Dataset Information

An assessment of patient navigator activities in breast cancer patient navigation programs using a nine-principle framework.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To determine how closely a published model of navigation reflects the practice of navigation in breast cancer patient navigation programs.

Data source

Observational field notes describing patient navigator activities collected from 10 purposefully sampled, foundation-funded breast cancer navigation programs in 2008-2009.

Study design

An exploratory study evaluated a model framework for patient navigation published by Harold Freeman by using an a priori coding scheme based on model domains.

Data collection

Field notes were compiled and coded. Inductive codes were added during analysis to characterize activities not included in the original model.

Principal findings

Programs were consistent with individual-level principles representing tasks focused on individual patients. There was variation with respect to program-level principles that related to program organization and structure. Program characteristics such as the use of volunteer or clinical navigators were identified as contributors to patterns of model concordance.

Conclusions

This research provides a framework for defining the navigator role as focused on eliminating barriers through the provision of individual-level interventions. The diversity observed at the program level in these programs was a reflection of implementation according to target population. Further guidance may be required to assist patient navigation programs to define and tailor goals and measurement to community needs.

SUBMITTER: Gunn CM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4213049 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

An assessment of patient navigator activities in breast cancer patient navigation programs using a nine-principle framework.

Gunn Christine M CM Clark Jack A JA Battaglia Tracy A TA Freund Karen M KM Parker Victoria A VA

Health services research 20140513 5

<h4>Objective</h4>To determine how closely a published model of navigation reflects the practice of navigation in breast cancer patient navigation programs.<h4>Data source</h4>Observational field notes describing patient navigator activities collected from 10 purposefully sampled, foundation-funded breast cancer navigation programs in 2008-2009.<h4>Study design</h4>An exploratory study evaluated a model framework for patient navigation published by Harold Freeman by using an a priori coding sche ...[more]

PMID: 24820445

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeHealthcare systems contribute to disparities in breast cancer outcomes. Patient navigation is a widely cited system-based approach to improve outcomes among populations at risk for delays in care. Patient navigation programs exist in all major Boston hospitals, yet disparities in outcomes persist. The objective of this study was to conduct a baseline assessment of navigation processes at six Boston hospitals that provide breast cancer care in preparation for an implementation trial of standardized navigation across the city.MethodsWe conducted a mixed methods study in six hospitals that provide treatment to breast cancer patients in Boston. We administered a web-based survey to clinical champions (n = 7) across six sites to collect information about the structure of navigation programs. We then conducted in-person workflow assessments at each site using a semi-structured interview guide to understand site-specific implementation processes for patient navigation programs. The target population included administrators, supervisors, and patient navigators who provided breast cancer treatment-focused care.ResultsAll sites offered patient navigation services to their patients undergoing treatment for breast cancer. We identified wide heterogeneity in terms of how programs were funded/resourced, which patients were targeted for navigation, the type of services provided, and the continuity of those services relative to the patient's cancer treatment.ConclusionsThe operationalization of patient navigation varies widely across hospitals especially in relation to three core principles in patient navigation: providing patient support across the care continuum, targeting services to those patients most likely to experience delays in care, and systematically screening for and addressing patients' health-related social needs. Gaps in navigation across the care continuum present opportunities for intervention.Trial registrationClinical Trial Registration Number NCT03514433, 5/2/2018.

Project description:BackgroundIn 2018 Translating Research Into Practice (TRIP), an evidence-based patient navigation intervention aimed at addressing breast cancer care disparities, was implemented across six Boston hospitals. This study assesses patient navigator team member perspectives regarding implementation barriers and facilitators one year post-study implementation.MethodsWe conducted in-depth qualitative interviews at the six sites participating in the pragmatic TRIP trial from December 2019 to March 2021. Navigation team members involved with breast cancer care navigation processes at each site were interviewed at least 12 months after intervention implementation. Interview questions were designed to address domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), focusing on barriers and facilitators to implementing the intervention that included 1) rigorous 11-step guidelines for navigation, 2) a shared patient registry and 3) a social risk screening and referral program. Analysis was structured using deductive codes representing domains and constructs within CFIR.ResultsSeventeen interviews were conducted with patient navigators, their supervisors, and designated clinical champions. Participants identified the following benefits provided by the TRIP intervention: 1) increased networking and connections for navigators across clinical sites (Cosmopolitanism), 2) formalization of the patient navigation process (Goals and Purpose, Access to Knowledge and Information, and Relative Advantage), and 3) flexibility within the TRIP intervention that allowed for diversity in implementation and use of TRIP components across sites (Adaptability). Barriers included those related to documentation requirements (Complexity) and the structured patient follow up guidelines that did not always align with the timeline of existing site navigation processes (Relative Priority).ConclusionsOur analysis provides data using real-world experience from an intervention trial in progress, identifying barriers and facilitators to implementing an evidence-based patient navigation intervention for breast cancer care. We identified core processes that facilitated the navigators' patient-focused tasks and role on the clinical team. Barriers encountered reflect limitations of navigator funding models and high caseload.Trial registrationClinical Trial Registration Number NCT03514433 , 5/2/2018.

Project description:BackgroundThere is a great deal of variation in the design and delivery of patient navigator (PN) programs, making it difficult to design or adopt these interventions in new contexts. We (1) systematically reviewed the literature to generate a preliminary program theory to describe how patient navigator interventions are designed and delivered; and (2) describe how the resulting program theory was applied in context to inform a prototype for a patient navigator program.MethodsThe current study includes a secondary review of a larger systematic review. We reviewed studies included in the primary review to identify those that designed and evaluated programs to assist patients in accessing and/or adhering to care. We conducted a content analysis of included publications to describe the barriers targeted by PN interventions and the navigator activities addressing those barriers. A program theory was constructed by mapping patient navigator activities to corresponding constructs within the capability-opportunity-motivation model of behavior change (COM-B) model of behavior change. The program theory was then presented to individuals with chronic disease, healthcare providers, and system stakeholders, and refined iteratively based on feedback.ResultsTwenty one publications describing 19 patient navigator interventions were included. A total of 17 unique patient navigator activities were reported. The most common included providing education, facilitating referrals, providing social and emotional support, and supporting self-management. The majority of navigator activities targeted barriers to physical opportunity, including facilitating insurance claims, assistance with scheduling, and providing transportation. Across all interventions, navigator activities were designed to target a total of 20 patient barriers. Among interventions reporting positive effects, over two thirds targeted knowledge barriers, problems with scheduling, proactive re-scheduling following a missed appointment, and insurance. The final program design included a total of 13 navigator activities-10 informed by the original program theory and 3 unique activities informed by stakeholders.ConclusionsThere is considerable heterogeneity in intervention content across patient navigator interventions. Our results provide a schema from which to develop PN interventions and illustrate how an evidence-based model was used to develop a real-world PN intervention. Our findings also highlight a critical need to improve the reporting of intervention components to facilitate translation.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42013005857.

Dataset Information

An assessment of patient navigator activities in breast cancer patient navigation programs using a nine-principle framework.

Objective

Data source

Study design

Data collection

Principal findings

Conclusions

Publications

An assessment of patient navigator activities in breast cancer patient navigation programs using a nine-principle framework.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets