Use Of Survivorship Care Plan Research Articles

YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT YOU DON’T KNOW: BLACK/LATINX CANCER SURVIVORS’ KNOWLEDGE AND USE OF SURVIVORSHIP CARE PLAN

Abstract Compared to Whites, Black and Latinx cancer survivors and their families experience disproportionate adverse effects of cancer and cancer therapy. This is due to extreme psychosocial, physical, emotional, and financial challenges they experience, thus, highlighting racial/ethnic disparity in cancer survivorship. A cancer survivorship care plan (SCP) is important for improving cancer health and quality of life, but the effectiveness of SCP as a tool to address the disproportionately persistent poor health and quality of life of Blacks/Latinx compared to Whites deserve critical attention. This study is part of a larger study on evaluating cancer survivorship in Rhode Island. We explored knowledge and use of SCP among Blacks and Latinx cancer survivors in Rhode Island. The study employed a qualitative descriptive method. Semi-structured interviews in English and Spanish were conducted with a purposive sample of 12 cancer survivors, 8 Latinx and 3 Blacks (Mage = 62 years). Their responses were transcribed and analyzed for themes. The 3 major themes identified were: 1) invisibility of survivors; 2) understanding the needs of cancer survivors; and 3) issues of empowerment. Our findings draw attention to the need for tailored interventions targeting Black/Latinx cancer survivors. One of such interventions include designing programs to increase the accessibility of SCP to help improve quality of life of cancer survivors from disadvantaged population groups.

Barriers and facilitators to the use of survivorship care plans by hematopoietic stem cell transplant survivors and clinicians.

Survivors of hematopoietic stem cell transplants (HSCT) have complex care needs for the remainder of their lives, known as the survivorship period. Survivorship care plans (SCPs) have been proposed to improve care coordination and ultimately survivorship outcomes. We explored the barriers and facilitators of SCP use among HSCT survivors and their clinicians in order to develop more useful SCPs for the HSCT context. Analogous surveys regarding perceived barriers to and facilitators of SCP use based on a sample SCP for a female allogenic HSCT survivor were administered to HSCT survivors and non-transplant oncology and primary care clinicians. Twenty-seven HSCT survivors and 18 clinicians completed the survey. The main barriers to SCP use were lack of awareness of SCP existence, uncertainty regarding where to find SCP, unclear roles and responsibilities among healthcare teams, length of SCP, and difficultly understanding SCPs. The facilitators of SCP use were increased understanding of survivorship care needs, clarified roles and responsibilities of survivors and clinicians, SCPs that are readily available and searchable in electronic health record, increased awareness of SCP existence and provision to all survivors, and if the SCP is survivor-specific and up-to-date. Much of the work regarding SCPs has looked at barriers to creation and provision; however, our study examines factors influencing use of SCPs. By determining the barriers and facilitators surrounding SCP use for HSCT survivors and their clinicians, we can create SCP templates and clinical workflows to optimize SCP use, ideally leading to better outcomes for HSCT survivors.

Internal medicine residents’ awareness on cancer survivorship care plan: A cross sectional study.

