BACKGROUND: Survivorship care plan (SCP) comprising a treatment summary and plan for follow-up care is recommended by various organizations to address long-term needs of an increasing number of breast cancer survivors. Although there have been previous systematic reviews of SCPs in cancer, none has focused on breast cancer exclusively. This systematic review evaluates the use and impact of SCP in breast cancer survivors. METHODS: Randomized (RCTs) and non-randomized (non-RCT) studies evaluating health care and patient-related outcomes after implementation of SCPs for survivors were identified by searching databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL, and Scopus). Data were extracted, quality assessed, and summarized on the basis of qualitative synthesis. RESULTS: Ten non-RCTs and 14 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Although the overall quality of RCTs was superior to non-RCTs with mean quality score of 81.5% vs 64.3%, two mixed-methods non-RCTs which were individualized and included both provider and patient perspectives had comparable scores like RCTs. Several models of SCP were evaluated (paper based/online, oncologist/nurse/primary-care physician-delivered, and different templates). Descriptive information from non-RCTs suggests improvement in survivorship knowledge, satisfaction with care, and improved communication with providers. Findings from RCTs were variable. Potential gaps existed in content of SCP including unclear recommendation on frequency and ownership of follow-up. Levels of survivor satisfaction with, and self-reported understanding of, their SCP were high. Distal outcomes like health care delivery measures including costs and efficiency were mostly mixed, but heterogeneous study designs make interpretation difficult. CONCLUSIONS: Existing research provides positive impact of SCPs on more proximal outcomes of patient experience and care delivery but mixed results for health outcomes in breast cancer survivors. Future research should focus on better defining SCP content and ensuring follow-up recommendations are acted upon, and provider feedback is included and use of novel tools to empower stakeholders.
BACKGROUND: Survivorship care plan (SCP) comprising a treatment summary and plan for follow-up care is recommended by various organizations to address long-term needs of an increasing number of breast cancer survivors. Although there have been previous systematic reviews of SCPs in cancer, none has focused on breast cancer exclusively. This systematic review evaluates the use and impact of SCP in breast cancer survivors. METHODS: Randomized (RCTs) and non-randomized (non-RCT) studies evaluating health care and patient-related outcomes after implementation of SCPs for survivors were identified by searching databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL, and Scopus). Data were extracted, quality assessed, and summarized on the basis of qualitative synthesis. RESULTS: Ten non-RCTs and 14 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Although the overall quality of RCTs was superior to non-RCTs with mean quality score of 81.5% vs 64.3%, two mixed-methods non-RCTs which were individualized and included both provider and patient perspectives had comparable scores like RCTs. Several models of SCP were evaluated (paper based/online, oncologist/nurse/primary-care physician-delivered, and different templates). Descriptive information from non-RCTs suggests improvement in survivorship knowledge, satisfaction with care, and improved communication with providers. Findings from RCTs were variable. Potential gaps existed in content of SCP including unclear recommendation on frequency and ownership of follow-up. Levels of survivor satisfaction with, and self-reported understanding of, their SCP were high. Distal outcomes like health care delivery measures including costs and efficiency were mostly mixed, but heterogeneous study designs make interpretation difficult. CONCLUSIONS: Existing research provides positive impact of SCPs on more proximal outcomes of patient experience and care delivery but mixed results for health outcomes in breast cancer survivors. Future research should focus on better defining SCP content and ensuring follow-up recommendations are acted upon, and provider feedback is included and use of novel tools to empower stakeholders.
Authors: Kim A H Nicolaije; Nicole P M Ezendam; M Caroline Vos; Johanna M A Pijnenborg; Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse; Roy F P M Kruitwagen Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2013-12-20 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Leigh Anne Faul; Brian Rivers; David Shibata; Ione Townsend; Patricia Cabrera; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Paul B Jacobsen Journal: J Psychosoc Oncol Date: 2012
Authors: Rebecca Cowens-Alvarado; Katherine Sharpe; Mandi Pratt-Chapman; Anne Willis; Ted Gansler; Patricia A Ganz; Stephen B Edge; Mary S McCabe; Kevin Stein Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2013-03-19 Impact factor: 508.702