Standardized activities for lay patient navigators in breast cancer care: Recommendations from a citywide implementation study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
There is a need for guidelines on patient navigation activities to promote both the quality of patient navigation and the standards of reimbursement for these services because a lack of reimbursement is a major barrier to the implementation, maintenance, and sustainability of these programs.Methods
A broad community-based participatory research process was used to identify the needs of patients for navigation. A panel of stakeholders of clinical providers was convened to identify specific activities for navigators to address the needs of patients and providers with the explicit goal of reducing delays in the initiation of cancer treatment and improving adherence to the care plan.Results
Specific activities were identified that could be generalized to all patient navigation programs for care during active cancer management to address the needs of vulnerable communities.Conclusions
Oncology programs that seek to implement lay patient navigation may benefit from the adoption of these activities for quality monitoring. Such activities are necessary as we consider reimbursement strategies for navigators without clinical training or licensure.
SUBMITTER: Freund KM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6891116 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Standardized activities for lay patient navigators in breast cancer care: Recommendations from a citywide implementation study.
Freund Karen M KM Haas Jennifer S JS Lemon Stephenie C SC Burns White Karen K Casanova Nicole N Dominici Laura S LS Erban John K JK Freedman Rachel A RA James Ted A TA Ko Naomi Y NY LeClair Amy M AM Moy Beverly B Parsons Susan K SK Battaglia Tracy A TA
Cancer 20190826 24
<h4>Background</h4>There is a need for guidelines on patient navigation activities to promote both the quality of patient navigation and the standards of reimbursement for these services because a lack of reimbursement is a major barrier to the implementation, maintenance, and sustainability of these programs.<h4>Methods</h4>A broad community-based participatory research process was used to identify the needs of patients for navigation. A panel of stakeholders of clinical providers was convened ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background: Widespread community engagement in advance care planning (ACP) is needed to overcome barriers to ACP implementation. Objective: Develop, implement, and evaluate a model for community-based ACP in rural populations with low English language fluency and health care access using lay patient navigators. Design: A statewide initiative to improve ACP setting/subjects-trained in a group session approach, bilingual patient navigators facilitated 1-hour English and Spanish ACP sessions discussing concerns about choosing a surrogate decision maker and completing an advance directive (AD). Participants received bilingual informational materials, including Frequently Asked Questions, an AD in English or Spanish, and Goal Setting worksheet. Measurement: Participants completed a program evaluation and 4-item ACP Engagement Survey (ACP-4) postsession. Results: For 18 months, 74 ACP sessions engaged 1034 participants in urban, rural, and frontier areas of the state; 39% were ethnically diverse, 69% female. A nurse or physician co-facilitated 49% of sessions. Forty-seven percent of participants completed an ACP-4 with 29% planning to name a decision maker in the next 6 months and 21% in the next 30 days; 31% were ready to complete an AD in the next 6 months and 22% in the next 30 days. Evaluations showed 98% were satisfied with sessions. Thematic analysis of interviews with facilitators highlighted barriers to delivering an ACP community-based initiative, strategies used to build community buy-in and engagement, and ways success was measured. Conclusion: Patient navigators effectively engaged underserved and ethnically diverse rural populations in community-based settings. This model can be adapted to improve ACP in other underserved populations.
| S-EPMC7249470 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn 2018 Translating Research Into Practice (TRIP), an evidence-based patient navigation intervention aimed at addressing breast cancer care disparities, was implemented across six Boston hospitals. This study assesses patient navigator team member perspectives regarding implementation barriers and facilitators one year post-study implementation.MethodsWe conducted in-depth qualitative interviews at the six sites participating in the pragmatic TRIP trial from December 2019 to March 2021. Navigation team members involved with breast cancer care navigation processes at each site were interviewed at least 12 months after intervention implementation. Interview questions were designed to address domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), focusing on barriers and facilitators to implementing the intervention that included 1) rigorous 11-step guidelines for navigation, 2) a shared patient registry and 3) a social risk screening and referral program. Analysis was structured using deductive codes representing domains and constructs within CFIR.ResultsSeventeen interviews were conducted with patient navigators, their supervisors, and designated clinical champions. Participants identified the following benefits provided by the TRIP intervention: 1) increased networking and connections for navigators across clinical sites (Cosmopolitanism), 2) formalization of the patient navigation process (Goals and Purpose, Access to Knowledge and Information, and Relative Advantage), and 3) flexibility within the TRIP intervention that allowed for diversity in implementation and use of TRIP components across sites (Adaptability). Barriers included those related to documentation requirements (Complexity) and the structured patient follow up guidelines that did not always align with the timeline of existing site navigation processes (Relative Priority).ConclusionsOur analysis provides data using real-world experience from an intervention trial in progress, identifying barriers and facilitators to implementing an evidence-based patient navigation intervention for breast cancer care. We identified core processes that facilitated the navigators' patient-focused tasks and role on the clinical team. Barriers encountered reflect limitations of navigator funding models and high caseload.Trial registrationClinical Trial Registration Number NCT03514433 , 5/2/2018.
