Prevalence and nature of survivorship needs in patients with head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the number, type, and predictors of patients with head and neck cancer unmet survivorship needs. METHODS: This study accrued patients with head and neck cancer at any time point in their survivorship course, and they completed a survey, including demographic information and the Cancer Survivors' Unmet Needs Measure (CaSUN). RESULTS: The median age of the 158 participants was 64 years. Ninety-six patients (61%) reported at least one unmet need on the CaSUN and 6 patients had a very high number of needs between 31 and 35. The mean number of unmet needs was 5.8 ± 8.9. Comprehensive Cancer Care was the most common domain of unmet need (n = 69; 45%). Younger age, earlier survivorship phase, and worse quality of life were associated with increased survivorship unmet needs on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: A high proportion of patients with head and neck cancer have unmet needs. These data can guide the development of head and neck survivorship programs. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38: 1097-1103, 2016.

Thyroid cancer survivors' perceptions of survivorship care follow-up options: a cross-sectional, mixed-methods survey.

PURPOSE: This study investigated thyroid cancer (TC) survivors' perceived satisfaction with and perceptions of survivorship care follow-up options. METHODS: Well-differentiated TC (WDTC) patients receiving follow-up care at an academic cancer centre completed a questionnaire assessing perceived satisfaction with follow-up care involving different clinicians and mediated by the Internet (email or videoconference) and their perceptions of these follow-up options. We examined associations between patient characteristics and perceived satisfaction with follow-up care options. Qualitative responses were analysed using conventional content analysis. RESULTS: Two hundred and two respondents completed the questionnaire (80 % response rate). The majority strongly agreed or agreed that they would be satisfied with specialist (surgeon, oncologist, or endocrinologist) follow-up (90.6 %) or a shared-care model that integrates specialists with primary care (67.5 %). One third (32 %) would be satisfied with video-based and 26 % with email-based specialist follow-up, 15 % with primary care alone. Longer time since diagnosis and health-related Internet use were associated with higher perceived satisfaction with Internet-based follow-up. Younger age was associated with higher perceived satisfaction with primary care follow-up. Qualitative responses (n = 145) revealed that survivors need reassurance they are receiving adequate care, regardless of the model or medium. Enablers to primary care and Internet-based follow-up are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: WDTC survivors want specialists involved in their follow-up. A specialist/primary care shared-care approach appears to be a suitable alternative to specialist-led follow-up for TC survivors. Internet-based visits could address some aspects of follow-up care for some WDTC survivors. Future work should examine patient and provider requirements for shared, multi-modal survivorship care.

The Need for Survivorship Care in Genitourinary Cancers: Considerations from SUO and LUGPA.

INTRODUCTION: A quarter of American cancer survivors have genitourinary malignancies that are largely managed by urologists. We explored urologist perceptions about survivorship care for genitourinary malignancies. METHODS: A total of 701 SUO (Society of Urologic Oncology) and 1,746 LUGPA (Large Urology Group Practice Association) members were invited to complete a web based survey composed of 5 domains, including 1) demographics, 2) current survivorship care practices, 3) perceived barriers, 4) accessibility to survivorship resources and 5) perceptions of advocacy groups. RESULTS: Of 191 respondents 137 (72%) had no training in survivorship care. Of the 174 respondents 129 (74%) practiced shared care models while 45 (26%) preferred pure specialized followup care. Only 39 of 129 respondents (30%) with a shared care model always provided a written care plan. These plans infrequently included information on lifestyle modifications and educational resources. Routine patient referral to advocacy organizations was highest for prostate cancer at 40% followed by bladder, testicular and kidney cancers at 17%, 10% and 8%, respectively. Lack of time/resources and practice guidelines were considered the 2 most important barriers to survivorship care by 31% and 30% of participants, respectively. Web based information on advocacy groups and best practice guidelines were selected as the most important initiatives to promote survivorship care. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the low response rate this study highlights important practice gaps in survivorship care for patients with genitourinary malignancies. In collaboration with advocacy organizations professional societies should initiate programs to better educate and train their members in survivorship care guidelines and consensus best practices.

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

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.

Poor Perception of Body Weight Category amongst the Overweight and Obese with Chronic Hepatitis C: A Target for Intervention.

Obesity in chronic hepatitis C (CHC) is associated with adverse hepatic and metabolic outcomes. This prospective study evaluates the agreement between self-perceived body weight (BW) status and measured body mass index (BMI) category and factors associated with its underestimation in CHC. Body size perception was measured with the Contour Drawing Rating Scale. Two hundred and seventy-three patients with CHC (overweight 45%, obese 18%) participated in this study. Although both overweight and obese demonstrated good body size perception, agreement between perceived BW and measured BMI categories was poor (κ = 0.315, 95% CI 0.231-0.399); 33% of overweight/obese respondents considered themselves normal or underweight. Male gender (OR 2.84) and overweight (OR 2.42) or obese BMI (OR 14.19) were associated with underestimation of BW category. Targeted interventions are needed to improve body weight perception, thereby enhancing the uptake of health advice on management of excess body weight in CHC.