Dataset Information

The Effectiveness of Shared Care in Cancer Survivors-A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To determine whether the shared care model during the follow-up of cancer survivors is effective in terms of patient-reported outcomes, clinical outcomes, and continuity of care.

Methods

Using systematic review methods, studies were searched from six electronic databases-MEDLINE (n = 474), British Nursing Index (n = 320), CINAHL (n = 437), Cochrane Library (n = 370), HMIC (n = 77), and Social Care Online (n = 210). The review considered all health-related outcomes that evaluated the effectiveness of shared care for cancer survivors.

Results

Eight randomised controlled trials and three descriptive papers were identified. The results showed the likelihood of similar effectiveness between shared care and usual care in terms of quality of life, mental health outcomes, unmet needs, and clinical outcomes in cancer survivorship. The reviewed studies indicated that shared care overall is highly acceptable to cancer survivors and primary care practitioners, and shared care might be cheaper than usual care.

Conclusions

The results from this review suggest that the patient satisfaction of shared care is higher than usual care, and the effectiveness of shared care is similar to usual care in cancer survivorship. Interventions that formally involve primary care and improve the communication between primary care and hospital care could support the PCPs in the follow-up.

SUBMITTER: Zhao Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6199565 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Effectiveness of Shared Care in Cancer Survivors-A Systematic Review.

Zhao Yan Y Brettle Alison A Qiu Ling L

International journal of integrated care 20181012 4

<h4>Objectives</h4>To determine whether the shared care model during the follow-up of cancer survivors is effective in terms of patient-reported outcomes, clinical outcomes, and continuity of care.<h4>Methods</h4>Using systematic review methods, studies were searched from six electronic databases-MEDLINE (n = 474), British Nursing Index (n = 320), CINAHL (n = 437), Cochrane Library (n = 370), HMIC (n = 77), and Social Care Online (n = 210). The review considered all health-related outcomes that ...[more]

PMID: 30483035

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCollaborative care involves active engagement of primary care and hospital physicians in shared care of patients beyond usual discharge summaries. This enhances community-based care and reduces dependence on specialists and hospitals. The model, successfully implemented in chronic care management, may have utility for treatment of depression in cancer. The aim of this systematic review was to identify components, delivery and roles and responsibilities within collaborative interventions for depression in the context of cancer.MethodsMedline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library and Central Register for Controlled Trials databases were searched to identify studies of randomised controlled trials comparing a treatment intervention that met the definition of collaborative model of depression care with usual care or other control condition. Studies of adult cancer patients with major depression or a non-bipolar depressive disorder published in English between 2005 and January 2018 were included. Cochrane checklist for risk of bias was completed (Study Prospero registration: CRD42018086515).ResultsOf 8 studies identified, none adhered to the definition of 'collaborative care'. Interventions delivered were multi-disciplinary, with care co-ordinated by nurses (n?=?5) or social workers (n?=?2) under the direction of psychiatrists (n?=?7). Care was primarily delivered in cancer centres (n?=?5). Care co-ordinators advised primary care physicians (GPs) of medication changes (n?=?3) but few studies (n?=?2) actively involved GPs in medication prescribing and management.ConclusionsThis review highlighted joint participation of GPs and specialist care physicians in collaborative care depression management is promoted but not achieved in cancer care. Current models reflect hospital-based multi-disciplinary models of care.Protocol registrationThe protocol for this systematic review has been registered with PROSPERO. The registration number is CRD42018086515.

Project description:BackgroundIn patients with chronic disease, many health care professionals are involved during treatment and follow-up. This leads to fragmentation that in turn may lead to suboptimal care. Shared care is a means to improve the integration of care delivered by various providers, specifically primary care physicians (PCPs) and specialty care professionals, for patients with chronic disease. The use of information technology (IT) in this field seems promising.ObjectiveOur aim was to systematically review the literature regarding the effectiveness of IT-supported shared care interventions in chronic disease in terms of provider or professional, process, health or clinical and financial outcomes. Additionally, our aim was to provide an inventory of the IT applications' characteristics that support such interventions.MethodsPubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE were searched from 2006 to 2015 to identify relevant studies using search terms related to shared care, chronic disease, and IT. Eligible studies were in the English language, and the randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled trials, or single group pre-post studies used reported on the effects of IT-supported shared care in patients with chronic disease and cancer. The interventions had to involve providers from both primary and specialty health care. Intervention and IT characteristics and effectiveness-in terms of provider or professional (proximal), process (intermediate), health or clinical and financial (distal) outcomes-were extracted. Risk of bias of (cluster) RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane tool.ResultsThe initial search yielded 4167 results. Thirteen publications were used, including 11 (cluster) RCTs, a controlled trial, and a pre-post feasibility study. Four main categories of IT applications were identified: (1) electronic decision support tools, (2) electronic platform with a call-center, (3) electronic health records, and (4) electronic communication applications. Positive effects were found for decision support-based interventions on financial and health outcomes, such as physical activity. Electronic health record use improved PCP visits and reduced rehospitalization. Electronic platform use resulted in fewer readmissions and better clinical outcomes-for example, in terms of body mass index (BMI) and dyspnea. The use of electronic communication applications using text-based information transfer between professionals had a positive effect on the number of PCPs contacting hospitals, PCPs' satisfaction, and confidence.ConclusionsIT-supported shared care can improve proximal outcomes, such as confidence and satisfaction of PCPs, especially in using electronic communication applications. Positive effects on intermediate and distal outcomes were also reported but were mixed. Surprisingly, few studies were found that substantiated these anticipated benefits. Studies showed a large heterogeneity in the included populations, outcome measures, and IT applications used. Therefore, a firm conclusion cannot be drawn. As IT applications are developed and implemented rapidly, evidence is needed to test the specific added value of IT in shared care interventions. This is expected to require innovative research methods.

Project description:Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the most common cancer affecting both men and women. Survivors of CRC often experience various physical and psychological effects arising from CRC and its treatment. These effects may last for many years and adversely affect QoL, and they may not be adequately addressed by standard specialist-based follow-up. Optimal management of these effects should harness the expertise of both primary care and specialist care. Shared models of care (involving both the patient's primary care physician [PCP] and specialist) have the potential to better support survivors and enhance health system efficiency.SCORE (Shared care of Colorectal cancer survivors) is a multisite randomised controlled trial designed to optimise and operationalise a shared care model for survivors of CRC, to evaluate the acceptability of the intervention and study processes, and to collect preliminary data regarding the effects of shared care compared with usual care on a range of patient-reported outcomes. The primary outcome is QoL measured using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are satisfaction with care, unmet needs, continuity of care and health resource use. The shared care model involves replacement of two routine specialist follow-up visits with PCP visits, as well as the provision of a tailored survivorship care plan and a survivorship booklet and DVD for CRC survivors. All consenting patients will be randomised 1:1 to either shared care or usual care and will complete questionnaires at three time points over a 12-month period (baseline and at 6 and 12 months). Health care resource use data will also be collected and used to evaluate costs.The evaluation and implementation of models of care that are responsive to the holistic needs of cancer survivors while reducing the burden on acute care settings is an international priority. Shared care between specialists and PCPs has the potential to enhance patient care and outcomes for CRC survivors while offering improvements in health care resource efficiency. If the findings of the present study show that the shared care intervention is acceptable and feasible for CRC survivors, the intervention may be readily expanded to other groups of cancer survivors.Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12617000004369p . Registered on 3 January 2017; protocol version 4 approved 24 February 2017.

Dataset Information

The Effectiveness of Shared Care in Cancer Survivors-A Systematic Review.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The Effectiveness of Shared Care in Cancer Survivors-A Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets