Patient participation in cancer network governance: a six-year case study

The role of collaborative governance in translating national cancer programs into network-based practices: A longitudinal case study in Canada

OBJECTIVES

Networks (multiple organizations or actors coordinating their activities towards a common goal) have been promoted in the cancer programs of a number of countries. But there is little empirical evidence on whether and how they overcome the siloed functioning endemic in specialized domains. This study examines how collaborative governance takes shape to support integrated network-based practices within a prescribed national cancer program.

METHODS

A longitudinal qualitative single-case study was conducted of the Quebec cancer network in Canada. Data were collected in 2018-2020 through semi-structured interviews with stakeholders (n = 37) involved in regional and/or national cancer network structures and a review of documents (n = 45) generated at national and regional level. Abductive thematic analysis during and post-field work was based on Emerson's collaborative governance framework. It aimed to identify how collaborative governance mechanisms (principled engagement, shared motivation and capacity for joint action) were activated in the network, and their contribution to translating a national cancer program into network-based practices at the point of care.

RESULTS

Principled engagement was driven through interdisciplinary committees at national and regional level, communities of practice and trajectory-development efforts. These mandated structures supported knowledge exchange and contributed to the recognition of interdependencies, distribution of leadership and development of mutual understanding and trust. Shared motivation benefitted from a vision of patient-centred care but was hindered by top-down communication vehicles that did not allow regional priorities to filter upwards to central level. Between care providers in different settings, trust and candidacy were identified as mechanisms important to shared motivation, though network actions did not sufficiently support trust across care settings, or even between members of the same profession. Candidacy issues hindered family physician participation in cancer network structures that mirrored ongoing difficulties to including them in cancer care practice. Institutional arrangements were important drivers of capacity for joint action in the network. Common indicators were recognized as important to generating efforts towards common goals; however, questions around their validity reduced their contribution to capacities for joint action.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite favorable starting conditions from the national cancer program and its central leadership promoting collaborative governance, tensions that emerge through the pursuit of network integration limit the transition to a more collaborative practice. Taking the time to work out these tensions as integration proceeds in waves appears essential to arrive at a governance model that is appropriate and acceptable for all network members.

Health networking on cancer in the European Union: a 'green paper' by the EU Joint Action on Networks of Expertise (JANE)

Health networking is in principle a formidable instrument to address many challenges posed by cancer, one of the two most common and most lethal non-communicable chronic diseases. The European Union (EU)'s Beating Cancer Plan foresaw the addition of new health networks to the four already existing European Reference Networks on rare cancers: the Network of Comprehensive Cancer Centres and several networks of expertise (NoEs), which will be shortly deployed on items as complex and poor-prognosis cancers, palliative care, survivorship, personalised primary and secondary prevention, omic technologies, hi-tech medical resources, and cancers in adolescents and young adults. The community of experts of the EU Joint Action, due to build such NoEs, has drafted this 'green paper', incorporating 13 open questions, in an effort to foster discussion on some open questions about health networking on cancer in the EU. These affect highly diverse issues such as the following: how gaps in research into the instrument of health networking may be filled; which items lend themselves more to health networking in the EU; what degree of cooperation and harmonisation should be required of EU member states to best exploit health networking and give rise to European networks of national/regional networks; how the idea of subsidiarity may be best interpreted to support health networking in the context of EU treaties, which basically do not include health; how health networks should be funded and with what degree of cooperation between the EU and national levels; whether EU health networks should be shaped as legal entities or could give rise to secondary legal entities, also with a view to fundraising; how health networks should be best shaped to advance cancer research and how the EU regulatory system should be updated to exploit such impulse to health networks, in view of the EU General Data Protection Regulation and the new EU Health Data Space; how artificial intelligence can be exploited today within health networks and to what extent it will be able to overcome challenges such as the current lack of interoperability of electronic health records and the language barrier across the EU; and how health networks should involve patients and their groups, with regard to their formal role within EU health networks as well as their ability to have a say in items such as production of clinical practice guidelines, the design of investigator-driven clinical trials, EU regulatory decisions on medicines and devices, health service data governance, and identification of unmet needs.

Telehomecare Monitoring for Patients Receiving Anticancer Oral Therapy: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Evaluability Study

BACKGROUND

Telehomecare monitoring (TM) in patients with cancer is a complex intervention. Research shows variations in the benefits and challenges TM brings to equitable access to care, the therapeutic relationship, self-management, and practice transformation. Further investigation into these variations factors will improve implementation processes and produce effective outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to concurrently analyze implementation and evaluate the effectiveness of TM for patients receiving anticancer oral therapy. The objectives are to (1) contextualize how and why TM is implemented according to (a) site characteristics, (b) team characteristics, and (c) characteristics of patients receiving anticancer oral therapy; (2) assess TM effectiveness for recording electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (ePREMs) according to the site, implementation process, and patient characteristics; (3) describe the acceptability and feasibility of TM from the perspectives of the people directly or indirectly involved and provide evidence-based actionable guidance in anticipation of provincewide implementation.

