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

A scoping review of the evidence on survivorship care plans among minority, rural, and low-income populations

PURPOSE

Despite recent advances in cancer control and the number of cancer survivors increasing substantially over the past years, some cancer survivors continue to experience disparities due to barriers to recommended survivorship care. The use of survivorship care plans (SCPs) may be a way to help care for these individuals and their respective issues after they complete their primary treatment. The purpose of this scoping review is to understand the evidence on SCPs among minority, rural, and low-income populations: groups that experience disproportionately poorer cancer health outcomes.

METHODS

Computer-based searches were conducted in four academic databases. We included peer-reviewed studies published in the English language and conducted in the USA. We systematically extracted information from each paper meeting our inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Our search identified 45 articles. The 4 major themes identified were (1) disparities in the receipt of SCPs where populations experience unmet needs; (2) benefits of SCPs, including improved care coordination and self-management of cancer; (3) needs and preferences for survivorship care; and (4) barriers and facilitators to using SCPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the potential benefits, underserved cancer survivors experience disparities in the receipt of SCPs and continue to have unmet needs in their survivorship care. Survivorship care may benefit from a risk-stratified approach where SCPs are prioritized to survivors belonging to high-risk groups.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

SCPs are a tool to deliver quality care for cancer survivors. While evidence is mixed on SCPs' benefits among the general population, SCPs show promise for underserved populations when it comes to proximal outcomes that contribute to disparities.

Fostering a High-Functioning Team in Cancer Care Using the 4R Oncology Model: Assessment in a Large Health System and a Blueprint for Other Institutions

PURPOSE

Delivering cancer care by high-functioning multidisciplinary teams promises to address care fragmentation, which threatens care quality, affects patient outcomes, and strains the oncology workforce. We assessed whether the 4R Oncology model for team-based interdependent care delivery and patient self-management affected team functioning in a large community-based health system.

METHODS

4R was deployed at four locations in breast and lung cancers and assessed along four characteristics of high-functioning teams: recognition as a team internally and externally; commitment to an explicit shared goal; enablement of interdependent work to achieve the goal; and engagement in regular reflection to adapt objectives and processes.

RESULTS

We formed an internally and externally recognized team of 24 specialties committed to a shared goal of delivering multidisciplinary care at the optimal time and sequence from a patient-centric viewpoint. The team conducted 40 optimizations of interdependent care (22 for breast, seven for lung, and 11 for both cancers) at four points in the care continuum and established an ongoing teamwork adaptation process. Half of the optimizations entailed low effort, while 30% required high level of effort; 78% resulted in improved process efficiency.

CONCLUSION

4R facilitated development of a large high-functioning team and enabled 40 optimizations of interdependent care along the cancer care continuum in a feasible way. 4R may be an effective approach for fostering high-functioning teams, which could contribute to improving viability of the oncology workforce. Our intervention and taxonomy of results serve as a blueprint for other institutions motivated to strengthen teamwork to improve patient-centered care.

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.