e23011 Background: Survivorship care plans (SCPs) is recommended as a tool for communication between oncologists and primary care physicians. According to the Institute of Medicine, it is necessary to lead a cultural shift to provide SCPs to all cancer survivors to improve the transition from the oncology clinic to primary care practices. Studies suggest residency training curriculums for internal medicine (IM) are lacking education about cancer survivorship and SCPs. We aimed to assess the awareness of trainees toward SCPs. Methods: A survey was distributed to IM trainees in an outpatient setting. We stratified the descriptive analyses by program type (transitional [TY] and categorical [CT] trainees) and year of training. Differences in the proportions were tested appropriately. Analyses were conducted in R v3.6.2. Results: 37 trainees were interviewed; 32.4% were TY and 67.6% CT trainees. A 54% were PGY-1, 21.6% PGY-2, and 24.3% PGY-3. None of the trainees reported following a SCP for cancer-free patients nor to use SCP as a source to obtain cancer-related information. 78.3% and 92.6% reported that they were not taught during residency or medical school about SCPs, respectively. 84.8% informed that cancer-related information was inaccessible during the encounter with patients; sources cancer diagnosis and treatment information included: patients/family members (97.3%), outside records (83.8%), and oncology notes (86.5%). By program type, there was a statistically significant difference between TY v. CT groups (p = 0.017) regarding how often cancer-related issues were discussed with patients; the TY group mainly reported ‘Not at all’ whether CT were more likely to engage in discussion about cancer. Differences in the trainees’ comfort level answering patients concerns about cancer recurrence were observed between TY v. CT trainees but was not statistically significant (p = 0.864). Most common barriers to discuss cancer history and/or SCP were insufficient information from patients (83.8%), perceived inaccuracy from patients’ information (81.1%), unclear if patient has a SCP (81.1%), lack of SCP in medical record (75.7%), and trainees’ low medical knowledge about side effects of cancer therapies (70.3%). Conclusions: The awareness of cancer SCP among the IM trainees is limited, and many have not accessed or received training in SCPs. Efforts intended to facilitate SCP use and educate residents about cancer survivorship may be effective to increase the comfort level of trainees managing the growing number of survivors and improve transition from oncology to primary care clinics.[Table: see text]

Survivorship Care Plans: Reaching a Benchmark and Striving to Achieve Intent

Survivorship care plans (SCPs) have been endorsed by major oncologic organizations despite challenges in implementation and unclear patient-specific benefits. In January 2020, the Commission on Cancer removed a 2018 provision that required accredited programs to deliver SCPs to eligible patients. Programs must determine whether to continue SCP use or begin de-implementation. We detail a framework to increase SCP delivery for programs continuing to provide SCPs as a component of survivorship care and suggest a patient-centered approach to evaluate continued utility amidst updated national standards. We surveyed medical, surgical, and radiation oncologists at our academic and community sites to identify barriers to SCP use and performed a Pareto analysis to highlight the most notable barriers. We then designed an intervention that used SCP templates within the medical record, disease-specific recommendations, delegation to nonphysician staff, and provider education. We monitored our intervention via a statistical process control analysis and assessed patient perceptions of SCP usefulness via a questionnaire. Before implementing our process improvements, our SCP completion rate during a 10-month period was 45%. During the 6-month period after our intervention, the SCP completion rate increased to 89%. Greater than 80% of patients who had recently received an SCP found the information helpful and were satisfied with the amount of information received. More than 40% did not remember receiving their original SCP. We demonstrated a feasible method for increasing SCP delivery for all cancers across a cancer network and used a patient-specific questionnaire to assess continued value amidst changing national standards.

Personal decision support for survivor engagement: formulation and feasibility evaluation of a conceptual framework for implementing online cancer survivorship care plans

BackgroundAlthough cancer survivorship care plans have been in use for several years, they have been shown to not be effective in meeting the long-term needs of cancer survivors, in addition being generic and passive in nature. Interactive survivorship care plans in the form of a personal decision support aid could provide an opportunity to not only engage survivors in their health care, but also capture meaningful treatment-related outcomes to use as a rich data source as the basis for making informed decisions. The objective of this research is to formulate an evidence-based model framework for implementing breast cancer survivorship guidelines via an online breast cancer survivorship care plan (SCP).MethodsThe study was completed in three steps. In the first step, or the requirements gathering phase, we conducted personal interviews of breast cancer survivors to determine their use of the survivorship care plan (SCP) and related needs to determine core SCP functions and formulate an implementation framework for an online SCP. In the second step, we used the framework as a guide to design and develop the online SCP tool. Finally, in the third step, we conducted preliminary testing to determine the feasibility of the developed tool among online users.ResultsFifteen breast cancer survivors were consulted, who reported several issues from their use of the traditional paper-based SCP. Four themes were identified that represent the SCP’s core desired functions. Eight features were matched to implement these core functions. Using a personal decision approach, an online SCP tool called ACESO that incorporates these features and functions was developed. Preliminary feasibility testing yielded overall positive responses from breast cancer survivors (n = 51).ConclusionOur study demonstrated that survivors face challenges from their use of a traditional paper-based SCP. The online SCP we developed is technically feasible and has the potential to effectively engage breast cancer survivors in self-management and shared decision-making with their clinicians and caregivers. Further testing is required to assess its usability and long-term impact.

