Dataset Information

Care coordination, consistency and continuity: the case of the key worker role in children's cancer care.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

The overall aim was to evaluate the key worker role across principal treatment centres for children with cancer in England, Wales and Scotland.

Methods

Mixed-methods case study gathering data from multiple perspectives using questionnaires, interviews, focus groups and reports/performance documents over a two-year period. Framework approach was adopted to analyse transcripts and documentary data.

Results

Participants included: 22 nurse specialist key workers, 103 parents, 85 professionals and 10 children/young people. Qualitative and quantitative data were woven together, to best illuminate key worker services. Four main models of care were described as well as the context of care and process of care. Key working effectiveness centred around three pillars: care coordination; expert knowledge, experience and expertise; relationship. These were essential to improved family experience, emotional wellbeing, and delivery of individualized care closer to home.

Conclusions

The role is complex and diverse, responding to local needs. Certain conditions, (e.g., high caseload) placed limits on enacting the three pillars, diminishing the positive experience of families. When they worked well, key workers reduced the fragmented nature of services and families placed great value on keeping the same key worker from diagnosis into long-term care. Retaining these roles, where already in place, or including, if not, we would recommend, factoring into budgets to sustain and expand such roles.

SUBMITTER: Martins A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9246033 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare coordination and continuity of care conceptualize all care providers and organizations involved in health care to ensure the right care at the right time. However, systematic evidence synthesis is lacking in the care coordination of health services. This scoping review synthesizes evidence on different levels of care coordination of primary health care (PHC) and primary care.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review of published evidence on healthcare coordination. PubMed, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Google Scholar were searched until 30 November 2022 for studies that describe care coordination/continuity of care in PHC and primary care. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines to select studies. We analysed data using a thematic analysis approach and explained themes adopting a multilevel (individual, organizational, and system) analytical framework.ResultsA total of 56 studies were included in the review. Most studies were from upper-middle-income or high-income countries, primarily focusing on continuity/care coordination in primary care. Ten themes were identified in care coordination in PHC/primary care. Four themes under care coordination at the individual level were the continuity of services, linkage at different stages of health conditions (from health promotion to rehabilitation), health care from a life-course (conception to elderly), and care coordination of health services at places (family to hospitals). Five themes under organizational level care coordination included interprofessional, multidisciplinary services, community collaboration, integrated care, and information in care coordination. Finally, a theme under system-level care coordination was related to service management involving multisectoral coordination within and beyond health systems.ConclusionsContinuity and coordination of care involve healthcare provisions from family to health facility throughout the life-course to provide a range of services. Several issues could influence multilevel care coordination, including at the individual (services or users), organizational (providers), and system (departments and sectors) levels. Health systems should focus on care coordination, ensuring types of care per the healthcare needs at different stages of health conditions by a multidisciplinary team. Coordinating multiple technical and supporting stakeholders and sectors within and beyond health sector is also vital for the continuity of care especially in resource-limited health systems and settings.

Project description:Introduction and backgroundAs cancer is developing into a chronic disease due to longer survival, continuity and coordination of oncological care are becoming more important for patients. As radiation oncology departments are an integral part of cancer care and as repeat irradiation becomes more commonplace, the relevance of continuity and coordination of care in operating procedures is increasing. This study aims to perform a single-institution analysis of cancer patients in which continuity and coordination of care matters most, namely the highly selected group with multiple repeat course radiotherapy throughout their chronic disease.Materials and methodsAll patients who received at least five courses of radiotherapy at the Department of Radiation Oncology at the University Hospital Zurich from 2011 to 2019 and who were alive at the time of the initiation of this project were included into this study. Patient and treatment characteristics were extracted from the hospital information and treatment planning systems. All patients completed two questionnaires on continuity of care, one of which was designed in-house and one of which was taken from the literature.ResultsOf the 33 patients identified at baseline, 20 (60.6%) participated in this study. A median of 6 years (range 3-13) elapsed between the first and the last visit at the cancer center. The median number of involved primary oncologists at the radiation oncology department was two (range 1-5). Fifty-seven percent of radiation therapy courses were preceded by a tumor board discussion. Both questionnaires showed high levels of experienced continuity of care. No statistically significant differences in experienced continuity of care between groups with more or less than two primary oncologists was found.Discussion and conclusionPatients treated with multiple repeat radiation therapy at our department over the past decade experienced high levels of continuity of care, yet further efforts should be undertaken to coordinate care among oncological disciplines in large cancer centers through better and increased use of interdisciplinary tumor boards.

