Suppr超能文献

全国学术癌症中心网络站点的癌症护理状况。

Status of Cancer Care at Network Sites of the Nation's Academic Cancer Centers.

机构信息

1Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio.

2Association of American Cancer Institutes, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

出版信息

J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2021 Mar 11;19(6):726-732. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2020.7656.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Cancer care coordination across major academic medical centers and their networks is evolving rapidly, but the spectrum of organizational efforts has not been described. We conducted a mixed-methods survey of leading cancer centers and their networks to document care coordination and identify opportunities to improve geographically dispersed care.

METHODS

A mixed-methods survey was sent to 91 cancer centers in the United States and Canada. We analyzed the number and locations of network sites; access to electronic medical records (EMRs); clinical research support and participation at networks; use of patient navigators, care paths, and quality measures; and physician workforce. Responses were collected via Qualtrics software between September 2017 and December 2018.

RESULTS

Of the 69 responding cancer centers, 74% were NCI-designated. Eighty-seven percent of respondents were part of a matrix health system, and 13% were freestanding. Fifty-six reported having network sites. Forty-three respondents use navigators for disease-specific populations, and 24 use them for all patients. Thirty-five respondents use ≥1 types of care path. Fifty-seven percent of networks had complete, integrated access to their main center's EMRs. Thirty-nine respondents said the main center provides funding for clinical research at networks, with 22 reporting the main center provides all funding. Thirty-five said the main center provided pharmacy support at the networks, with 15 indicating the main center provides 100% pharmacy support. Certification program participation varied extensively across networks.

CONCLUSIONS

The data show academic cancer centers have extensive involvement in network cancer care, often extending into rural communities. Coordinating care through improved clinical trial access and greater use of patient navigation, care paths, coordinated EMRs, and quality measures is likely to improve patient outcomes. Although it is premature to draw firm conclusions, the survey results are appropriate for mapping next steps and data queries.

摘要

背景

主要学术医疗中心及其网络之间的癌症护理协调正在迅速发展,但尚未描述组织工作的范围。我们对领先的癌症中心及其网络进行了混合方法调查,以记录护理协调情况并确定改善地域分散护理的机会。

方法

我们向美国和加拿大的 91 家癌症中心发送了一份混合方法调查。我们分析了网络站点的数量和位置;电子病历(EMR)的访问权限;网络中的临床研究支持和参与情况;使用患者导航员、护理路径和质量指标的情况;以及医生劳动力。通过 Qualtrics 软件收集回复,时间为 2017 年 9 月至 2018 年 12 月。

结果

在 69 家做出回应的癌症中心中,有 74%是 NCI 指定的。87%的受访者来自矩阵式医疗系统,13%为独立式。56 家报告有网络站点。43 名受访者为特定疾病患者使用导航员,24 名受访者为所有患者使用导航员。35 名受访者使用≥1 种护理路径。57%的网络可以完全、集成地访问其主要中心的 EMR。39 名受访者表示,主要中心为网络的临床研究提供资金,其中 22 名受访者表示主要中心提供全部资金。35 名受访者表示主要中心在网络上提供药房支持,其中 15 名受访者表示主要中心提供 100%的药房支持。认证计划的参与情况在各个网络之间差异很大。

结论

数据表明,学术癌症中心广泛参与网络癌症护理,通常延伸到农村社区。通过改善临床试验的获取途径以及更多地使用患者导航员、护理路径、协调的 EMR 和质量指标来协调护理,可能会改善患者的治疗效果。虽然现在得出确切的结论还为时过早,但调查结果适合用于绘制下一步计划和进行数据查询。

相似文献

2
Building a sustainable rural physician workforce.建设可持续的农村医师队伍。
Med J Aust. 2021 Jul;215 Suppl 1:S5-S33. doi: 10.5694/mja2.51122.

本文引用的文献

1
Evaluating the Impact of Treatment Care Planning on Quality Measures.评估治疗护理计划对质量措施的影响。
J Oncol Pract. 2019 Mar;15(3):e271-e276. doi: 10.1200/JOP.18.00390. Epub 2019 Jan 31.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验