Factors Influencing Delivery of Cancer Survivorship Care Plans: A National Patterns of Care Study.

Nearly half of all Americans will develop cancer at least once in their lifetime. Through improved screening and treatments, the number of cancer survivors is reaching all-time highs. However, survivorship care plans (SCPs) are inconsistently used, denying many survivors access to critical information. This study used 46,408 SCPs generated from 2007 to 2016 and applied machine learning to identify predictors of SCP creation, including cancer type, type of physician, and healthcare center where they received care, as well as regional variations in care plan creation. Identifying these disparities in SCP use is a critical first step in efforts toward expanding access to survivorship care planning. Using a convenience sample of survivors, it is possible to model the factors that predict generation of SCPs either by the survivor or by a healthcare provider. This study identifies several important disparities both survivor intrinsic such as cancer type, as well as treatment associated and geographic differences in SCP generation. Identifying these disparities at the national level across cancer types will allow for more targeted recommendations to improve SCP creation and dissemination in underserved groups.

Survivorship Care Plans: Health Actions Taken and Satisfaction After Use.

To examine the use of and assess patient satisfaction with survivorship care plans (SCPs). 189 cancer survivors recruited from five cancer treatment center locations (Avera Cancer Institute in Aberdeen, Mitchell, Sioux Falls, and Yankton; Sanford Cancer Center in Sioux Falls) and one auxiliary specialty center (Urology Specialists in Sioux Falls), all in South Dakota. A written survey was completed by participants before and three months after receiving an SCP. Associations between demographics and cancer-related characteristics and use of the SCP were evaluated using chi-square tests. Logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with any use of the SCP, health actions attributable to the SCP, and satisfaction with the SCP. The most frequently reported uses of the SCP were to share with spouse or partner, inform about symptoms, and ask physician or nurse about concerns. SCP use, health actions taken, and satisfaction with the SCP were associated with gender, marital status, and main cancer type. Nurses should promote SCPs because they are valued and used by survivors for follow-up care.

Survivorship care plans: are randomized controlled trials assessing outcomes that are relevant to stakeholders?

The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes assessed in extant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to outcomes that stakeholders expect from survivorship care plans (SCPs). To facilitate the transition from active treatment to follow-up care for the 15.5 million US cancer survivors, many organizations require SCP use. However, results of several RCTs of SCPs' effectiveness have been null, possibly because they have evaluated outcomes on which SCPs should be expected to have limited influence. Stakeholders (e.g., survivors, oncologists) may expect outcomes that differ from RCTs' outcomes. We identified RCTs' outcomes using a PubMed literature review. We identified outcomes that stakeholders expect from SCPs using semistructured interviews with stakeholders in three healthcare systems in the USA and Canada. Finally, we mapped RCTs' outcomes onto stakeholder-identified outcomes. RCT outcomes did not fully address outcomes that stakeholders expected from SCPs, and RCTs assessed outcomes that stakeholders did not expect from SCPs. RCTs often assessed outcomes only from survivors' perspectives. RCTs of SCPs' effectiveness have not assessed outcomes that stakeholders expect. To better understand SCPs' effectiveness, future RCTs should assess outcomes of SCP use that are relevant from the perspective of multiple stakeholders. SCPs' effectiveness may be optimized when used with an eye toward outcomes that stakeholders expect from SCPs. For survivors, this means using SCPs as a map to guide them with respect to what kind of follow-up care they should seek, when they should seek it, and from whom they should seek it.

A survey of colorectal cancer (CRC) survivorship practices in Ireland, and implementation of a survivorship care plan (SCP) pilot program.

