Danielle Blanch-Hartigan1, Neetu Chawla2, Ellen I Beckjord3, Laura P Forsythe4, Janet S de Moor5, Bradford W Hesse5, Neeraj K Arora5. 1. Department of Natural and Applied Sciences, Bentley University, Waltham, USA. Electronic address: danielleblanch@gmail.com. 2. Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, USA. 3. Departments of Psychiatry and Clinical and Translational Science, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA. 4. Research Integration and Evaluation, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Washington, USA. 5. Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Institute of Medicine recommends cancer survivors completing treatment be provided with a treatment summary to facilitate delivery of patient-centered survivorship care. However, the relationship between treatment summary receipt and patient-centered communication (PCC) and overall quality of care (QOC) are not well understood. METHODS: Cancer survivors responding to the Health Information National Trends Survey reported treatment summary receipt, QOC, and experiences of six core functions of PCC. Multivariable logistic regression assessed the relationship between treatment summary receipt and PCC. The prevalence of survivors' treatment summary receipt and demographic/clinical characteristics predictive of treatment summary receipt were also assessed. RESULTS: Of 359 respondents with a cancer history, 34.5% reported receiving a treatment summary. Greater treatment burden was associated with increased treatment summary receipt. Treatment summary receipt was associated with higher QOC and more PCC, both overall and for five of the six PCC functions. CONCLUSION: The receipt of cancer treatment summaries may improve PCC and QOC for survivors. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The positive relationship between treatment summary receipt and survivors' PCC experience substantiates continued efforts to provide treatment summaries to survivors transitioning from active treatment to survivorship care. Future research should characterize mechanisms by which treatment summary provision may enhance PCC.
OBJECTIVE: The Institute of Medicine recommends cancer survivors completing treatment be provided with a treatment summary to facilitate delivery of patient-centered survivorship care. However, the relationship between treatment summary receipt and patient-centered communication (PCC) and overall quality of care (QOC) are not well understood. METHODS:Cancer survivors responding to the Health Information National Trends Survey reported treatment summary receipt, QOC, and experiences of six core functions of PCC. Multivariable logistic regression assessed the relationship between treatment summary receipt and PCC. The prevalence of survivors' treatment summary receipt and demographic/clinical characteristics predictive of treatment summary receipt were also assessed. RESULTS: Of 359 respondents with a cancer history, 34.5% reported receiving a treatment summary. Greater treatment burden was associated with increased treatment summary receipt. Treatment summary receipt was associated with higher QOC and more PCC, both overall and for five of the six PCC functions. CONCLUSION: The receipt of cancer treatment summaries may improve PCC and QOC for survivors. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The positive relationship between treatment summary receipt and survivors' PCC experience substantiates continued efforts to provide treatment summaries to survivors transitioning from active treatment to survivorship care. Future research should characterize mechanisms by which treatment summary provision may enhance PCC.
Authors: Annette L Stanton; Patricia A Ganz; Julia H Rowland; Beth E Meyerowitz; Janice L Krupnick; Sharon R Sears Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-12-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: David E Nelson; Gary L Kreps; Bradford W Hesse; Robert T Croyle; Gordon Willis; Neeraj K Arora; Barbara K Rimer; K V Viswanath; Neil Weinstein; Sara Alden Journal: J Health Commun Date: 2004 Sep-Oct
Authors: Laura P Forsythe; Erin E Kent; Kathryn E Weaver; Natasha Buchanan; Nikki A Hawkins; Juan L Rodriguez; A Blythe Ryerson; Julia H Rowland Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-04-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ellen Burke Beckjord; Kerry A Reynolds; G J van Londen; Rachel Burns; Reema Singh; Sarah R Arvey; Stephanie A Nutt; Ruth Rechis Journal: J Psychosoc Oncol Date: 2014
Authors: Nina S Kadan-Lottick; Leslie L Robison; James G Gurney; Joseph P Neglia; Yutaka Yasui; Robert Hayashi; Melissa Hudson; Mark Greenberg; Ann C Mertens Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-04-10 Impact factor: 157.335
Authors: Jessica D Austin; Marlyn Allicock; Folefac Atem; Simon Craddock Lee; Maria E Fernandez; Bijal A Balasubramanian Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2020-05-30 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Kara Franco; Elyse Shuk; Errol Philip; Danielle Blanch-Hartigan; Patricia A Parker; Matthew Matasar; Steven Horwitz; David Kissane; Smita C Banerjee; Carma L Bylund Journal: J Psychosoc Oncol Date: 2017-03-30
Authors: Janet S de Moor; Kisha Coa; Erin E Kent; Carmen Moten; Sarah Kobrin; Cheryl Altice; K Robin Yabroff Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: P Jimenez-Fonseca; C Calderon; A Carmona-Bayonas; M M Muñoz; R Hernández; M Mut Lloret; I Ghanem; C Beato; D Cacho Lavín; A Ivars Rubio; R Carrión; C Jara Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2018-04-02 Impact factor: 3.405