Breaking the Barriers to Specialty Care: Practical Ideas to Improve Health Equity and Reduce Cost - Call to Action for a System-wide Focus on Equity

Tremendous health outcome inequities remain in the U.S. across race and ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation, socio-economic status, and geography—particularly for those with serious conditions such as lung or skin cancer, HIV/AIDS, or cardiovascular disease.These inequities are driven by a complex set of factors—including distance to a specialist, insurance coverage, provider bias, and a patient's housing and healthy food access. These inequities not only harm patients, resulting in avoidable illness and death, they also drive unnecessary health systems costs.This 5-part series highlights the urgent need to address these issues, providing resources such as case studies, data, and recommendations to help the health care sector make meaningful strides toward achieving equity in specialty care.Top TakeawaysThere are vast inequalities in access to and outcomes from specialty health care in the U.S. These inequalities are worst for minority patients, low-income patients, patients with limited English language proficiency, and patients in rural areas.A number of solutions have emerged to improve health outcomes for minority and medically underserved patients. These solutions fall into three main categories: increasing specialty care availability, ensuring high-quality care, and helping patients engage in care.As these inequities are also significant drivers of health costs, payers, health care provider organizations, and policy makers have a strong incentive to invest in solutions that will both improve outcomes and reduce unnecessary costs. These actors play a critical role in ensuring that equity is embedded into core care delivery at scale.Part 5: "Call to Action for a System-wide Focus on Equity"These solutions create value not only for patients, but also for health care providers and public and private payers.  Each of these actors have a role to play in scaling and sustaining the health equity solutions.

Addressing the Health Needs of an Aging America: New Opportunities for Evidence-Based Policy Solutions

This report systematically maps research findings to policy proposals intended to improve the health of the elderly. The study identified promising evidence-based policies, like those supporting prevention and care coordination, as well as areas where the research evidence is strong but policy activity is low, such as patient self-management and palliative care. Future work of the Stern Center will focus on these topics as well as long-term care financing, the health care workforce, and the role of family caregivers

Study protocol: addressing evidence and context to facilitate transfer and uptake of consultation recording use in oncology: a knowledge translation implementation study

Background: The time period from diagnosis to the end of treatment is challenging for newly diagnosed cancer patients. Patients have a substantial need for information, decision aids, and psychosocial support. Recordings of initial oncology consultations improve information recall, reduce anxiety, enhance patient satisfaction with communication, and increase patients' perceptions that the essential aspects of their disease and treatment have been addressed during the consultation. Despite the research evidence supporting the provision of consultation recordings, uptake of this intervention into oncology practice has been slow. The primary aim of this project is to conduct an implementation study to explicate the contextual factors, including use of evidence, that facilitate and impede the transfer and uptake of consultation-recording use in a sample of patients newly diagnosed with breast or prostate cancer. Methods: Sixteen oncologists from cancer centres in three Canadian cities will participate in this three-phase study. The preimplementation phase will be used to identify and address those factors that are fundamental to facilitating the smooth adoption and delivery of the intervention during the implementation phase. During the implementation phase, breast and prostate cancer patients will receive a recording of their initial oncology consultation to take home. Patient interviews will be conducted in the days following the consultation to gather feedback on the benefits of the intervention. Patients will complete the Digital Recording Use Semi-Structured Interview (DRUSSI) and be invited to participate in focus groups in which their experiences with the consultation recording will be explored. Oncologists will receive a summary letter detailing the benefits voiced by their patients. The postimplementation phase includes a conceptual framework development meeting and a seven-point dissemination strategy. Discussion: Consultation recording has been used in oncology, family medicine, and other medicine specialties, and despite affirming evidence and probable applications to a large number of diseases and a variety of clinical contexts, clinical adoption of this intervention has been slow. The proposed study findings will advance our conceptual knowledge of the ways to enhance uptake of consultation recordings in oncology

Breaking the Barriers to Specialty Care: Practical Ideas to Improve Health Equity and Reduce Cost - Striving for Equity in Specialty Care Full Report