60 Background: Due to rising incidence and improved outcomes the number of CRC survivors in Ireland is approaching 20,000, and this figure is climbing. It is now recognized by leading organizations such as ASCO and NCCN, that survivorship is a distinct phase along the cancer care continuum and that supporting patients throughout their survivorship is vital. We aimed to assess the variability in surveillance practices in Ireland, and pilot the use of SCPs in CRC patients. Methods: A two phase approach was taken to complete this study. Firstly an online survey was issued to medical oncologists treating CRC in the 8 designated regional cancer centres in Ireland. This comprised 10 questions addressing surveillance practices and use of guidelines. We subsequently piloted the SCP in a cohort of our CRC patients, and followed up with a questionnaire assessing patient views. Results: The online survey was completed by 13 medical oncologists, comprising the lead treating physicians for the Irish regional cancer centres and their satellite centres. Routine surveillance of CRC is practiced by 77% (n = 10). Of those who practice follow up, 90% (n = 9) do so for 5 years. Guidelines for follow up are utilized by 77% (n = 10). The most commonly used guideline is NCCN, by 60% (n = 6). 91.6% think that the SCP is useful in enabling alternative methods of follow up and 69.2% think that nurse-led surveillance clinics should be introduced. 16 patients responded to the follow up survey. 81% (n = 13) felt the SCP was useful, and 81% (n = 13) also believed it reduced anxiety around their diagnosis. 88% (n = 14) reported that the SCP helped them feel in control of their follow up. 69% of patients (n = 11) felt the SCP aided communication and coordination of their care. Conclusions: Surveillance practices in Ireland are heterogeneous. Which guidelines are used to follow patients is physician and hospital dependent. The SCP is a useful tool for streamlining follow up practices so that they are more uniform. Physicians and patients both feel that SCPs are beneficial. Widespread use of SCPs may provide a mechanism to move CRC surveillance out of busy oncology clinics to a more appropriate setting, such as nurse-led clinics and primary care.

Cancer Survivorship Care Plan Utilization and Impact on Clinical Decision-Making at Point-of-Care Visits with Primary Care: Results from an Engineering, Primary Care, and Oncology Collaborative for Survivorship Health.

Every cancer survivor and his/her primary care provider should receive an individualized survivorship care plan (SCP) following curative treatment. Little is known regarding point-of-care utilization at primary care visits. We assessed SCP utilization in the clinical context of primary care visits. Primary care physicians and advanced practice providers (APPs) who had seen survivors following provision of an SCP were identified. Eligible primary care physicians and APPs were sent an online survey, evaluating SCP utilization and influence on decision-making at the point-of-care, accompanied by copies of the survivor's SCP and the clinic note. Eighty-eight primary care physicians and APPs were surveyed November 2016, with 40 (45%) responding. Most respondents (60%) reported discussing cancer or related issues during the visit. Information needed included treatment (66%) and follow-up visits, and the cancer team was responsible for (58%) vs primary care (58%). Respondents acquired this information by asking the patient (79%), checking oncology notes (75%), the SCP (17%), or online resources (8%). Barriers to SCP use included being unaware of the SCP (73%), difficulty locating it (30%), and finding needed information faster via another mechanism (15%). Despite largely not using the SCP for the visit (90%), most respondents (61%) believed one would be quite or very helpful for future visits. Most primary care visits included discussion of cancer or cancer-related issues. SCPs may provide the information necessary to deliver optimal survivor care but efforts are needed to reduce barriers and design SCPs for primary care use.

Survivorship and the chronic cancer patient: Patterns in treatment‐related effects, follow‐up care, and use of survivorship care plans

