BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary care is rarely practiced in community healthcare settings where the majority of patients receive lung cancer care in the US. We sought direct input from patients and their informal caregivers on their experience of lung cancer care delivery. METHODS: We conducted focus groups of patient and caregiver dyads. Patients had received care for lung cancer in or out of a multidisciplinary thoracic oncology clinic coordinated by a nurse navigator. Focus groups were audiotaped, transcribed, and analyzed using Creswell's 7-step process. Recurring overlapping themes were developed using constant comparative methods within the Grounded Theory framework. RESULTS: A total of 46 participants were interviewed in focus groups of 5 patient-caregiver dyads. Overlapping themes were a perception that multidisciplinary care improved physician collaboration, patient-physician communication, and patient convenience, while reducing redundancy in testing. Improved coordination decreased confusion, stress, and anxiety. Negative experience of serial care included poor communication among physicians, insensitive communication about illness, delays in diagnosis and treatment, misdiagnosis, and mistreatment. Physician-to-physician communication and patient education were suggested areas for improvement in the multidisciplinary model. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary care was perceived as more patient-centered, effective, safe, and efficient than standard serial care. It was also believed to improve the timeliness of care and equitable access to high quality care. Additional studies to compare these perspectives to those of other key stakeholders, including clinicians, hospital administrators and representatives of third party payers, will facilitate better understanding of the role of multidisciplinary care programs in lung cancer care delivery.
BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary care is rarely practiced in community healthcare settings where the majority of patients receive lung cancer care in the US. We sought direct input from patients and their informal caregivers on their experience of lung cancer care delivery. METHODS: We conducted focus groups of patient and caregiver dyads. Patients had received care for lung cancer in or out of a multidisciplinary thoracic oncology clinic coordinated by a nurse navigator. Focus groups were audiotaped, transcribed, and analyzed using Creswell's 7-step process. Recurring overlapping themes were developed using constant comparative methods within the Grounded Theory framework. RESULTS: A total of 46 participants were interviewed in focus groups of 5 patient-caregiver dyads. Overlapping themes were a perception that multidisciplinary care improved physician collaboration, patient-physician communication, and patient convenience, while reducing redundancy in testing. Improved coordination decreased confusion, stress, and anxiety. Negative experience of serial care included poor communication among physicians, insensitive communication about illness, delays in diagnosis and treatment, misdiagnosis, and mistreatment. Physician-to-physician communication and patient education were suggested areas for improvement in the multidisciplinary model. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary care was perceived as more patient-centered, effective, safe, and efficient than standard serial care. It was also believed to improve the timeliness of care and equitable access to high quality care. Additional studies to compare these perspectives to those of other key stakeholders, including clinicians, hospital administrators and representatives of third party payers, will facilitate better understanding of the role of multidisciplinary care programs in lung cancer care delivery.
Entities:
Keywords:
Quality of care; focus groups; multidisciplinary model; patient-centered care; qualitative analysis; serial care model
Authors: Nicole J Look Hong; Anna R Gagliardi; Susan E Bronskill; Lawrence F Paszat; Frances C Wright Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Daniel J Boffa; Mark S Allen; Joshua D Grab; Henning A Gaissert; David H Harpole; Cameron D Wright Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2007-12-21 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: David E Gerber; Torsten Reimer; Erin L Williams; Mary Gill; Laurin Loudat Priddy; Deidi Bergestuen; Joan H Schiller; Haskell Kirkpatrick; Simon J Craddock Lee Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2016-09-30 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Devon K Check; Kathleen B Albers; Kanti M Uppal; Jennifer Marie Suga; Alyce S Adams; Laurel A Habel; Charles P Quesenberry; Lori C Sakoda Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2018-09-11 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Satish K Kedia; Kenneth D Ward; Andy C Collins; Bianca M Jackson; Fedoria Rugless Stewart; Nicholas R Faris; Kristina S Roark; Raymond U Osarogiagbon Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-07-15 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Simon J Craddock Lee; Mark A Clark; John V Cox; Burton M Needles; Carole Seigel; Bijal A Balasubramanian Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2016-10-31 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Simon J Craddock Lee; Torsten Reimer; Sandra Garcia; Erin L Williams; Mary West; Tobi Stuart; David E Gerber Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2019-10-07
Authors: G Linford; R Egan; A Coderre-Ball; N Dalgarno; C J L Stone; A Robinson; D Robinson; S Wakeham; G C Digby Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Matthew P Smeltzer; Fedoria E Rugless; Bianca M Jackson; Courtney L Berryman; Nicholas R Faris; Meredith A Ray; Meghan Meadows; Anita A Patel; Kristina S Roark; Satish K Kedia; Margaret M DeBon; Fayre J Crossley; Georgia Oliver; Laura M McHugh; Willeen Hastings; Orion Osborne; Jackie Osborne; Toni Ill; Mark Ill; Wynett Jones; Hyo K Lee; Raymond S Signore; Roy C Fox; Jingshan Li; Edward T Robbins; Kenneth D Ward; Lisa M Klesges; Raymond U Osarogiagbon Journal: Transl Lung Cancer Res Date: 2018-02
Authors: Allison M Kurahashi; Jennifer N Stinson; Margaret van Wyk; Stephanie Luca; Trevor Jamieson; Peter Weinstein; Joseph A Cafazzo; Bhadra Lokuge; Eyal Cohen; Adam Rapoport; Amna Husain Journal: JMIR Hum Factors Date: 2018-01-09