METHODS

This type II hybrid effectiveness-implementation study uses a concurrent mixed methods design. Evaluability assessment is integrated into an emerging practice in 3 participating sites to enable the evaluation of implementation strategies on TM clinical outcomes. Quantitative data for ePROMs and ePREMs will be collected using validated oncology questionnaire. Descriptive statistics and repeated measures using multiple linear mixed models and generalized estimating equations analyses will be undertaken alongside interpretive descriptive coding of qualitative data. Qualitative data will be gathered from key informants guided by the RE-AIM (reach, efficacy, adoption, implementation, maintenance) framework and its extension, PRISM (practical robust implementation and sustainability model). The concurrent approach allows results at multiple stages of this study to be integrated iteratively. The methodological choice aims to provide real-world data that are rigorous, rapidly usable in practice, and transferable to other settings.

RESULTS

Questionnaires were pretested and the technological platform was codeveloped with members of the cancer care team and patients. Preparatory work was carried out to configure the TM platform and activate coordinating mechanisms between members of the cancer care team, patients, information technology experts, and the research team. A steering committee with 3 working groups was established to oversee the technological, clinical, and evaluation aspects of this study. Recruitment of patients for ePROMs started in February 2024, and data collection is expected to continue until March 2025. Interviews with members of the cancer care team began in November 2024. Full analysis should be completed by September 2025.

CONCLUSIONS

This study will clarify how, why, for whom, and under what conditions TM can complement current care models. Our evaluability assessment will help to address implementation complexities and better understand intervention-to-practice operationalization so that implementation might be adapted to contextual factors without potentially harmful or inequitable impacts on patients.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/63099.

Bouncing Beyond Adversity in Oncology: An Exploratory Study of the Association Between Professional Team Resilience at Work and Work-Related Sense of Coherence

Team resilience at work (TR@W) is an important resource for bouncing beyond adverse situations. Adopting a health-promoting salutogenic approach, this cross-sectional study explores whether oncology team resilience, which is significantly associated with work-related sense of coherence (Work-SoC), and examines the roles of team member characteristics, quality of work life, and perceived impact of COVID-19. Team members (n = 189) from four oncology settings in Québec (Canada) completed self-administered e-questionnaires. Structural equation modeling was used to identify the best-fitting model and significant relationships among study variables. The results showed a significant positive reciprocal relationship between TR@W and Work-SoC (R = 0.20) and between Work-SoC and TR@W (R = 0.39). These two variables were influenced by gender, gender roles, age, or COVID-19. The resulting model confirms our initial assumption that a higher level of TR@W is significantly associated with a more positive Work-SoC. Our findings provide new insights into subscale items perceived positively by oncology team members, such as perseverance, connectedness, and capability; and identify areas, such as self-care, within the team that may require greater attention to bounce beyond adversity. They also suggest there may be different levels (individual, team, and organizational) of resources under the health salutogenic umbrella.

Unravelling collaborative governance dynamics within healthcare networks: a scoping review

In many countries, healthcare systems suffer from fragmentation between hospitals and primary care. In response, many governments institutionalized healthcare networks (HN) to facilitate integration and efficient healthcare delivery. Despite potential benefits, the implementation of HN is often challenged by inefficient collaborative dynamics that result in delayed decision-making, lack of strategic alignment and lack of reciprocal trust between network members. Yet, limited attention has been paid to the collective dynamics, challenges and enablers for effective inter-organizational collaborations. To consider these issues, we carried out a scoping review to identify the underlying processes for effective inter-organizational collaboration and the contextual conditions within which these processes are triggered. Following appropriate methodological guidance for scoping reviews, we searched four databases [PubMed (n = 114), Web of Science (n = 171), Google Scholar (n = 153) and Scopus (n = 52)] and used snowballing (n = 22). A total of 37 papers addressing HN including hospitals were included. We used a framework synthesis informed by the collaborative governance framework to guide data extraction and analysis, while being sensitive to emergent themes. Our review showed the prominence of balancing between top-down and bottom-up decision-making (e.g. strategic vs steering committees), formal procedural arrangements and strategic governing bodies in stimulating participative decision-making, collaboration and sense of ownership. In a highly institutionalized context, the inter-organizational partnership is facilitated by pre-existing legal frameworks. HN are suitable for tackling wicked healthcare issues by mutualizing resources, staff pooling and improved coordination. Overall performance depends on the capacity of partners for joint action, principled engagement and a closeness culture, trust relationships, shared commitment, distributed leadership, power sharing and interoperability of information systems To promote the effectiveness of HN, more bottom-up participative decision-making, formalization of governance arrangement and building trust relationships are needed. Yet, there is still inconsistent evidence on the effectiveness of HN in improving health outcomes and quality of care.