The survivorship needs of patients living with chronic cancer (CC) and their use of survivorship care plans (SCPs) have been overlooked and underappreciated. A convenience sample of 39,088 SCPs completed for cancer survivors with an Internet-based SCP tool was examined; it included 5847 CC survivors (15%; CC was defined as chronic leukemia and/or recurrent/metastatic cancer of another nature). Patient-reported treatment effects and follow-up care patterns were compared between CC survivors and survivors treated with curative intent (CI). Responses from a follow-up survey regarding SCP satisfaction and use were reviewed. CC survivors had greater odds of experiencing multiple treatment-related effects than survivors treated with CI; these effects included fatigue, cognitive changes, dyspnea, peripheral neuropathy, lymphedema, and erectile dysfunction. Nearly half of CC survivors were managed by an oncologist alone, and they were less likely than CI patients to be comanaged by a primary care provider and an oncologist. Fewer SCPs were generated by health care providers (HCPs) for CC survivors versus CI survivors. A smaller proportion of CC users versus CI users rated their experience and satisfaction with the SCP tool as very good or excellent, and CC users were less likely to share the HCP summary with their health care team. A substantial number of CC survivors, often considered incurable but treatable, seek survivorship support. Tools to facilitate participation, communication, and coordination of care are valuable for these patients, and future iterations of SCPs should be designed to address the particular circumstances of living with CC. Cancer 2017;123:4268-4276. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

The Impact of Survivorship Care Planning on Patients, General Practitioners, and Hospital-Based Staff.

In 2005, the Institute of Medicine recommended that all cancer patients receive a survivorship care plan (SCP). Despite widespread support, few centers have routinely implemented them. Understanding of their impact is limited. The aims of this study were to examine the impact of SCP delivery on patients and healthcare professionals at an Australian comprehensive cancer center and determine enablers and barriers to implementation. Six groups were surveyed: (1) patients who had received SCPs; (2) nurse coordinators using SCPs, (3) general practitioners (primary care, GPs) of patients who had received SCPs, (4) clinical service chairs, (5) heads of allied health, and (6) nurse coordinators not using SCPs (nonengaged nurse coordinators). Groups 1 to 3 completed written questionnaires. Groups 4 to 6 participated in semistructured interviews. Fifty patients, 7 nurse coordinators, 18 GPs, 7 clinical service chairs, 4 heads of allied health, and 8 nonengaged nurse coordinators participated. Eighty-seven percent of patients considered the SCP to be very or somewhat useful; 50% felt it helped them understand their cancer experience. All engaged nurse coordinators reported SCPs to be very or somewhat useful, and 86% believed SCPs improved communication with GPs. General practitioners felt SCPs were very or somewhat useful (67%) and wished to receive SCPs for future patients (83%). Organizational and clinical leadership, multidisciplinary engagement, resourcing, and timing of SCP delivery were considered critical enablers. Patients and healthcare professionals support the use of SCPs; however, they are resource intensive and require significant organizational support. Nurses are instrumental to SCP implementation. Attention to enablers and barriers is important for successful implementation.

Survivorship care planning after participation in communication skills training intervention for a consultation about lymphoma survivorship.

A survivorship care plan refers to a written summary of the treatment received and recommendations regarding surveillance and management of late effects. To provide evaluation of a communication skills training (CST) intervention to enhance the transition of lymphoma survivors to cancer survivorship. Nineteen oncologists specializing in lymphoma treatment were recruited and completed a survivorship CST workshop, and two standardized patient assessments (SPAs), one pretraining and one posttraining. Significant improvements in SPA scores were observed in six of the seven SPA assessment categories: use of survivorship care plan, review of disease and treatment details, long-term effects, potential late effects, specific physician recommendations, and additional health maintenance recommendations. The intervention had significant effects on physicians' uptake of new strategies and skills, as measured through pre- and posttraining SPAs, as well as on the physicians' self-efficacy about having these conversations.

Guidelines for the use of survivorship care plans: a systematic quality appraisal using the AGREE II instrument.

