The optimal living and survivorship program: Piloting a novel survivorship care model.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (29_suppl) ◽  
pp. 40-40
Author(s):  
Stacie Corcoran ◽  
John Russell ◽  
Jill Clayton ◽  
Bridget Kelly ◽  
Andrea Smith ◽  
...  

40 Background: Multiple agencies define cancer survivorship as beginning at the time of diagnosis. However, traditional care models deliver “survivorship care” months or years after diagnosis, which can cause care disruption and “transition anxiety”. We hypothesized that an approach centered around wellbeing could be applied across the cancer continuum (starting at diagnosis) and serve as a novel survivorship care model. Methods: We developed the Optimal Living and Survivorship Program with 3 key components: 1) a centralized model that provides multidisciplinary care; 2) an individualized Wellness Plan (WP); and 3) enrollment at the time of diagnosis to mitigate post-treatment transition. Participants complete a digital wellness questionnaire (WQ) prior to the 1st medical oncology consult, receive a validated algorithm-based WP, and meet with a Wellness Advanced Practice Provider (WAPP). The WP consists of individualized education and referrals (e.g., nutrition, exercise, financial counseling). The WAPP will assume post-treatment (“survivorship”) care. We piloted this approach in patients diagnosed with breast cancer beginning in 11/19. The primary outcome is feasibility defined by completion of the WQ. Secondary outcomes include participation in the WAPP visits, attendance at appointments, and quality of life (QOL). Results: Due to COVID-19, the pilot was paused in 2/20. Data collected from 11/19 through 2/20 reveal a total of 67 eligible patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer were approached, with 65 enrolled. All participants completed the WQ and all received a WP with supportive referrals and educational resources. All participants engaged with WP recommendations. Participants were screened at high risk for an average of 3.8 unmet needs, and 98% were at high risk for 2 or more needs at time of diagnosis. Exercise was the highest unmet need (83%). There was 76% adherence with referral to the program’s Exercise Physiologist. Other areas of needs were nutrition (59%) and sleep quality (51%). WAPP tele-visits began in 6/20; visit completion rates will be presented. Qualitative data regarding patient experience and QOL will be obtained via interviews and feedback will be categorized in thematic domains. Conclusions: Most patients enrolled in the program, completed a WQ and engaged with the WP. Our findings suggest that this early intro to survivorship is feasible. Earlier engagement and incorporation of wellness and supportive services from time of diagnosis may improve our ability to address multifactorial needs during and after cancer therapy.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14003-e14003
Author(s):  
Stacie Corcoran ◽  
John Russell ◽  
Andrea Smith ◽  
Bridget Kelly ◽  
Jill Clayton ◽  
...  

e14003 Background: Multiple national agencies define cancer survivorship as beginning at the time of cancer diagnosis. However, traditional care models deliver “survivorship care” months or years after diagnosis, which can lead to disruption in care and “transition anxiety”. We hypothesized that an approach centered around wellbeing could be applied across the cancer continuum (starting at diagnosis) and serve as a novel survivorship care model. Methods: We developed the Optimal Living and Wellness Program, a multilevel intervention with 3 key components: 1) a centralized model that provides coordinated multidisciplinary care; 2) an individualized Wellness Plan (WP); and 3) enrollment at the time of cancer diagnosis in order to mitigate the experience of post-treatment transition. Participants complete a digital wellness questionnaire (WQ) prior to the first medical oncology consult, receive a validated algorithm-based WP reviewed by a Wellness Coordinator, and meet with a Wellness Advanced Practice Provider (WAPP) via tele-medicine. The WP consists of individualized education and referrals to indicated supportive services (e.g., nutrition, exercise physiology, financial counseling, integrative medicine). The WAPP will ultimately assume care of the patient in the post-treatment (“survivorship”) phase. We piloted this approach in patients diagnosed with breast cancer beginning in November 2019. The primary outcome is feasibility defined by completion of the WQ. Secondary outcomes include participation in the WAPP visits, attendance at referral appointments, and quality of life (QOL). Results: As of January 31, 2020, a total of 39 eligible patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer were approached. Of these, 36 (92%) have completed the WQ. All 36 participants received a WP with indicated supportive referrals and educational resources. Initial WAPP tele-visits will begin in May 2020. Qualitative data regarding patient experience and QOL will be obtained via focused interviews and feedback will be categorized in thematic domains. Conclusions: In this pilot, the majority of patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer completed a WQ in advance of their initial medical oncology visit, indicating preliminary feasibility. Patient enrollment is ongoing, and updated data including additional feasibility metrics and QOL will be presented. Earlier patient engagement and incorporation of wellness and supportive services from time of diagnosis may significantly improve the transition to post-treatment care.