Barriers and facilitators of meaningful patient participation at the collective level in healthcare organizations: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Collective patient participation, such as patient participation in policy making, has become increasingly important to achieve high-quality care. However, there is little knowledge on how to let patients participate in a meaningful manner at this level. The aim of this systematic literature review was to provide an overview of barriers, facilitators, and associated impact of collective patient participation.

METHODS

PubMed and EMBASE were searched until May 2023 for studies that evaluated collective patient participation. Study characteristics, methods for patient participation, barriers and facilitators, and impact (if measured) of patient participation were extracted from the articles.

RESULTS

We included 59 articles. Identified barriers and facilitators of collective patient participation were grouped into five categories: (1) preconditions for patient participation, (2) strategy for patient participation, (3) preparation of patients and staff for patient participation, (4) support for patients and staff during patient participation, and (5) evaluation of patient participation. Impact of patient participation was reported in 34 included studies at three levels: quality of care and research, the team and organization, and the participants themselves. Only three studies reported quantitative outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Interestingly, similar challenges were experienced during a period of twenty years, indicating that little progress has been made in structuring patient participation. Our overview of barriers and facilitators will therefore help to improve and structure collective patient participation.

A Smart Digital Health Platform to Enable Monitoring of Quality of Life and Frailty in Older Patients with Cancer: A Mixed-Methods, Feasibility Study Protocol

OBJECTIVES

LifeChamps is an EU Horizon 2020 project that aims to create a digital platform to enable monitoring of health-related quality of life and frailty in patients with cancer over the age of 65. Our primary objective is to assess feasibility, usability, acceptability, fidelity, adherence, and safety parameters when implementing LifeChamps in routine cancer care. Secondary objectives involve evaluating preliminary signals of efficacy and cost-effectiveness indicators.

DATA SOURCES

This will be a mixed-methods exploratory project, involving four study sites in Greece, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. The quantitative component of LifeChamps (single-group, pre-post feasibility study) will integrate digital technologies, home-based motion sensors, self-administered questionnaires, and the electronic health record to (1) enable multimodal, real-world data collection, (2) provide patients with a coaching mobile app interface, and (3) equip healthcare professionals with an interactive, patient-monitoring dashboard. The qualitative component will determine end-user usability and acceptability via end-of-study surveys and interviews.

CONCLUSION

The first patient was enrolled in the study in January 2023. Recruitment will be ongoing until the project finishes before the end of 2023.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

LifeChamps provides a comprehensive digital health platform to enable continuous monitoring of frailty indicators and health-related quality of life determinants in geriatric cancer care. Real-world data collection will generate "big data" sets to enable development of predictive algorithms to enable patient risk classification, identification of patients in need for a comprehensive geriatric assessment, and subsequently personalized care.

Dimensions of Proximity: An Actionable Framework to Better Understand Integrated Practices in Cancer Networks

Introduction:

This study empirically explores how dimensions of proximity that support integrated care emerge from deliberate actions within a cancer network in Quebec (Canada).

Methods:

We conduct a supplementary analysis of qualitative data from a primary multi-case study focused on collaborative governance and cancer care integration. Data from semi-structured interviews, documents and observation are analysed to find out how relationships take shape through actions that create different dimensions of proximity, and how these contribute to integrated practices.

Results:

Deliberate actions at different levels within the network create dimensions of proximity. The creation of committees and communities of practice at national and local level establish geographic proximity. Relational proximity among actors emerges to different degrees in these venues. Cognitive proximity is generated by consistent promotion of the national cancer plan and person-centred care. The priority of cancer care at policy level and prescription of common standards enhance organizational proximity. Synergy between dimensions of proximity appears essential to the emergence of integrated practices. Insufficient efforts to create technological and institutional proximity contribute to inconsistent clinical and professional integration.

Conclusion:

The concept of proximity appears a promising complement to existing models of integration, especially in complex contexts such as cancer networks.

Highlights

The multiple dimensions of proximity appear a promising complement to existing models of integration, especially in complex contexts such as cancer networks.