Search

Purpose: The optimal delivery of survivorship care, particularly within primary care, remains poorly understood. We established the Johns Hopkins Primary Care for Cancer Survivors (PCCS) clinic in 2015 to address care challenges unique to cancer survivors. To better understand the care from the PCCS clinic, we interviewed patients about their perception of care delivery, survivorship care, and care coordination. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with adult survivors of any cancer type seen in the PCCS clinic. A priori and in vivo coding of verbatim transcripts was part of the thematic analysis. Results: Seventeen cancer survivors were interviewed (ages 37–78). Themes that emerged were (1) optimal care and (2) the PCCS experience. Subthemes respectively included the ideal role of the primary care provider (1), telehealth/COVID-19 challenges and opportunities (1), patient-derived value from the PCCS clinic (2), and improving the PCCS model (2). Overall, PCCS patients expected and experienced high-quality, comprehensive primary care by providers with cancer survivorship expertise. Patients reported telehealth benefits and challenges for survivorship care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions: PCCS patients perceived receiving high-quality primary care and valued being seen in a primary care–based survivorship clinic. The PCCS clinic can serve as a model of primary care–based cancer survivorship. Implications for Cancer Survivors: Ideal primary care provider roles and care coordination are important factors for high-quality survivorship care and can be provided by a specialized cancer survivorship clinic in primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Survivorship care plans (SCPs) communicate cancer‐related information from oncology providers to patients and primary care providers. SCPs may limit overuse testing by specifying necessary follow‐up care. From a randomized, controlled trial of SCP delivery, we examined whether cancer‐related tests not specified in SCPs, but conducted after SCP receipt, were appropriate or consistent with overuse. Methods: Survivors of breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer treated at urban‐academic or rural‐community health systems were randomized to one of three SCP delivery arms. Tests during 18 months after SCP receipt were classified as consistent with overuse if they were (1) not included in SCPs and (2) on a guideline‐based predetermined list of "not recommended surveillance." After chart abstraction, physicians performed review and adjudication of potential overuse. Descriptive analyses were conducted of tests consistent with overuse. Negative binomial regression models determined if testing consistent with overuse differed across study arms. Results: Among 316 patients (137 breast, 67 colorectal, 112 prostate), 140 individual tests were identified as potential overuse. Upon review, 98 were deemed to be consistent with overuse: 78 tumor markers and 20 imaging tests. The majority of overuse testing was breast cancer‐related (95%). Across sites, 27 patients (9%) received ≥1 test consistent with overuse; most were breast cancer patients (22/27). Exploratory analyses of overuse test frequency by study arm showed no significant difference. Conclusions: This analysis identified practice patterns consistent with overuse of surveillance testing and can inform efforts to improve guideline‐concordant care. Future interventions may include individual practice patterns and provider education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Survivorship care plans seek to improve the transition to survivorship, but the required resources present implementation barriers. This randomized controlled trial aimed to identify the simplest, most effective approach for survivorship care planning.Methods: Stage 1-3 breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer patients aged 21 years or older completing treatment were recruited from an urban-academic and rural-community cancer center. Participants were randomly assigned, stratified by recruitment site and cancer type 1:1:1 to a mailed plan, plan delivered during a 1-time transition visit, or plan delivered during a transition visit plus 6-month follow-up visit. Health service use data were collected from participants and medical records for 18 months. The primary outcome, receipt of all plan-recommended care, was compared across intervention arms using logistic regression adjusting for cancer type and recruitment site, with P less than .05 considered statistically significant.Results: Of 378 participants randomly assigned, 159 (42.1%) were breast, 142 (37.6%) prostate, and 77 (20.4%) colorectal cancer survivors; 207 (54.8%) from the academic site and 171 (45.2%) from the community site; 316 were analyzable for the primary outcome. There was no difference across arms in the proportion of participants receiving all plan-recommended care: 45.2% mail, 50.5% 1-visit, 42.7% 2-visit (2-sided P = .60). Adherence by cancer type for mail, 1-visit, and 2-visit, respectively, was 52.2%, 53.3%, and 40.0% for breast cancer; 48.6%, 64.1%, and 57.1% for prostate cancer; and 23.8%, 19.0%, and 26.1% for colorectal cancer. There were no statistically significant interactions by recruitment site or cancer type.Conclusions: This study did not find differences in receipt of recommended follow-up care by plan delivery