4 main strategies to promote adherence were focused on education, reminders, behavior and monitoring, and multicomponent approaches. Digital technology–based interventions were reported in most reviews (27/29, 93%). A few interventions applied theories (10/29, 34%), design frameworks (2/29, 7%), or engaged stakeholders (1/29, 3%) in the development processes. The effectiveness of interventions was inconsistent between and within reviews. However, interventions using multiple strategies to promote adherence were more likely to be effective than single-strategy interventions (12/29, 41% reviews). Unidirectional communication (7/29, 24% reviews) and technology alone (11/29, 38% reviews) were not sufficient to demonstrate improvement in adherence outcomes. Nurses and pharmacists played a critical role in promoting patient adherence to oral cancer therapies, especially with the support of digital technologies (7/29, 24% reviews).

Conclusions

Multicomponent interventions are potentially effective in promoting patient adherence to oral anticancer medicines. The seamless integration of digital solutions with direct clinical contacts is likely to be effective in promoting adherence. Future research for developing comprehensive digital adherence interventions should be evidence-based, theory-based, and rigorously evaluated.