Survivorship care planning after the Institute of Medicine recommendations: how are we faring?
Authors:
- Carrie Tompkins StrickerCSCarrie Tompkins Stricker
- Linda A. JacobsLJLinda A. Jacobs
- Betsy RisendalBRBetsy Risendal
- Alison JonesAJAlison Jones
- Sarahlena PanzerSPSarahlena Panzer
- Patricia A. GanzPGPatricia A. Ganz
- Karen L. SyrjalaKSKaren L. Syrjala
- Mary S. McCabeMMMary S. McCabe
- K. Scott BakerKBK. Scott Baker
- Kenneth MillerKMKenneth Miller
- Jacqueline CasillasJCJacqueline Casillas
- Donald L. RosensteinDRDonald L. Rosenstein
- 4 October 2011
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Nature in Journal of Cancer Survivorship
- Vol. 5 (4) , 358-370
Abstract
Introduction This study evaluates the concordance of treatment summaries (TSs) and survivorship care plans (SCPs) delivered to breast cancer survivors within the LIVESTRONG™ Network of Survivorship Centers of Excellence with Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommendations and describes additional structure/process variables. Method Seven NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers and six community-based centers participated. TS/SCPs for 65 patients were rated against IOM recommendations using a study-derived checklist, and surveys were administered to better understand the structure and process of delivering TSs/SCPs. Results On average, fewer than half of IOM content recommendations were met for TSs (M = 46%) and less than two thirds for SCPs (M = 59%). No sites achieved ≥75% overall concordance with IOM recommendations for TSs and only two of 13 met this criterion for SCPs. Content domain scores across sites varied widely, as did the number of sites addressing domain content with ≥75% concordance. Nonetheless, resources required for document preparation and delivery were substantial. Discussion Gaps in concordance with IOM recommendations exist even in dedicated survivorship centers. A substantial time burden was also noted. Further research is needed to determine which informational elements are essential, to develop and test strategies for improving efficiency and reach, and to determine if outcomes of survivorship care planning warrant the resources required in their preparation and delivery. Implications for survivors TSs and SCPs have been recommended for all cancer survivors. Essential elements must be determined, approaches made more efficient, outcome improvements demonstrated, and cost-benefit analyses determined before survivors should expect widespread implementation of this recommendation for survivorship care.Keywords
This publication has 39 references indexed in Scilit:
- Survivors of breast cancer: patient perspectives on survivorship care planningJournal of Cancer Survivorship, 2011
- Adult cancer survivorship care: experiences from the LIVESTRONG centers of excellence networkJournal of Cancer Survivorship, 2011
- The Interface Between Primary and Oncology Specialty Care: Treatment Through SurvivorshipJNCI Monographs, 2010
- Views of primary care physicians and oncologists on cancer follow-up initiatives in primary care: an online surveyJournal of Cancer Survivorship, 2010
- The views of bowel cancer survivors and health care professionals regarding survivorship care plans and post treatment follow upJournal of Cancer Survivorship, 2009
- Cancer Care and Cancer Survivorship Care in the United States: Will We Be Able to Care for These Patients in the Future?Journal of Oncology Practice, 2009
- Patient navigation: State of the art or is it science?Cancer, 2008
- Ensuring Quality Care for Cancer Survivors: Implementing the Survivorship Care PlanSeminars in Oncology Nursing, 2008
- Ensuring Continuity of Care Through Electronic Health RecordsJournal of Oncology Practice, 2007
- Future Supply and Demand for Oncologists : Challenges to Assuring Access to Oncology ServicesJournal of Oncology Practice, 2007