Patient navigator team perceptions on the implementation of a citywide breast cancer patient navigation protocol: a qualitative study

Treatment trajectories of individuals diagnosed with rectal cancer: an interpretative phenomenological study

Rectal cancer affects almost every aspect of an individual's daily life. However, there are gaps in understanding the complete spectrum of experiences spanning from diagnosis to recovery. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore the treatment trajectories of individuals diagnosed with rectal cancer. Adopting an interpretative phenomenological approach, seven participants were recruited using purposive sampling. Data were collected using semi-structured, in-depth interviews that were digitally recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Study rigour was established following the four-dimension criteria of credibility, dependability, transferability and confirmability. Four prominent themes emerged from the participants' experiences of undergoing rectal cancer treatment: uncovering the inner battles; navigating the physical challenges; anchors of support and conquering the summit. These findings contribute to knowledge and practice by highlighting the importance of providing a comprehensive and individualised treatment plan for individuals that takes account of the physical and psycho-emotional implications of rectal cancer treatment.

Advancing Inclusive Research (AIR) Site Alliance: Facilitating the inclusion of historically underrepresented people in oncology and ophthalmology clinical research

BACKGROUND

The Advancing Inclusive Research (AIR) Site Alliance is composed of clinical research centers that partner with Genentech, a biotechnology company, to advance the representation of diverse patient populations in its oncology and ophthalmology clinical trials, test recruitment, and retention approaches and establish best practices to leverage across the industry to achieve health equity.

METHODS

Through a data-driven selection process, Genentech identified 6 oncology and 3 ophthalmology partners that focus on reaching historically underrepresented patients in clinical trials and worked collaboratively to share knowledge and explore original ways of increasing clinical study access for every patient, including sites co-creation of a Protocol Entry Criteria Guideline with inclusion principles.

RESULTS

For patients, three publicly available educational videos about clinical trials were created in multiple languages. The AIR Site Alliance has also defined invoiceable services for sites to enhance patient support; this has been built into the new study budget templates for sustainability. For healthcare professionals (HCPs), the first-of-its-kind AIR Educational Program was developed to focus on identifying and addressing bias and engaging historically underrepresented patient populations in trials. The sites also co-created videos for HCPs and patients on why advancing inclusive research matters. Over 16 regional health equity symposia have been delivered for patients, HCPs, and community leaders.

CONCLUSIONS

This AIR Site Alliance is a model for other site alliances, including Kenya, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and Canada. Such alliances will build a robust and sustainable research ecosystem that includes diverse patient groups and encourages change across the healthcare system.

Integrating accompanying patients into clinical oncology teams: limiting and facilitating factors

OBJECTIVES

Since 2018, four establishments in Quebec have been instrumental in implementing the PAROLE-Onco program, which introduced accompanying patients (APs) into healthcare teams to improve cancer patients' experience. APs are patient advisors who have acquired specific experiential knowledge related to living with cancer, using services, and interacting with healthcare professionals. They are therefore in a unique and reliable position to be able to provide emotional, informational, cognitive and navigational support to patients who are dealing with cancer. We aimed to explore APs' perspectives regarding the limiting and facilitating factors in terms of how they are integrated into the clinical oncology teams.

METHODS

A qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews and focus groups was conducted with 20 APs at the beginning of their intervention (T1) and, two years later, during a second data collection (T2). Limiting and facilitating factors of APs' integration into clinical teams were analyzed in terms of governance, culture, resources and tools.

RESULTS

The limited factors raised by APs to be integrated into clinical teams include the following: confusion about the specific roles played by APs, lifting the egos of certain professionals who feel they are already doing what APs typically do, lack of identification of patient needs, absence of APs in project governance organizational boundaries, and team members' availability. Various communication challenges were also raised, resulting in the program being inadequately promoted among patients. Also mentioned as limiting factors were the lack of time, space and compensation. Creating opportunities for team members to meet with APs, building trust and teaching team members how APs' activities complement theirs were enhancing factors. Other facilitators include APs being involved in decision-making committees, being leaders in promoting the PAROLE-Onco program to patients and clinical team members and creating opportunities to communicate with team members to help enhance their work and provide feedback to improve patient services. Awareness of APs' added value for the team and patients is also a key facilitator. Regarding tools, offering accompanying services by telephone allows both patients and APs to benefit from the flexibility they need.

CONCLUSION

Over time, APs were able to identify optimal factors for successful implementation. Recommendations include APs and professionals working in co-construction on organization, leadership, resources and status factors. This could help catalyze a change in culture within health establishments and allow people dealing with cancer to benefit from the experiential knowledge of other patients within their clinical team.