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Singh-Carlson ◽  
F. Wong ◽  
G. Oshan

Background This paper focuses on phase iii of a study evaluating the development and implementation of a survivorship care plan (scp) that could ultimately improve post-treatment quality of life for South Asian (sa) breast cancer survivors (bcss). Evaluating the utility of the scp was important to understand how sociocultural influences might affect uptake of the scp by sa bcss, especially as they transition from treatment to community care.Methods Post-treatment discharge planning using an individualized scp at discharge for sa female breast cancer patients with stage i or ii disease was offered as a pilot service to oncologists at BC Cancer’s Fraser Valley and Abbotsford centres. A longitudinal study using a mixed-methods approach was used to evaluate the utility of that service at 1 year after discharge.Results Participants (n = 16) completed a survey about their scp delivery experience, and a 1-year post implementation survey about the scp content and its utility. Most participants reported the discharge appointments to be extremely or very helpful with respect to post-treatment care questions. All have visited their family physicians for follow-up as recommended. The three major sources of support were family, faith, and family physician. Qualitative responses from the health care professionals who developed or implemented the scps identified two challenges in scp delivery: engaging patients or family members in relationship, and translating key information through interpreters.Conclusions It is important to evaluate the utility of scps for sa female survivors, who might differ from the general bcs population because of a different understanding of the disease; language barriers; strong influence of family members; societal stigmas; and personal, social, cultural, and religious beliefs and values. A formal nurse-led discharge appointment with discussions about follow-up care and an individualized scp outlining the short- and long-term effects of treatment are recommended. Particular attention has to be paid to the practical and psychosocial needs of sa bcss and their supporting family members.


The Breast ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 36 ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly C. Gast ◽  
Summer V. Allen ◽  
Kathryn J. Ruddy ◽  
Tufia C. Haddad

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1010-1010
Author(s):  
B. Arun ◽  
V. Valero ◽  
G. Yin ◽  
G. Babiera ◽  
J. L. Murray ◽  
...  

1010 Background: Short-term chemoprevention trials offer a convenient model to screen chemopreventive agents and identify endpoint biomarkers. One of the potential agents is celecoxib (C), which has antiproliferative and apoptosis inducing properties. In this prospective study, our primary aim was to evaluate changes in proliferation induced by C in breast tissue of high risk women. Here, we report changes in estrogen receptor (ER) proliferation index. Methods: 42 eligible high risk women were enrolled into the study, underwent fine needle aspiration (FNA) and started celecoxib treatment at 400 mg BID. Median age: 51.9 years. Risk factors: Gail risk > 1.67% (n=13), lobular carcinoma insitu (n=13), atypical hyperplasia (n=11), previous history of breast cancer (n=5). For ER and Ki-67 testing, thin preparations slides were incubated with primary mouse monoclonal antibody 6F11 against the ER and clone MIB-1, respectively. Appropriate negative and positive controls were included. At least 100 epithelial cells were evaluated per slide. Immunoreactivity for each marker was scored as the percentage of positive nuclei. We assessed the difference in ER and Ki-67 levels before and after treatment using a Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: The average pre-treatment ER expression in FNA samples was 35.9% and Ki-67 was 2.4%. 19 (45%) showed hyperplasia or atypical hyperplasia. 39 patients underwent also post-treatment FNAs. The pre-and post treatment ER expression in this group was 35.7% (range 0–100%) and 27.4% (range: 0–100%), respectively. The difference in ER levels was statistically significant (p = 0.04). Twenty-six patients had Ki-67 levels measured both before and after treatment. The median difference in Ki-67 levels was 0 (range 0- 5). This change was not statistically significant (p = 0.63). Conclusions: We have completed accrual to a prospective short-term chemoprevention trial with celecoxib. We have found a significant downregulation of ER expression with 6 months celecoxib. Since ER expression is a marker of proliferation, this finding confirms celecoxibs antiproliferative properties. Currently, we have not observed a change in Ki-67; this could be partly due to the small number of samples and the fact that Ki-67 is low in normal epithelium. [Table: see text]


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19629-e19629
Author(s):  
Fran Zandstra ◽  
Guadalupe R. Palos ◽  
Ludivine Russell ◽  
Jacklyn J Flores ◽  
Yvette DeJesus ◽  
...  

e19629 Background: Multidisciplinary care models provide a comprehensive approach to improve the care of long-term cancer survivors as recommended by the Institute of Medicine report.. Here we describe a Multidisciplinary Survivorship Care Model and the metrics used to evaluate the delivery of personalized care to long-term survivors. Methods: Critical components used to develop survivorship services included: 1) engaging clinical and administrative leadership; 2) conducting extensive reviews/syntheses of published literature including health promotion, prevention and risk reduction, late treatment effects, and rehabilitative services for each disease-site; 3) determining eligibility criteria to transition patients from active-disease care to survivorship care; 4) developing, implementing, and evaluating algorithms by involving a multidisciplinary team expert-consensus; 5) obtaining approval for integration of algorithms into practice by institutional credentialing and regulatory committees; 6) identifying appropriate survivorship clinics to pilot the feasibility of algorithms in routine clinical operations; 7) performing improvement checks of the clinic operations; and 8) revising operations and scheduling as needed. Metrics used to evaluate the progress of the clinical activity of each multidisciplinary survivorship care clinic (MSCC) included number of unique patients transitioned, number seen, number of arrived appointments, number of summary care plans issued, and survivors’ satisfaction. Results: The MSCCs included gynecology, thyroid, genitourinary, stem cell transplant, breast, head and neck, colorectal, lymphoma, and melanoma, with varied launch dates for each clinic. Between 09/01/2008 and 12/31/2011, there were a total of 7396 unique survivors, 12,741 arrived appointments, and 10,016 summary care plans completed within 30 days from appointment. Conclusions: Dedicated multidisciplinary survivorship care models are a comprehensive approach to deliver long-term survivorship care. Comparative effectiveness and other health outcomes research examining the feasibility, usability, acceptance, and effectiveness of the MSCC by providers and survivors is warranted.