| S-EPMC9123866 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFamily Navigation (FN) is an evidence-based care management intervention designed to reduce disparities in access to care by providing families with individually tailored support and care coordination. Early data suggest FN is effective, but effectiveness is significantly influenced by both contextual (e.g. setting) and individual (e.g., ethnicity) variables. To better understand how FN could be tailored to address this variability in effectiveness, we set forth to explore proposed adaptations to FN by both navigators and families who received FN.MethodsThis study was a nested qualitative study set within a larger randomized clinical trial of FN to improve access to autism diagnostic services in urban pediatric primary care practices in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Connecticut serving low-income, racial and ethnic minority families. Following FN implementation, key informant interviews were conducted based on the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Expanded (FRAME) with a purposeful sample of parents of children who received FN (n = 21) and navigators (n = 7). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and were coded using framework-guided rapid analysis to categorize proposed adaptations to FN.ResultsParents and navigators proposed 38 adaptations in four domains: 1) content of the intervention (n = 18), 2) context of the intervention (n = 10), 3) training and evaluation (n = 6), and 4) implementation and scale-up (n = 4). The most frequently endorsed adaptation recommendations focused on content (e.g., lengthening FN, providing parents with additional education on autism and parenting children with autism) and implementation (e.g., increasing access to navigation). Although probes targeted critical feedback, parents and navigators were overwhelmingly positive about FN.ConclusionsThis study builds upon prior FN effectiveness and implementation research by providing concrete areas for adaptation and refinement of the intervention. Recommendations by parents and navigators have the potential to inform improvement of existing navigation programs and development of new programs in similarly underserved populations. These findings are critical as adaptation (cultural and otherwise) is an important principle in the field of health equity. Ultimately, adaptations will need to be tested to determine clinical and implementation effectiveness.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, registration number NCT02359084, February 9, 2015.
| S-EPMC10273746 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Patient navigators are a promising mechanism to link patients with primary care. While navigators have been used in population health promotion and prevention programmes, their impact on access to primary care is not clear. The aim of this scoping review was to examine the use of patient navigators to facilitate access to primary care and how they were defined and described, their components and the extent to which they were patient centred. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS:We used the Arksey and O'Malley scoping review method. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, ProQuest Medical, other key databases and grey literature for studies reported in English from January 2000 to April 2016. We defined a patient navigator as a person or process creating a connection or link between a person needing primary care and a primary care provider. Our target population was people without a regular source of, affiliation or connection with primary care. Studies were included if they reported on participants who were connected to primary care by patient navigation and attended or made an appointment with a primary care provider. Data analysis involved descriptive numerical summaries and content analysis. RESULTS:Twenty studies were included in the final scoping review. Most studies referred to 'patient navigator' or 'navigation' as the mechanism of connection to primary care. As such, we grouped the components according to Freeman's nine-principle framework of patient navigation. Seventeen studies included elements of patient-centred care: informed and involved patient, receptive and responsive health professionals and a coordinated, supportive healthcare environment. CONCLUSIONS:Patient navigators may assist to connect people requiring primary care to appropriate providers and extend the concept of patient-centred care across different healthcare settings. Navigation requires further study to determine impact and cost-effectiveness and explore the experience of patients and their families.