Tremendous health outcome inequities remain in the U.S. across race and ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation, socio-economic status, and geography—particularly for those with serious conditions such as lung or skin cancer, HIV/AIDS, or cardiovascular disease.These inequities are driven by a complex set of factors—including distance to a specialist, insurance coverage, provider bias, and a patient's housing and healthy food access. These inequities not only harm patients, resulting in avoidable illness and death, they also drive unnecessary health systems costs.This 5-part series highlights the urgent need to address these issues, providing resources such as case studies, data, and recommendations to help the health care sector make meaningful strides toward achieving equity in specialty care.Top TakeawaysThere are vast inequalities in access to and outcomes from specialty health care in the U.S. These inequalities are worst for minority patients, low-income patients, patients with limited English language proficiency, and patients in rural areas.A number of solutions have emerged to improve health outcomes for minority and medically underserved patients. These solutions fall into three main categories: increasing specialty care availability, ensuring high-quality care, and helping patients engage in care.As these inequities are also significant drivers of health costs, payers, health care provider organizations, and policy makers have a strong incentive to invest in solutions that will both improve outcomes and reduce unnecessary costs. These actors play a critical role in ensuring that equity is embedded into core care delivery at scale.

The Delphi and GRADE methodology used in the PSOGI 2018 consensus statement on Pseudomyxoma Peritonei and Peritoneal Mesothelioma

Pseudomyxoma Peritonei (PMP) and Peritoneal Mesothelioma (PM) are both rare peritoneal malignancies. Currently, affected patients may be treated with Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy offering long-term survival or even cure in selected patients. However, many issues regarding the optimal treatment strategy are currently under debate. To aid physicians involved in the treatment of these patients in clinical decision making, the PSOGI executive committee proposed to create a consensus statement on PMP and PM. This manuscript describes the methodology of the consensus process. The Delphi technique is a reliable method for attaining consensus on a topic that lacks scientific evidence through multiple voting rounds which feeds back responses to the participants in between rounds. The GRADE system provides a structured framework for presenting and grading the available evidence. Separate questionnaires were created for PMP and PM and sent during two voting rounds to 80 and 38 experts, respectively. A consensus threshold of 51.0% was chosen. After the second round, consensus was reached on 92.9%–100.0% of the questions. The results were presented and discussed in the plenary session at the PSOGI 2018 international meeting in Paris. A third round for the remaining issues is currently in progress. In conclusion, using the Delphi technique and GRADE methodology, consensus was reached in many issues regarding the treatment of PM and PMP amongst an international panel of experts. The main results will be published in the near future

Improving Emergency Response in the Outpatient Clinic Setting

Background: Effective triage, assessment, and activation of necessary systems in emergent situations of clinical instability is vital in reducing morbidity and mortality of patients in any clinical setting. When medical emergencies occur outside of the hospital, organized and expedited transfer to a higher level of care reduces the potential for adverse events, lasting deficits, and patient death. Aim: The aim of this project was to identify weaknesses in the emergency response system in the community-based outpatient clinic setting and to propose solutions. Methods: The “Swiss Cheese” theoretical framework was used to do a root cause analysis of two clinical scenarios. Weaknesses in the emergency response system in the community-based outpatient clinic setting were identified. Results: Several tools were utilized including a fish bone diagram and the 5-Whys tool. Two root causes were identified. The first is that clinic staff does not have a working knowledge with specifics regarding the emergency response process. The second is that the existing emergency response checklist document is visually confusing and duties are not in sequence. Discussion and Implications for the CNL: Weaknesses in the emergency response system will be discussed. Knowledge and experience from inpatient care will be translated to the outpatient clinic setting. The role of the CNL in designing an effective emergency response system will be discussed with the proposal of several plans of action

Rethinking the therapeutic misconception: social justice, patient advocacy, and cancer clinical trial recruitment in the US safety net.

