Simplifying Survivorship Care Planning: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing 3 Care Plan Delivery Approaches

Author:

Snyder Claire123ORCID,Choi Youngjee1,Blackford Amanda L3,DeSanto Jennifer2ORCID,Mayonado Nancy4ORCID,Rall Susan4,White Sharon2,Bowie Janice2,Cowall David E4ORCID,Johnston Fabian13,Joyner Robert L4ORCID,Mischtschuk Joan4ORCID,Peairs Kimberly S13ORCID,Thorner Elissa3,Tran Phuoc T13ORCID,Wolff Antonio C13ORCID,Smith Katherine C23ORCID,

Affiliation:

1. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

2. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA

3. Johns Hopkins Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA

4. TidalHealth Richard A. Henson Research Institute, Salisbury, MD, USA

Abstract

Abstract Background Survivorship care plans seek to improve the transition to survivorship, but the required resources present implementation barriers. This randomized controlled trial aimed to identify the simplest, most effective approach for survivorship care planning. Methods Stage 1-3 breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer patients aged 21 years or older completing treatment were recruited from an urban-academic and rural-community cancer center. Participants were randomly assigned, stratified by recruitment site and cancer type 1:1:1 to a mailed plan, plan delivered during a 1-time transition visit, or plan delivered during a transition visit plus 6-month follow-up visit. Health service use data were collected from participants and medical records for 18 months. The primary outcome, receipt of all plan-recommended care, was compared across intervention arms using logistic regression adjusting for cancer type and recruitment site, with P less than .05 considered statistically significant. Results Of 378 participants randomly assigned, 159 (42.1%) were breast, 142 (37.6%) prostate, and 77 (20.4%) colorectal cancer survivors; 207 (54.8%) from the academic site and 171 (45.2%) from the community site; 316 were analyzable for the primary outcome. There was no difference across arms in the proportion of participants receiving all plan-recommended care: 45.2% mail, 50.5% 1-visit, 42.7% 2-visit (2-sided P = .60). Adherence by cancer type for mail, 1-visit, and 2-visit, respectively, was 52.2%, 53.3%, and 40.0% for breast cancer; 48.6%, 64.1%, and 57.1% for prostate cancer; and 23.8%, 19.0%, and 26.1% for colorectal cancer. There were no statistically significant interactions by recruitment site or cancer type. Conclusions This study did not find differences in receipt of recommended follow-up care by plan delivery approach. Feasibility and other factors may determine the best approach for survivorship care planning.

Funder

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute

Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Cancer Research,Oncology

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3