| S-EPMC5875656 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatient navigators have been introduced across various countries to enable timely access to healthcare services and to ensure completion of diagnosis and follow-up of care. There is an increasing evidence on the the role of patient navigation for patients and healthcare systems. The aim of this study was to analyse the evidence on patient navigation interventions in ambulatory care and to evaluate their effects on individuals and health system outcomes.MethodsAn overview of reviews was conducted, following a prespecified protocol. All patients in ambulatory care or transitional care setting were included in this review as long as it was related to the role of patient navigators. The study analysed patient navigators covering a wide range of health professionals such as physicians, nurses, pharmacists, social workers and lay health workers or community-based workers with no or very limited training. Studies including patient-related measures and health system-related outcomes were eligible for inclusion. A rigorous search was performed in multiple data bases. After reaching a high inter-rater agreement of 0.86, title and abstract screening was independently performed. Of an initial 14,248 search results and an additional 62 articles identified through the snowballing approach, a total of 7159 hits were eligible for title/abstract screening. 679 articles were included for full-text screening.ResultsEleven systematic reviews were included covering various patient navigation intervention in cancer care, disease screening, transitional care and for various chronic conditions and multimorbidity. Nine systematic reviews primarily tailored services to ethnic minorities or other disadvantaged groups. Patient navigators performed tasks such as providing education and counselling, translations, home visits, outreach, scheduling of appointments and follow-up. Eight reviews identified positive outcomes in expanding access to care, in particular for vulnerable patient groups. Two reviews on patient navigation in transitional care reported improved patient outcomes, hospital readmission rates and mixed evidence on quality of life and emergency department visits. Two reviews demonstrated improved patient outcomes for persons with various chronic conditions and multimorbidity.ConclusionsPatient navigators were shown to expand access to screenings and health services for vulnerable patients or population groups with chronic conditions who tend to underuse health services.
| S-EPMC8555047 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe aim of this study was to develop priority recommendations for the service level implementation of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) into clinical cancer care.MethodsDevelopment of draft guidance statements was informed by a literature review, the Knowledge to Action (KTA) implementation framework, and discussion with PRO experts and cancer survivors. A two-round modified Delphi survey with key stakeholders including cancer survivors, clinical and research experts, and Information Technology specialists was undertaken. Round 1 rated the importance of the statements and round 2 ranked statements in order of priority.ResultsRound 1 was completed by 70 participants with round 2 completed by 45 participants. Forty-seven statements were rated in round 2. In round 1, the highest agreement items (>90% agreement) included those that focused on the formation of strong stakeholder partnerships, ensuring ongoing communication within these partnerships, and the use of PROs for improvement and guidance in clinical care. Items ranked as the highest priorities in round 2 included assessment of current staff capabilities and service requirements, mapping of workflows and processes to enable collection, and using collected PROs to guide improved health outcomes.ConclusionsThis stakeholder consultation process has identified key priorities in PRO implementation into clinical cancer care that include clinical relevance, stakeholder engagement, communication, and integration within the existing processes and capabilities.Implication for cancer survivorsRoutine adoption of PRO collection by clinical cancer services requires multiple implementation steps; of highest priority is strong engagement and communication with key stakeholders including cancer survivors.
| S-EPMC8881271 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The inclusion of patient portals into electronic health records in the inpatient setting lags behind progress in the outpatient setting. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to understand patient perceptions of using a portal during an episode of acute care and explore patient-perceived barriers and facilitators to portal use during hospitalization. METHODS:We utilized a mixed methods approach to explore patient experiences in using the portal during hospitalization. All patients received a tablet with a brief tutorial, pre- and postuse surveys, and completed in-person semistructured interviews. Qualitative data were coded using thematic analysis to iteratively develop 18 codes that were integrated into 3 themes framed as patient recommendations to hospitals to improve engagement with the portal during acute care. Themes from these qualitative data guided our approach to the analysis of quantitative data. RESULTS:We enrolled 97 participants: 53 (53/97, 55%) women, 44 (44/97, 45%) nonwhite with an average age of 48 years (19-81 years), and the average length of hospitalization was 6.4 days. A total of 47 participants (47/97, 48%) had an active portal account, 59 participants (59/97, 61%) owned a smartphone, and 79 participants (79/97, 81%) accessed the internet daily. In total, 3 overarching themes emerged from the qualitative analysis of interviews with these patients during their hospital stay: (1) hospitals should provide both access to a device and bring-your-own-device platform to access the portal; (2) hospitals should provide an orientation both on how to use the device and how to use the portal; and (3) hospitals should ensure portal content is up to date and easy to understand. CONCLUSIONS:Patients independently and consistently identified basic needs for device and portal access, education, and usability. Hospitals should prioritize these areas to enable successful implementation of inpatient portals to promote greater patient engagement during acute care. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00102401; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01970852.