BackgroundSurvivorship care plans (SCPs) are written treatment summaries and follow-up care plans that are intended to facilitate communication and coordination of care among survivors, cancer care providers, and primary care providers. A growing number of guidelines for the use of SCPs exist, yet SCP use in the United States remains limited. Limited use of SCPs may be due to poor quality of these guidelines. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the quality of guidelines for SCP use, tools that are intended to promote evidence-based medicine.MethodsWe conducted a comprehensive search of the literature using MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE (Excerpta Medica Database), and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) published through April 2014, in addition to grey literature sources and bibliographic and expert reviews. Guideline quality was assessed using the AGREE II instrument (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation, 2nd edition), a tool developed by an international group of scientists to advance the quality of clinical practice guidelines. To promote consistency with extant studies using the AGREE II instrument and to clearly and unambiguously identify potentially useful guidelines for SCP use, we also summarized AGREE II scores by strongly recommending, recommending, or not recommending the guidelines that we evaluated.ResultsOf 128 documents screened, we included 16 guidelines for evaluation. We did not strongly recommend any of the 16 guidelines that we evaluated; we recommended 5 and we did not recommend 11. Overall, guidelines scored highest on clarity of presentation (i.e., guideline language, structure, and format): Guidelines were generally unambiguous in their recommendations that SCPs should be used. Guidelines scored lowest on applicability (i.e., barriers and facilitators to implementation, implementation strategies, and resource implications of applying the guideline): Few guidelines discussed facilitators and barriers to guideline application; advice and tools for implementing guidelines were vague; and none explicitly discussed resource implications of implementing the guidelines.ConclusionsGuidelines often advocated survivorship care plan use without justification or suggestions for implementation. Improved guideline quality may promote survivorship care plan use.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0254-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Abstract P1-09-15: Randomized clinical trial assessing the impact of survivorship care plans on survivor knowledge

Abstract Purpose: Efforts to inform survivors about long-term risks and planned follow-up after cancer treatment have increased. Survivorship Care Plans (SCPs) and care planning sessions have been recommended since 2005, yet the benefits of both SCP provision and care planning are only now being assessed. The impact of SCPs separate from care planning sessions is unclear, however SCPs alone require less time and cost to provide than SCPs combined with care planning sessions. We hypothesized that SCPs alone might enhance patient knowledge. In a randomized trial, we assessed change in patient knowledge of diagnosis, treatment, late/chronic side effects and followup care pre and post receipt of SCP. Methods: Patients who completed primary treatment within the past 2 years for Stage 0-3 breast cancer were consented, enrolled, and randomized to immediate (intervention) versus delayed receipt (control) of an individualized SCP without care planning. All participants completed the Wisconsin Survey of DiagnOsis and Management in Breast cancer (WiSDOM-B), a test of knowledge about one’s own breast cancer diagnosis, treatment and late effects scored out of 40 points. The survey was completed at both baseline and at four weeks (prior to delayed receipt); the primary outcome was change in score. The study was designed with 90% power to detect a between-group difference of 4 points (out of 40 possible). Results: Between November 2013 and March 2014, we recruited 64 women aged 36-78 with Stage 0-3 breast cancer. Most participants were Stage 1-2 (n=50, 79%) with n=7 (10.9%) in Stage 3. Most had received chemotherapy (62.5%), endocrine therapy (89.1%), or radiation (76.6%). At baseline, the average WiSDOM-B score was 28.3 out of 40 (70.8%), range 15.5-38.5. There was no evidence of change in score from baseline to four weeks for either the immediate SCP group (+0.41, 95% CI [-0.97,+1.79]) or delayed receipt control group (+0.95, 95% CI [-0.48,2.38]). Observed variation was consistent with sample size assumptions, and the observed treatment difference (-0.55, 95% CI [-2.53,1.44], p=n.s.) ruled out the prespecified clinically significant effect size of +4.0 (+10%). Overall, participants scored better on questions testing knowledge of diagnosis (side, year of diagnosis, lymph node test results, receptor status, and stage) and surgical side effects than on questions testing knowledge of other treatment (chemotherapy, radiation or endocrine therapy) side effects. Participant satisfaction with knowledge and care team communication was collected pre and post SCP, as well as feedback on SCP content and use of the SCP. These and analyses of selected questions shown to change post SCP by Nissen et al will also be presented. Conclusion: In a controlled, randomized clinical trial, receipt of a SCP without care planning sessions did not appear to significantly increase survivor knowledge about cancer diagnosis, treatment and followup as assessed by the WiSDOM-B survey. Efforts to improve survivor knowledge should investigate the impact of care planning sessions or other interactive health information tools. A second study of patients (n=64) randomized to immediate or delayed receipt of SCPs, in conjunction with care planning sessions, is currently enrolling. Citation Format: Amye J Tevaarwerk, Kevin A Buhr, Kari B Wisinski, Mark Burkard, Mindy Gribble, Willam Hocking, Wenjun Sun, SarahMaria Donohue, Jamie Zeal, Abigail Terhaar, Douglas A Wiegman, Mary E Sesto. Randomized clinical trial assessing the impact of survivorship care plans on survivor knowledge [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-09-15.