Project description:BackgroundContinuity of care is an important element of advanced prostate cancer care due to the availability of multiple treatment options, and associated toxicity. However, the association between continuity of care and outcomes across different racial groups remains unclear.ObjectiveTo assess the association of provider continuity of care with outcomes among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with advanced prostate cancer and its variation by race.DesignRetrospective cohort study using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data.SubjectsAfrican American and white Medicare beneficiaries aged 66 or older, and diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer between 2000 and 2011. At least 5 years of follow-up data for the cohort was used.MeasuresShort-term outcomes were emergency room (ER) visits, hospitalizations, and cost during acute survivorship phase (2-year post-diagnosis), and mortality (all-cause and prostate cancer-specific) during the follow-up period. We calculated continuity of care using Continuity of Care Index (COCI) and Usual Provider Care Index (UPCI), for all visits, oncology visits, and primary care visits in acute survivorship phase. We used Poisson models for ER visits and hospitalizations, and log-link GLM for cost. Cox model and Fine-Gray competing risk models were used for survival analysis, weighted by propensity score. We performed similar analysis for continuity of care in the 2-year period following acute survivorship phase.ResultsOne unit increase in COCI was associated with reduction in short-term ER visits (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64, 0.67), hospitalizations (IRR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.64, 0.67), and cost (0.64, 95% CI 0.61, 0.66) and lower hazard of long-term mortality. Magnitude of these associations differed between African American and white patients. We observed comparable results for continuity of care in the follow-up period.ConclusionsContinuity of care was associated with improved outcomes. The benefits of higher continuity of care were greater for African Americans, compared to white patients. Advanced prostate cancer survivorship care must integrate appropriate strategies to promote continuity of care.

Project description:BackgroundCoordination of care is considered a key component of patient-centered health care systems, but is rarely defined or operationalised in health care policy. Continuity, an aspect of coordination, is the patient's experience of care over time, and is often described in terms of three dimensions: information, relational and management continuity. With the current health policy focus on both the use of information technology and care coordination, this study aimed to 1) explore how information continuity supports coordination and 2) investigate conditions required to support information continuity.MethodsFour diverse Australian primary health care initiatives were purposively selected for inclusion in the study. Each has improved coordination as an aim or fundamental principle. Each organization was asked to identify practitioners, managers and decision makers who could provide insight into the use of information for care coordination to participate in the study. Using in-depth semi-structured interviews, we explored four questions covering the scope and use of information, the influence of governance, data ownership and confidentiality and the influence of financial incentives and quality improvement on information continuity and coordination. Data were thematically analyzed using NVivo 8.ResultsThe overall picture that emerged across all four cases was that whilst accessibility and continuity of information underpin effective care, they are not sufficient for coordination of care for complex conditions. Shared information reduced unnecessary repetition and provided health professionals with the opportunity to access records of care from other providers, but participants described their role in coordination in terms of the active involvement of a person in care rather than the passive availability of information. Complex issues regarding data ownership and confidentiality often hampered information sharing. Successful coordination in each case was associated with responsiveness to local rather than system level factors.ConclusionsThe availability of information is not sufficient to ensure continuity for the patient or coordination from the systems perspective. Policy directed at information continuity must give consideration to the broader 'fit' with management and relational continuity and provide a broad base that allows for local responsiveness in order for coordination of care to be achieved.

Project description:BackgroundImproving continuity between primary care and cancer care is critical for improving cancer outcomes and curbing cancer costs. A dimension of continuity, we investigated how regularly patients receive their primary care and surgical care for colon cancer from the same hospital and whether this affects mortality and costs.MethodsUsing Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program Registry (SEER)-Medicare data, we performed a retrospective cohort study of stage I-III colon cancer patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2009. There were 23,305 stage I-III colon cancer patients who received primary care in the year prior to diagnosis and underwent operative care for colon cancer. Patients were assigned to the hospital where they had their surgery and to their primary care provider's main hospital, and then classified according to whether these two hospitals were same or different. Outcomes examined were hazards for all-cause mortality, subhazard for colon cancer specific mortality, and generalized linear estimate for costs at 12 months, from propensity score matched models.ResultsFifty-two percent of stage I-III colon patients received primary care and surgical care from the same hospital. Primary care and surgical care from the same hospital was not associated with reduced all-cause or colon cancer specific mortality, but was associated with lower inpatient, outpatient, and total costs of care. Total cost difference was $8,836 (95% CI $2,746-$14,577), a 20% reduction in total median cost of care at 12 months.ConclusionsReceiving primary care and surgical care at the same hospital, compared to different hospitals, was associated with lower costs but still similar survival among stage I-III colon cancer patients. Nonetheless, health care policy which encourages further integration between primary care and cancer care in order to improve outcomes and decrease costs will need to address the significant proportion of patients receiving health care across more than one hospital.