Development and Evaluation of Patient Navigation Training for Rural and Appalachian Populations

The Appalachian region of the USA includes 423 counties in 13 states positioned along the spine of the Appalachian Mountains stretching from New York to Mississippi. Approximately 42% of Appalachia is rural, and while the economy of Appalachia has diversified over the past two decades from reliance on agriculture and coal mining, 176 (41.6%) of the 423 counties are classified as economically distressed or at-risk. Patient navigation (PN) has been shown to be effective as an approach to address multiple barriers and enhance access to healthcare services, and yet there are no known PN programs focusing on the Appalachian population. This project was designed to develop, implement, and evaluate a curriculum and training program for PN for cancer prevention and control in Appalachia. The training program was developed through formative evaluation and offered daylong workshops that provided instruction in 60-90-min modules. Workshop topics included an introduction to PN, Appalachian culture, community needs assessment, communication, financial navigation, and navigation for screening and diagnostic follow-up for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. A total of 20 workshops were conducted with 334 attendees. The workshops were evaluated using a mixed-method approach using pre- and posttests and participant evaluations. The overall mean posttest scores increased by 4% from pretest (p < 0.05). Evaluation also showed that attendees valued the focus on Appalachian culture and judged the content relevant and useful. Attendees also expressed interest in additional opportunities for similar workshops that expanded upon current topics and allowed for exploration of Appalachian health-related issues.

Implementation of postpartum navigation for low-income individuals at an urban academic medical center

BACKGROUND

Patient navigation, a patient-centered intervention to promote comprehensive health care, is an emerging innovation in obstetrics to optimize postpartum care. We aimed to evaluate the implementation of a novel postpartum patient navigation program at an urban academic medical center.

METHODS

This mixed-methods study analyzed the implementation of a postpartum patient navigation program within an ongoing randomized control trial. This study analyzed three navigators' logs of interactions with 50 patients, care team members, and community organizations throughout patients' first year postpartum. We categorized and quantified interactions by topic addressed, care team member interacted with, and communication mode used. We also conducted semi-structured interviews with each navigator every three months (5 interviews per navigator), emphasizing navigation experiences, relationships with patients and care teams, integration in the care team, and healthcare system gaps. Interview data were analyzed using the constant comparative method to identify themes using the constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

RESULTS

Analysis of navigator logs revealed a high patient need level, especially in the first 3 months postpartum. CFIR-guided analysis of intervention characteristics revealed positive perceptions of navigation's utility due to its adaptability. Navigation's complexity, however, posed an early obstacle to implementation that diminished over time. Outer setting analysis indicated navigators addressed patient needs through interactions with multiple systems. Despite clinicians' initial unfamiliarity with navigation, inner setting analysis suggested ongoing communication and electronic medical record use facilitated integration into the care team. Regarding individual and process characteristics, findings emphasized how navigator self-efficacy and confidence increased with experience (individual) and was facilitated by comprehensive training and reflection (process). Overall, barriers to implementation included unfamiliarity, varied patient engagement, and innovation complexity. Facilitators included high patient need, communication with outside organizations, medical record usage, navigator characteristics (self-efficacy, communication skills, and personal growth), a comprehensive training period, consistent reflection, high relative advantage, and high adaptability to patient need.

CONCLUSION

Patient navigation is a promising innovation to improve postpartum care coordination and support care team efforts. The successful implementation of navigation in this study indicates that, if shown to improve patient outcomes, obstetric navigation could be a component of patient-centered postpartum care.

Prenatal oral health guidelines: a theory- and practice-informed approach to survey development using a modified-Delphi technique and cognitive interviews

BACKGROUND

Pregnancy presents an opportune time for oral health promotion and intervention; however, implementation of the prenatal oral health guidelines remains a challenge among prenatal and oral health providers. The purpose of this study was twofold: To employ a theory-based approach to identify high-priority Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs with the greatest potential to impact prenatal oral health guideline implementation, and to operationalize and pre-test survey items based on the prioritized CFIR constructs. Identifying barriers and facilitators to guideline implementation will inform the development of targeted interventions that address gaps in adherence which can positively impact oral-systemic health.

METHODS

The online survey development process employed three rounds of a modified-Delphi technique with prenatal (i.e., MD/DO, CNM) and oral health (i.e., DMD) Practice Advisory Board Members, cognitive interviews with prenatal and oral health providers, and deliberations among the research team and a Scientific Advisory Board (OBGYN, pediatric dentist, and researchers). High-impact CFIR constructs were identified and translated into survey items that were subsequently piloted and finalized.

RESULTS

During three modified-Delphi rounds, a total of 39 CFIR constructs were evaluated with final input and deliberations with the Practice Advisory Board, Scientific Advisory Board, and the research team achieving consensus on 19 constructs. The instrument was pre-tested with four prenatal and two oral health providers. Overall, participants reported that the survey items were feasible to respond to, took an appropriate length of time to complete, and were well-organized. Participants identified specific areas of improvement to clarify CFIR items. The final survey instrument included 21 CFIR items across four domains, with five constructs included from the intervention characteristics domain, two from the process domain, two from the outer setting domain, and 12 from the inner setting domain.

CONCLUSIONS

Lessons learned from the survey development process include the importance of soliciting diverse scientific and practice-based input, distinguishing between importance/impact and direction of impact (barrier/facilitator), and the need for additional qualitative methods during interdisciplinary collaborations. Overall, this study illustrated an iterative approach to identifying high-priority CFIR constructs that may influence the implementation of the prenatal oral health guidelines into practice settings.