Potential determinants of health-care professionals' use of survivorship care plans: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework.

BackgroundSurvivorship care plans are intended to improve coordination of care for the nearly 14 million cancer survivors in the United States. Evidence suggests that survivorship care plans (SCPs) have positive outcomes for survivors, health-care professionals, and cancer programs, and several high-profile organizations now recommend SCP use. Nevertheless, SCP use remains limited among health-care professionals in United States cancer programs. Knowledge of barriers to SCP use is limited in part because extant studies have used anecdotal evidence to identify determinants. This study uses the theoretical domains framework to identify relevant constructs that are potential determinants of SCP use among United States health-care professionals.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews to assess the relevance of 12 theoretical domains in predicting SCP use among 13 health-care professionals in 7 cancer programs throughout the United States with diverse characteristics. Relevant theoretical domains were identified through thematic coding of interview transcripts, identification of specific beliefs within coded text units, and mapping of specific beliefs onto theoretical constructs.ResultsWe found the following theoretical domains (based on specific beliefs) to be potential determinants of SCP use: health-care professionals’ beliefs about the consequences of SCP use (benefit to survivors, health-care professionals, and the system as a whole); motivation and goals regarding SCP use (advocating SCP use; extent to which using SCPs competed for health-care professionals’ time); environmental context and resources (whether SCPs were delivered at a dedicated visit and whether a system, information technology, and funding facilitated SCP use); and social influences (whether using SCPs is an organizational priority, influential people support SCP use, and people who could assist with SCP use buy into using SCPs). Specific beliefs mapped onto the following psychological constructs: outcome expectancies, intrinsic motivation, goal priority, resources, leadership, and team working.ConclusionsPrevious studies have explored a limited range of determinants of SCP use. Our findings suggest a more comprehensive list of potential determinants that could be leveraged to promote SCP use. These results are particularly timely as cancer programs face impending SCP use requirements. Future work should develop instruments to measure the potential determinants and assess their relative influence on SCP use.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-014-0167-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Primary care provider (PCP) views on survivorship care plans (SCPs) generated by an electronic health record (EHR).

168 Background: SCPs may address inadequate provider-to-provider communication but PCP views regarding EHR-generated SCPs have not been assessed. A multiple choice survey was used to evaluate an EHR-generated SCP for appropriate content, length, perceived accuracy, need for updates and preferred method of delivery (the Clinican survEy of Care Plan [ChECkuP]). Methods: PCPs were recruited from the Wisconsin Research and Education Network (WREN), a cohort of family practitioners working in urban and rural Wisconsin. WREN practitioners were e-mailed and invited to participate if they currently saw patients with a breast cancer history. PCPs were provided a sample 10-page EHR-generated SCP and completed the ChECkuP at one time point. Results: 36 PCPs participated in Summer 2014. Most PCPs reported the sample EHR-generated SCP as accurate (75%), easy to use (58%) and useful in coordinating care (75%). Few felt using SCPs would disrupt their clinic workflow (11%) or that SCP use would take too much time (14%). Most (75%) preferred receiving SCPs via EHR, vs paper (36%), having the patient provide (19%) or viewing the SCP on an external website (6%). Most deemed consistent provision (69%) and standard location (78%) important. With regards to timing, 42% reported desiring an SCP immediately after completion of primary treatment. However, PCPs requested some changes: 33% requested a shorter SCP (ideally 1-3 pages) and 53% advocated for SCPs specifically written for PCPs rather than producing one document for both PCP and survivor. Also, most (53%) felt that SCPs should be updated based on information changes rather than on a regular schedule, including changes to screening guidelines (100%), late or long term side effects (89%) and followup recommendations (95%). Conclusions: PCPs regarded EHR-generated SCPs as useful in coordinating care between oncologists and primary care. PCPs desired a standardized SCP accessible within the EHR. EHR-generated SCP content, length and layout will be revised based on the feedback provided. Clinical trial information: OS12122.