| S-EPMC6996719 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background. Few Americans obtain all 41 guideline-recommended preventive services for nonpregnant adults. We assessed patient interest in prioritizing their preventive care needs. Methods. We conducted a mixed-methods study, with 4 focus groups (N = 28) at a single institution and a nationwide survey (N = 2,103). Participants were middle-aged and older adults with preventive care needs. We obtained reactions to written materials describing the magnitude of benefit from major preventive services, including both absolute and relative benefits. Recommendations were individualized for patient risk factors ("individualized preventive care recommendations"). Focus groups assessed patient interest, how patients would want to discuss individualized recommendations with their providers, and potential for individualized recommendations to influence patient decision making. Survey content was based on focus groups and analyzed with logistic regression. Results. Patients expressed strong interest in individualized recommendations. Among survey respondents, an adjusted 88.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 86.7% to 89.7%) found individualized recommendations very easy to understand, 77.2% (95% CI = 75.3% to 79.1%) considered them very useful, and 64.9% (95% CI = 62.8% to 67.0%) highly trustworthy (each ≥6/7 on Likert scale). Three quarters of participants wanted to receive their own individualized recommendations in upcoming primary care visits (adjusted proportion = 77.5%, 95% CI = 75.6% to 79.4%). Both focus group and survey participants supported shared decision making and reported that individualized recommendations would improve motivation to obtain preventive care. Half of survey respondents reported that they would be much more likely to visit their doctor if they knew individualized recommendations would be discussed, compared with 4.2% who would not be more likely to visit their doctor. Survey respondents already prioritized preventive services, stating they were most likely to choose quick/easy preventive services and least likely to choose expensive preventive services (adjusted proportions, 63.8% and 8.5%, respectively). Results were consistent in sensitivity analyses. Conclusions. Individualized preventive care recommendations are likely to be well received in primary care and might motivate patients to improve adherence to evidence-based care.
| S-EPMC6540511 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Approaches to refeeding patients with anorexia nervosa for medical stabilization vary across institutions, and there is no established standard of care. This study assessed the impact of a refeeding pathway on hospital length of stay and transfer to the psychiatry unit.MethodsThis quality improvement intervention sought to standardize care for adolescents with anorexia nervosa at a tertiary care, free-standing children's hospital from Spring 2017 to Fall 2018. The pathway specified admission criteria, nutritional advancement, activity restriction, laboratory monitoring, readiness to transfer to the psychiatry unit, and discharge criteria. Statistical process control analysis was utilized to identify system-level changes over time. We used linear regression to assess pre- and postpathway differences in length of stay and transfer to the psychiatry unit.ResultsThere were 161 patient encounters for anorexia nervosa admitted for medical stabilization. 84% of the sample were female with median age of 15.2 (IQR 14.0-17.0) years. There was no difference in hospital length of stay between the pre- and postpathway groups. There was a statistically significant increase in the proportion of patients transferred to the psychiatry unit over the study period.ConclusionClinical pathway use to deliver standardized care to achieve medical stability for patients with anorexia nervosa did not shorten hospital length of stay. Multiple potentially confounding medical and psychosocial factors may have contributed to this lack of improvement.
| S-EPMC9416762 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhile there is wide consensus that the public should be consulted about emerging technology early in development, it is difficult to elicit public opinion about innovations unfamiliar to lay audiences. We sought public input on a program of research on genetic engineering to control mosquito vectors of disease that is led by scientists at the University of California and funded by the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). In preparation for this effort, we developed a series of narrated slideshows to prompt responses to the development of gene drive mosquito control strategies among lay people. We describe the development and content of these slideshows and evaluate their ability to elicit discussions among focus group participants.MethodsIn developing these materials, we used an iterative process involving input from experts in molecular genetics and vector control. Topics were chosen for their relevance to the goals of the scientists leading the program of research. Significant time was devoted to crafting explanations that would be accessible to uninitiated members of the public but still represent the science accurately. Through qualitative analysis of focus group discussions prompted by the slideshows, we evaluated the success of these slideshows in imparting clear technical information sufficient to inform lay discussion.ResultsThe collaboration resulted in a series of four narrated slideshows that were used to anchor discussions in online focus groups. Many participants described the slideshows as interesting and informative, while also raising concerns and possible risks that were not directly addressed in the material presented. Open-ended comments from participants suggest that the slideshows inspired critical questions, reflection, and conversation about genetically engineered and gene drive mosquitoes. After the final and most technically complex slideshow, however, some respondents made comments suggestive of overwhelm or confusion.ConclusionOur narrated slideshows prompted engaged conversations about genetically engineered mosquitoes among members of the public who were generally naïve to this technology. Narrated slideshows may serve as viable and useful tools for future public engagement on other controversial emerging medical and public health technologies.
| S-EPMC7643426 | biostudies-literature