approach. Feasibility and other factors may determine the best approach for survivorship care planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Methods Results Conclusions Continuity and coordination‐of‐care for childhood cancer survivors with multiple chronic conditions are understudied but critical for appropriate follow‐up care.From April through June 2022, 800 Childhood Cancer Survivor Study participants with two or more chronic conditions (one or more severe/life‐threatening/disabling) were emailed the “Patient Perceived Continuity‐of‐Care from Multiple Clinicians” survey. The survey asked about survivors’ main (takes care of most health care) and coordinating (ensures follow‐up) provider, produced three care‐coordination summary scores (main provider, across multiple providers, patient–provider partnership), and included six discontinuity indicators (e.g., having to organize own care). Discontinuity (yes/no) was defined as poor care on one or more discontinuity item. Chi‐square tests assessed associations between discontinuity and sociodemographics. Modified Poisson regression models estimated prevalence ratios (PRs) for discontinuity risk associated with the specialty and number of years seeing the main and coordinating provider, and PRs associated with better scores on the three care‐coordination summary measures. Inverse probability weights adjusted for survey non‐participation.A total of 377 (47%) survivors responded (mean age 48 years, 68% female, 89% non‐Hispanic White, 78% privately insured, 74% ≥college graduate); 147/373 (39%) reported discontinuity. Younger survivors were more likely to report discontinuity (chi‐square p = .02). Seeing the main provider ≤3 years was associated with more prevalent discontinuity (PR; 95%CI) (1.17; 1.02‐1.34 vs ≥ 10 years). Cancer specialist main providers were associated with less prevalent discontinuity (0.81; 0.66–0.99 vs. primary care). Better scores on all three care‐coordination summary measures were associated with less prevalent discontinuity: main provider (0.73; 0.64–0.83), across multiple providers (0.81; 0.78–0.83), patient–provider partnership (0.85; 0.80–0.89).Care discontinuity among childhood cancer survivors is prevalent and requires intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sasang constitutional medicine (SCM), which categorizes humans into four Sasang types according to their constitution-specific characteristics, has been identified as being useful in predicting metabolic risks and preventing non-communicable diseases (NCDs). However, no systematic review has evaluated this relationship previously. This study protocol describes a method for evaluating the association between Sasang constitution and the metabolic risk factors for NCDs., Methods: The following nine academic databases will be used as data sources for entries: Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica database, Web of Science, and six Korean databases. All cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies that were published by December 2021 and could explain the association between Sasang constitution and metabolic risk factors for NCDs will be considered eligible. Two independent researchers will select studies, extract data, assess quality of studies, and qualitatively evaluate clinical evidence, subsequently. The quality assessment will be evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, with modifications if necessary. Quantitative data will be synthesized as a random-effects model, if applicable. The strength of clinical evidence will be performed applying the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) or GRADE-Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach., Discussion: This study will contribute to helping clinicians and health authorities detect any relevant metabolic risks that patients may have, based on systematic clinical evidence., Trial Registration: Review Registry Unique Identifying Number: reviewregistry1213.

Background: The noradrenergic system modulates cognitive flexibility for insight-based problem solving in studies using beta-adrenergic antagonists, which block noradrenergic neurotransmission postsynaptically. However, it is not known whether alpha2-adrenergic agonists, that decrease noradrenergic neurotransmission by presynaptic inhibition, have the same effect., Objectives: Therefore, we wished to test whether alpha2-adrenergic agonists would have a similar effect on cognitive flexibility., Methods: Eighteen normal adults were tested on cognitive flexibility, problem solving, verbal and spatial memory tasks after receiving clonidine (0.1 mg), an alpha2-agonist, placebo, or ephedrine (25 mg), a noradrenergic stimulant., Results: Three-way analysis of variance revealed no significant drug effect on cognitive flexibility or problem solving. There was also no significant effect of clonidine on memory., Conclusions: Therefore, alpha2-agonists do not influence cognitive flexibility in the same manner as beta-antagonists. Better performance on memory with clonidine might be expected based on primate studies demonstrating benefits in working memory using clonidine. This benefit was not observed for the commonly used clinical memory tasks in our study. This may have implications for why clonidine has not demonstrated efficacy for cognitive disorders such as Alzheimer disease, despite its known benefit for working memory in animal models.