Summing it up: an integrative review of studies of cancer survivorship care plans (2006-2013).

In 2006, the Institute of Medicine recommended that cancer survivors who are completing primary treatment receive a survivorship care plan (SCP) based on face validity. The state of scientific knowledge regarding the SCP is unclear. The authors conducted an integrative review of existing evidence regarding SCPs. The MEDLINE/PubMed database, the Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) database were searched for relevant studies published between 2006 and 2013 using a combination of keywords: "survivors," "survivorship," "care plans," "care planning," "treatment summaries," and "cancer." Articles were included if they 1) reported results from an empirical study, 2) included cancer survivors who were diagnosed at age ≥ 18 years, 3) related to SCP, and 4) were published in English. In total, 781 records were retrieved; 77 were identified as duplicates, and 665 were abstracts or presentations that did not relate to SCPs for adults or were not empirical, which left 42 articles for inclusion in this review. Studies regarding SCP fell into 3 categories: 1) content (n=14), 2) dissemination and implementation (n=14), and 3) survivor and provider outcomes (n=14). SCPs have been endorsed and are associated with improved knowledge, but SCP use remains sporadic. Only 4 studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that avoided many biases associated with observational studies. Other limitations included cross-sectional or pre-SCP-post-SCP ("pre-post") designs, limited generalizability caused by a lack of sample diversity, and a lack of systematic testing of data-collection tools. The quantity and quality of SCP research are limited. SCPs have been endorsed, but evidence of improved outcomes associated with SCP is limited. Future research that addresses the methodological concerns of extant studies is needed regarding SCP use, content, and outcomes.

Erratum to: Determinants of Survivorship Care Plan Use in US Cancer Programs

Table 1 in the original publication of “Determinants of survivorship care plan use inUnited States cancer programs” (Birken SA, Deal AM, Mayer DK, Weiner BJ; 2014;doi:10.1007/s13187014-0645-7) erroneously excluded an item designation for one group of response options. The following response options should correspond to the item In your opinion, what are barriers to SCP use in your cancer program? Please check all that apply.: “There are not enough resources (e.g., time, staff, training, money) to use SCPs”; Perception that SCPs are difficult to use; Influential people (e.g., physician champions, managers) have not advocated for SCPs to be used; and Other.

Determinants of Survivorship Care Plan Use in US Cancer Programs

Cancer programs are increasingly required to use survivorship care plans (SCPs). Compliance with SCP use requirements will be evaluated at the cancer program level. Cancer program-level determinants of SCP use may suggest strategies for compliance. The objective of this study was to describe SCP use and identify its cancer program-level determinants. We surveyed employees knowledgeable about survivorship practices in cancer programs throughout the USA with a wide range of annual incident cancers, program types, and cancer care quality improvement organization memberships (81/100 response rate). We used descriptive statistics to describe SCP use and bivariate statistics to identify its cancer program-level determinants. Most respondents (56 %) reported that SCPs were not used. In programs reporting use, SCP use is restricted primarily to breast (82 %) and colorectal (55 %) cancer survivors, and few providers use SCPs. When developed, SCPs seldom reach survivors and their primary care providers. Most respondents (78 %) reported beginning to use SCPs because of requirements. Frequently cited barriers included insufficient resources (76 %), perceived difficulty using SCPs (29 %), and lack of advocacy for SCP use from influential people (24 %). SCP use was positively associated with academic program type (p = .009) and membership in the National Cancer Institute's Community Cancer Centers Program (p = .009) and negatively associated with freestanding program type (p = .02). SCP use in the US cancer programs is highly inconsistent. Many cancer programs plan to implement SCPs to comply with SCP use requirements. Support specifically intended to facilitate SCP use may be more effective than non-specific resources.