Dataset Information

Practice patterns and perceptions of survivorship care in Canadian genitourinary oncology: A multidisciplinary perspective.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

There is little knowledge of survivorship care specific to genitourinary (GU) cancers. To improve care delivery to this patient population, we need to clearly define physician perceptions of survivorship care. We therefore conducted a study to determine the challenges to GU cancer survivorship care in Canada.

Methods

A web-based questionnaire was e-mailed to physicians treating GU cancers in Canada, including urologists, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. Five domains were assessed: demography, current post-cancer treatment care, perspectives on barriers to survivorship care, accessibility to survivorship resources, and perspectives about advocacy groups.

Results

There were 306 responses, with 260 eligible for study. A total of 82% of physicians involve primary care practitioners (PCPs) at some point in survivorship care. Most physicians provide some form of written follow-up plan to PCPs. However, only 25% provided lifestyle recommendations and 53% included persistent and late effects of therapy. Lack of time or resources dedicated to survivorship care was the most commonly reported barrier. There was variation in accessibility to survivorship support programs among different subspecialties and regions. Advocacy groups generally were underutilized, particularly in testis cancer. Low response rate and the potential response bias are the main limitations of this survey.

Conclusion

To our knowledge this is the first study to address the challenges of GU cancer survivorship care in Canada. The barriers and accessibility of survivorship care quoted in this survey may be used to improve care for this group of patients. Underutilization of advocacy groups may stimulate the advocacy groups and institutions to address its causes and solutions.

SUBMITTER: Almatar A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4277520 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Practice patterns and perceptions of survivorship care in Canadian genitourinary oncology: A multidisciplinary perspective.

Almatar Ashraf A Richter Suzanne S Lalani Nafisha N Bender Jackie L JL Wiljer David D Alkazaz Nour N Legere Laura L Maganti Manjula M Sridhar Srikala S SS Catton Pamela P PP Jewett Michael A S MA

Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada 20141101 11-12

<h4>Introduction</h4>There is little knowledge of survivorship care specific to genitourinary (GU) cancers. To improve care delivery to this patient population, we need to clearly define physician perceptions of survivorship care. We therefore conducted a study to determine the challenges to GU cancer survivorship care in Canada.<h4>Methods</h4>A web-based questionnaire was e-mailed to physicians treating GU cancers in Canada, including urologists, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. ...[more]

PMID: 25553154

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMultidisciplinary collaboration has generally been shown to have positive effects on healthcare but can be difficult to facilitate. This study assessed the effects of a multidisciplinary fibroid clinic on practice patterns and clinician perceptions to better understand drivers of interspecialty collaboration.Materials and methodsAnnual rates of hysterectomies, myomectomies, and uterine fibroid embolizations (UFEs) performed in an urban healthcare system were collected from 2012-2019. Rates of each procedure were compared over time before and after launching a multidisciplinary fibroid clinic at the academic medical center. Referral rates were also compared. The gynecologists and interventional radiologists (IRs) involved in the clinic were interviewed 2 years prior to and after the clinic launch about their approaches to fibroids and perceptions of others who treat this condition. A phenomenological approach was used to identify and compare themes within the interviews by two researchers with excellent inter-rater agreement (κ = 0.80).Results and discussionAnnual rates of fibroid procedures increased over time (p<0.01) but the relative number of UFEs decreased (p = 0.01). UFE referrals by the clinic gynecologists significantly increased as did the number of combined fibroid procedures (p<0.01). However, the rates of one fibroid procedure relative to others were not different between the clinic and rest of the healthcare system (p = 0.55). Specialty-specific perceptions of fibroid treatments and inter-specialty dynamics did not change. Despite this, clinicians unanimously perceived the clinic and post-clinic practice patterns as positive and distinct from their previous work and relationships between gynecology and IR elsewhere. Limitations of this study included its single clinic design and potential confounder of differences in advertising pre- versus post-clinic.ConclusionCreating the right practice environment may be more important for fostering inter-specialty collaboration and work satisfaction than shared mental models or procedural volumes in certain practice settings.