BackgroundApproximately 20% of adult cancer patients are eligible to participate in a clinical trial, but only 2.5-9% do so. Accrual is even less for minority and medically underserved populations. As a result, critical life-saving treatments and quality of life services developed from research studies may not address their needs. This study questions the utility of the bioethical concern with therapeutic misconception (TM), a misconception that occurs when research subjects fail to distinguish between clinical research and ordinary treatment, and therefore attribute therapeutic intent to research procedures in the safety net setting. This paper provides ethnographic insight into the ways in which research is discussed and related to standard treatment.MethodsIn the course of two years of ethnographic fieldwork in a safety net hospital, I conducted clinic observations (n=150 clinic days) and in-depth in-person qualitative interviews with patients (n=37) and providers (n=15). I used standard qualitative methods to organize and code resulting fieldnote and interview data.ResultsFindings suggest that TM is limited in relevance for the interdisciplinary context of cancer clinical trial recruitment in the safety net setting. Ethnographic data show the value of the discussions that happen prior to the informed consent, those that introduce the idea of participation in research. These preliminary discussions are elemental especially when recruiting underserved and vulnerable patients for clinical trial participation who are often unfamiliar with medical research and how it relates to medical care. Data also highlight the multiple actors involved in research discussions and the ethics of social justice and patient advocacy they mobilize, suggesting that class, inequality, and dependency influence the forms of ethical engagements in public hospital settings.ConclusionOn the ground ethics of social justice and patient advocacy are more relevant than TM as guiding ethical principles in the context of ongoing cancer disparities and efforts to diversify clinical trial participation

Surgical assessment of the geriatric oncology patient

BACKGROUND: The aging population in the United States will correlate with an increased number of cancer diagnoses as cancer is primarily a disease of the elderly. Providing this ever-growing group of individuals with quality surgical management, while taking into account the unique needs and desires of this cohort, is a great challenge facing both geriatricians and surgeons going forward. The best approach to ensure that oncogeriatric patients receive the best tailored treatment is through the completion of a pre-surgical geriatric assessment. However, only a minority of oncogeriatric patients is undergoing a comprehensive pre-surgical geriatric assessment despite the majority of geriatricians and surgeons acknowledging its importance in order to properly risk stratify their patients. LITERATURE REVIEW FINDINGS: Multiple theories exist as to why geriatric assessments are not being utilized more frequently, but the most probable answer is that these assessments are very time-consuming, making it virtually impossible for incorporation into a healthcare provider’s busy schedule. Comprehensive literature review regarding geriatric assessments amongst the oncogeriatric population found that the most sensitive and specific domains of the geriatric assessments predicting morbidity and mortality include Frailty Index, Social Support Survey, Mini-Nutritional Assessment, and Geriatric Depression Screening. PROPOSED METHODS: A novel educational intervention will be proposed to teach Physician Assistant and Medical Students about the domains of the geriatric assessment most predictive of post-surgical risk during their surgical clerkship. The curriculum will utilize both simulation- and competency-based education training under the guidance of geriatricians and surgeons. Students will first learn the necessary skills in a controlled classroom environment and then proceed to incorporate these skills during their clerkship with patients on their service. CONCLUSIONS: The goal of the proposed method is to instill the confidence and skills necessary to provide an accurate geriatric assessment for oncogeriatric patients in future clinicians. The field of geriatric oncology is going to grow exponentially in the up-coming years and familiarizing future clinicians with the most predictive domains regarding surgical outcome will improve treatment outcomes for oncogeriatric patients in the immediate and foreseeable future

Breaking the Barriers to Specialty Care: Practical Ideas to Improve Health Equity and Reduce Cost - Helping Patients Engage in Specialty Care

Tremendous health outcome inequities remain in the U.S. across race and ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation, socio-economic status, and geography—particularly for those with serious conditions such as lung or skin cancer, HIV/AIDS, or cardiovascular disease.These inequities are driven by a complex set of factors—including distance to a specialist, insurance coverage, provider bias, and a patient's housing and healthy food access. These inequities not only harm patients, resulting in avoidable illness and death, they also drive unnecessary health systems costs.This 5-part series highlights the urgent need to address these issues, providing resources such as case studies, data, and recommendations to help the health care sector make meaningful strides toward achieving equity in specialty care.Top TakeawaysThere are vast inequalities in access to and outcomes from specialty health care in the U.S. These inequalities are worst for minority patients, low-income patients, patients with limited English language proficiency, and patients in rural areas.A number of solutions have emerged to improve health outcomes for minority and medically underserved patients. These solutions fall into three main categories: increasing specialty care availability, ensuring high-quality care, and helping patients engage in care.As these inequities are also significant drivers of health costs, payers, health care provider organizations, and policy makers have a strong incentive to invest in solutions that will both improve outcomes and reduce unnecessary costs. These actors play a critical role in ensuring that equity is embedded into core care delivery at scale.Part 4: "Helping Patients Engage in Specialty Care"Specialty care actors are increasingly addressing the social determinants of health with community outreach, patient navigation, and patient support services