Search

Purpose: Long-term follow-up (LTFU) care for childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) is essential to improve and maintain their quality of life. The Survivorship Passport (SurPass) is a digital tool which can aid in the delivery of adequate LTFU care. During the European PanCareSurPass (PCSP) project, the SurPass v2.0 will be implemented and evaluated at six LTFU care clinics in Austria, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Lithuania and Spain. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the SurPass v2.0 with regard to the care process as well as ethical, legal, social and economical aspects., Methods: An online, semi-structured survey was distributed to 75 stakeholders (LTFU care providers, LTFU care program managers and CCSs) affiliated with one of the six centres. Barriers and facilitators identified in four centres or more were defined as main contextual factors influencing implementation of SurPass v2.0., Results: Fifty-four barriers and 50 facilitators were identified. Among the main barriers were a lack of time and (financial) resources, gaps in knowledge concerning ethical and legal issues and a potential increase in health-related anxiety in CCSs upon receiving a SurPass. Main facilitators included institutions' access to electronic medical records, as well as previous experience with SurPass or similar tools., Conclusions: We provided an overview of contextual factors that may influence SurPass implementation. Solutions should be found to overcome barriers and ensure effective implementation of SurPass v2.0 into routine clinical care., Implications for Cancer Survivors: These findings will be used to inform on an implementation strategy tailored for the six centres., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Childhood cancer survivors (CCS), of whom there are about 500,000 living in Europe, are at an increased risk of developing health problems [1-6] and require lifelong Survivorship Care. There are information and knowledge gaps among CCS and healthcare providers (HCPs) about requirements for Survivorship Care [7-9] that can be addressed by the Survivorship Passport (SurPass), a digital tool providing CCS and HCPs with a comprehensive summary of past treatment and tailored recommendations for Survivorship Care. The potential of the SurPass to improve person-centred Survivorship Care has been demonstrated previously [10,11]., Methods: The EU-funded PanCareSurPass project will develop an updated version (v2.0) of the SurPass allowing for semi-automated data entry and implement it in six European countries (Austria, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Lithuania and Spain), representative of three infrastructure healthcare scenarios typically found in Europe. The implementation study will investigate the impact on person-centred care, as well as costs and processes of scaling up the SurPass. Interoperability between electronic health record systems and SurPass v2.0 will be addressed using the Health Level Seven (HL7) International interoperability standards., Results: PanCareSurPass will deliver an interoperable digital SurPass with comprehensive evidence on person-centred outcomes, technical feasibility and health economics impacts. An Implementation Toolkit will be developed and freely shared to promote and support the future implementation of SurPass across Europe., Conclusions: PanCareSurPass is a novel European collaboration that will improve person-centred Survivorship Care for CCS across Europe through a robust assessment of the implementation of SurPass v2.0 in different healthcare settings., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Having sufficient knowledge of cancer diagnosis, treatment and late effects in survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult (CAYA) cancer is important for effective self-management and optimising health outcomes. Therefore, in collaboration with different stakeholders, the PanCare PLAIN Information Group converted the PanCareFollowUp Recommendations for late effects surveillance into information summaries that are Person-centred, written in Lay language, Accessible, Internationally relevant, and Navigable (PLAIN). Methods: The PanCare PLAIN Information Group, comprising 21 stakeholders from seven European countries, collaborated to provide concise information for survivors and their families. The aim was to deliver PLAIN summaries that are clear and accessible for the majority of survivors, while providing links to additional sources of information. The PLAIN summaries were drafted by the PanCare PLAIN Information Group and subjected to two internal and one external consultation round, the latter involving experts, CAYA cancer survivors and parents/caregivers. Results: In total, 45 PLAIN summaries were developed, each corresponding to one of the PanCareFollowUp Recommendations for late effects surveillance. The summaries provide information about late effects, personal health risks, important symptoms and signs, recommended surveillance strategies, possible referral and treatment options, and self-care. Conclusions: The PLAIN summaries are meant to increase knowledge in survivors and their families, while they may also inform healthcare professionals. Along with their translations, the PLAIN summaries will be made freely available on the PanCare website, with a link provided on the European Network of Youth Cancer Survivors information platform. In addition, they will become and integral part of the Survivorship Passport.

Purpose: Childhood cancer patients report low physical activity levels despite the risk for long-term complications that may benefit from exercise. Research is lacking regarding exercise barriers, preferences, and beliefs among patients (1) on- and off-therapy and (2) across the age spectrum.Methods: Cross-sectional study in the Yale Pediatric Hematology-Oncology Clinic (October 2013-October 2014). Participants were ≥ 4 years old, > 1 month after cancer diagnosis at < 20 years, not acutely ill, expected to live > 6 months, and received chemotherapy and/or radiation. Participants (or parents if < 13 years) completed a survey.Results: The 162 patients (99% participated) were 34% children (4.0-12.9 years), 31% adolescents (13.0-17.9 years), and 35% adults (≥ 18 years). Most had leukemia/lymphoma (66%); 32% were on-therapy. On-therapy patients were more likely than off-therapy patients (73 vs. 48%; p = 0.003) to report ≥ 1 barrier related to physical complaints, such as "just too tired" (46 vs. 28%; p = 0.021) or "afraid" of injury (22 vs. 9%; p = 0.027). The majority preferred walking (73%), exercising at home (91%), exercising in the afternoon (79%), and a maximum travel time of 10-20 min (54%); preferences did not vary significantly by therapy status or age. Most respondents (94%) recognized the benefits of exercise after cancer, but 50% of on- vs. 12% of off-therapy patients believed "their cancer diagnosis made it unsafe to exercise regularly" (p < 0.001).Conclusions: Physical activity barriers pertaining to physical complaints and safety concerns were more pronounced in on-therapy childhood cancer patients but persisted off-therapy. Preferences and beliefs were relatively consistent. Our data can inform interventions in different patient subgroups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Given childhood cancer survivors' risk of treatment-induced late effects, long-term follow-up care is recommended. We explored experiences with late effects-related care and preferences for long-term follow-up care among adult survivors of childhood malignant lymphoma in Norway.Methods: We conducted five focus group interviews with 34 survivors (19 females; 21 Hodgkin/13 non-Hodgkin lymphoma survivors; mean age 39 years; mean time from diagnosis 26 years). Data was analyzed using principles of thematic analysis.Results: Two main themes were identified: (1) the survivors' experiences with late effects-related care and (2) their preferences for long-term follow-up care. Most of the survivors were dissatisfied with their late effects-related care due to perceptions of poor coordination of healthcare needs in a fragmented system, combined with a perceived lack of knowledge of late effects among themselves and general practitioners (GPs). All survivors valued long-term follow-up care. Oncologists were the preferred care providers, but GPs were considered acceptable providers if they had sufficient knowledge of late effects and routine examinations, short waiting times, and improved GP-oncologist collaboration.Conclusions: Our results suggest that a shared care model of long-term follow-up care involving specialists, GPs, and the survivors themselves is likely to fulfill several of the currently unmet needs among adult survivors of childhood cancers. Improved patient education about late effects and follow-up care would aid self-management. The survivors' concerns regarding lack of sufficient knowledge of late effects among GPs suggest a need for improving access to, and dissemination of, information of late effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]