RESUMO
Cancer survivorship care plans (SCPs) have been recommended to improve clinical care and patient outcomes. Research is needed to establish their efficacy and identify best practices. Starting in 2015, centers accredited by the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer must deliver SCPs to patients completing primary cancer treatment with curative intent. We describe how we established routine SCP delivery at the Robert H Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center in Chicago, Illinois, using the Quality Implementation Framework. We evaluated local practices, gathered clinician and patient stakeholder input, developed customized SCP templates within the electronic health record (EHR), and implemented 2 complementary delivery models. Clinician interviews (n = 41) and survey responses (n = 12), along with input from patients (n = 68) and a patient advisory board (n = 15), indicated support for SCPs and survivorship services. To promote feasible implementation and leverage existing workflows, we harmonized 2 SCP delivery models: integrated care within clinics where patients received treatment, and referral to a centralized survivorship clinic. We are implementing SCP delivery with prominent disease sites and will extend services to survivors of other cancers in the future. We developed four electronic disease-specific SCP templates for breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancers and a fifth, generic template that can be used for other malignancies. The templates reduced free-text clinician entry by auto-populating 20% of the fields from existing EHR data, and using drop-down menus for another 65%. Mean SCP completion time is 12 minutes (range, 10-15; n = 64). We designed our framework to facilitate ongoing evaluation of implementation and quality improvement. Funding/sponsorship Robert H Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, the Coleman Foundation, and the Lynn Sage Cancer Research Foundation.
RESUMO
The number of older individuals with cancer is increasing exponentially, mandating that oncologists contemplate more comprehensive and multidisciplinary approaches to treatment of this cohort. Recruitment of assessment instruments validated in older patients can be invaluable for guiding treatment and decision-making by both patients and providers, and can arguably contribute to improving outcomes and health-related quality of life. The Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment is one such validated instrument that can be used by oncologists to assess patient readiness and appropriateness for prescribed cancer therapy. As a multidisciplinary diagnostic and treatment process, it comprises functional status, cognitive status, social support, and advance care preferences, and is an ideal instrument for evaluating complex older individuals. It is well established that many older individuals with cancer travel with multiple comorbid illnesses, including cognitive impairment, and when presented with a cancer diagnosis struggle to choose from multiple treatment options. In addition to the complete medical history, the ability of patients to decide on a course of therapy in concert with their oncologist is critically important. Alternatively, many oncologists are conflicted as to whether true informed consent for treatment can be obtained from many older patients. Having a roadmap to decision-making capacity is therefore an inescapable imperative in geriatric oncology, because careful attention must be directed at identifying older patients with cancer who might benefit from these assessments and the individualized treatment plans that emerge.