2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (26_suppl) ◽  
pp. 116-116
Author(s):  
Jennifer R. Klemp ◽  
Lori Ranallo ◽  
Catherine J Knight ◽  
Mary Williams ◽  
Carol J. Fabian

116 Background: With more than 2.9 million BrCa survivors in the US, it is imperative to determine how best to deliver post-treatment survivorship care. National accreditation standards are pushing survivorship care plans, while evidence supporting specific methods of delivery and outcomes are lacking. The University of Kansas Breast Cancer Survivorship Center opened in 2007 as a continuity of care, post-treatment survivorship clinic. We report prospective findings from a group of BrCa survivors from 2007-2013. Methods: Four hundred twenty-four BrCa survivors consented to an IRB approved, longitudinal survivorship registry. Baseline variables on demographics, disease history, summary of cancer treatment, late effects, medications and health status were collected. Follow-up data collection included disease status or new primary cancer, patient’s health status and late/long-term effects. Comparisons from baseline to subsequent visits provided information on changes in key variables over time. Results: Participants were ~57 years old, primarily Caucasian, attended at least some college, made >$40K per year, and 49% were premenopausal at diagnosis. Forty-five women reported having another malignancy and 10 were diagnosed with either a recurrence or a second primary breast cancer while followed in the survivorship center. Significant self-reported symptoms included menopausal symptoms: hot flashes (n=164), vaginal dryness (n=211) and a lack of sexual activity (195). 95% were seen for >1 post-baseline visit. Menopausal symptom interventions, lifestyle recommendations (weight loss and increasing physical activity), referrals to specialists (77% referred for colonoscopy completed colon ca screening; 92% referred attending cardio-oncology screening visit; 100% referred completed a bone mineral density analysis), and lymphedema education and management increased significantly. Conclusions: Multidisciplinary care facilitated through a continuity of care survivorship clinic improves compliance with recommended follow-up and cancer screening, however additional research on the cost and impact of delivering survivorship care is needed to evaluate sustainability and long-term patient outcomes.


2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (26_suppl) ◽  
pp. 123-123
Author(s):  
Leah L. Dietrich ◽  
Mohammed Al-Hamadani ◽  
Chris Meyer ◽  
Alexandra Watral ◽  
Angela Smith

123 Background: After the IOM report “From Cancer Patient to Cancer Survivor - Lost in Transition” was issued, there was a widespread call to develop Survivorship programs. Few studies have evaluated the effectiveness of these programs. Prior studies have focused on perceptions of, or preferences for, certain models of survivorship care. Therefore, our goal was to retrospectively evaluate our effectiveness based on patient perception, quality of life (QOL) and compliance with NCCN guidelines for follow-up. Methods: Eligible patients completed all of their breast cancer treatment at GHS. Surveys were sent out to evaluate patient knowledge and QOL. Chart review was conducted to assess NCCN compliance. Survivorship clinic attendees and non-attendees were matched for age and disease stage for comparison purposes of the outcomes (QOL, NCCN compliance, overall effectiveness) using descriptive statistics analysis. Chi-squares and t-tests/ANOVA statistical tests were used for categorical and continuous data significance respectively. Results: We found survivorship clinic patients (n=65) tended to perceive their concerns, in various categories, to be more adequately addressed than non-attendees (n=52), with significant differences in the areas of practical concerns and questions regarding late-term side effects. Categories in which there were no significant differences tended to be highly rated in both groups. There was also a significant difference in compliance with two NCCN guidelines for those attending survivorship. Additionally, women attending the survivorship appointment utilized supportive resources more than those who did not attend. Conclusions: Survivorship clinic attendees felt certain concerns were better addressed, were more compliant with NCCN recommended follow-up, and used supportive services more often than non-attendees. Statistically significant differences in other categories may be found in a larger sample size. These measures can be used to help us improve our survivorship services and for other institutions to measure quality and effectiveness of their programs.


2010 ◽  
Vol 56 (5) ◽  
pp. 818-824 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin C. Oeffinger ◽  
Melissa M. Hudson ◽  
Ann C. Mertens ◽  
Stephanie M. Smith ◽  
Pauline A. Mitby ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document