Project description:BackgroundAs persons of trust, community-based physicians providing survivorship care (e.g., general practitioners [GPs]) often serve as the primary contacts for cancer survivors disclosing distress. From the perspective of physicians providing survivorship care for cancer patients, this study explores (a) the accessibility, availability, and potential benefits of psycho-oncology services; (b) whether physicians themselves provide psychosocial support; and (c) predictors for impeded referrals of survivors to services.MethodsIn a cross-sectional survey, all GPs and community-based specialists in a defined region were interviewed. In addition to descriptive analyses, categorical data were investigated by applying chi-square tests. Predictors for impeded referrals were explored through logistic regression.ResultsOf 683 responding physicians, the vast majority stated that survivors benefit from psycho-oncology services (96.8%), but the physicians also articulated that insufficient coverage of psycho-oncology services (90.9%) was often accompanied by impeded referrals (77.7%). A substantial proportion (14.9%) of physicians did not offer any psychosocial support. The odds of physicians in rural areas reporting impeded referrals were 1.91 times greater than the odds of physicians in large urban areas making a similar report (95% confidence interval [1.07, 3.40]).ConclusionMost community-based physicians providing survivorship care regard psycho-oncology services as highly beneficial. However, a large number of physicians report tremendous difficulty referring patients. Focusing on those physicians not providing any psychosocial support, health policy approaches should specifically (a) raise awareness of the role of physicians as persons of trust for survivors, (b) highlight the effectiveness of psycho-oncology services, and (c) encourage a proactive attitude toward the assessment of unmet needs and the initiation of comprehensive care.Implications for practiceCommunity-based physicians providing survivorship care for cancer patients regard psycho-oncology services as a highly reasonable and beneficial addition to medical care. In light of insufficient local coverage with services, difficulties with seamless referrals constitute a major challenge for physicians. Apart from emphasizing the effectiveness of psycho-oncology services and proactive attitudes toward the assessment of unmet needs, future policies should focus on the integration of medical and psychosocial follow-up of cancer survivors, especially in rural areas.

Project description:Importance:Health insurers reimburse clinicians in many ways, including the ubiquitous fee-for-service model and the emergent shared-savings models. Evidence on the effects of these emergent models in oncological treatment remains limited. Objectives:To analyze the early use and cost associations of a recent Medicare payment program, the Oncology Care Model (OCM), which included a shared savings-like component. Design, Setting, and Participants:This nonrandomized controlled study used a difference-in-differences approach on 2 years of data, from July 1, 2015, to June 30, 2017-1 year before and 1 year after launch of the OCM-to compare the differences between participating and nonparticipating practices, controlling for patient, clinician, and practice factors. Participation in the OCM began on July 1, 2016. Associations of participation with care use and cost were estimated for care directly managed by clinicians from a large network within their Medicare populations for breast, lung, colon, and prostate cancers. Data were analyzed from September 2019 to March 2020. Exposures:Participating practices were paid a monthly management fee of $160 per beneficiary and a potential risk-adjusted performance-based payment for eligible patients who received chemotherapy treatment, in addition to standard fee-for-service payments. Main Outcomes and Measures:Office visits, drug administrations, patient hydrations, drug costs, and total costs. Results:Monthly means data at the physician-level were evaluated for 11 869 physician-months for breast cancers, 11 135 physician-months for lung cancers, 8592 physician-months for colon cancers, and 9045 physician-months for prostate cancers. Patients at OCM practices had a mean (SD) age of 63.4 (3.1) years, and a mean (SD) of 59% (7 percentage points) of their patients were women. Participation in the OCM was associated with less physician-administered prostate cancer drug use (difference, 0.29 [95% CI, -0.47 to -0.11] percentage points, or 24.0%) translating to a mean of $706 (95% CI, -$1383 to -$29) less in drug costs per month. Monthly drug costs were also lower, at $558 (95% CI, -$1173 to $58) less for treatment for lung cancer. Total costs were lower by 9.7% or $233 (95% CI, -$495 to $30) for breast cancer, 9.9% or $337 (95% CI, -$618 to -$55) for lung cancer, 14.2% or $385 (95% CI, -$780 to $10) for colon cancer, and 29.2% or $610 (95% CI, -$1095 to -$125) for prostate cancer; however, these differences were largely offset by program costs. Clinician visits were also lower by 11.2% or 0.11 (95% CI, -0.20 to -0.01) percentage points among patients with breast cancer and by 14.4% or 0.19 (95% CI, -0.37 to -0.02) among patients with colon cancer. Conclusions and Relevance:These findings suggest that payment models with shared-savings components can be associated with fewer visits and lower costs in certain cancer settings in the first year, but the savings can be modest given the costs of program administration.

Dataset Information

Practice patterns and perceptions of survivorship care in Canadian genitourinary oncology: A multidisciplinary perspective.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Practice patterns and perceptions of survivorship care in Canadian genitourinary oncology: A multidisciplinary perspective.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets