Negative information seeking experiences of long-term prostate cancer survivors

Purpose Many prostate cancer survivors have lasting symptoms and disease-related concerns for which they seek information. To understand survivors’ information seeking experiences, we examined the topics of their information searches, their overall perceptions of the search, and perceptions of their health information seeking self-efficacy (i.e., confidence in their ability to obtain information). We hypothesized that negative search experiences and lower health information seeking self-efficacy would be associated with certain survivor characteristics such as non-white race, low income, and less education. Methods This was a retrospective study using data from the Michigan Prostate Cancer Survivor Study (state-based survey of long-term prostate cancer survivor outcomes, N=2,499, response rate = 38%). Participants recalled their last search for information and reported the topics and overall experience. We conducted multivariable regression to examine the association between survivor characteristics and the information-seeking experience. Results Nearly a third (31.7%) of prostate cancer survivors (median age of 76 years and 9 years since diagnosis) reported having negative information seeking experiences when looking for information. However, only 13.4% reported having low health information seeking self-efficacy. Lower income and less education were both significantly associated with negative information seeking experiences. Conclusions Our findings suggest that many long-term prostate cancer survivors have negative experiences when searching for information, and lower income and less education were survivor factors related to negative information seeking experiences. Implications for cancer survivors We advocate for ongoing, information needs assessment at the point-of-care as the survivorship experience progresses to assess and potentially improve survivors’ quality of life

Providing prostate cancer survivorship care in Japan: Implications from the USA care model

Despite an increasing number of prostate cancer survivors in Japan, the current delivery of prostate cancer survivorship care is insufficient and lacks a multidisciplinary approach. We carried out a study to characterize prostate cancer survivorship care in Japan, examine the Japanese workforce available to deliver survivorship care, introduce a conceptual framework for survivorship and identify opportunities to improve Japanese survivorship care. We systematically searched PubMed for prostate cancer survivorship care studies, including those from Japan. We also searched the internet for prostate cancer guidelines relevant to survivorship care. We found 392 articles, of which 71 were relevant, read in detail and reported here. In Japan, survivorship care is mostly provided by urologists. Primary care as a specialty does not exist in Japan, and there are no independent nurse practitioners or physician assistants to assist with survivorship care. Japanese quality of life studies characterize the long‐term effects of prostate cancer treatment, but routine use of patient‐reported outcomes is not common in Japan. In the USA, in light of a growing comprehensive awareness of challenges facing survivors and their providers, the American Cancer Society prostate cancer survivorship care guidelines serve as a tool for optimizing the management of long‐term treatment effects and coordination of care. In order to deliver high‐quality survivorship care in Japan, urologists need to establish collaborations with other disciplines within the delivery system. A multidisciplinary guideline for prostate cancer survivorship care in Japan appears warranted.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/134455/1/iju13186_am.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/134455/2/iju13186.pd

Development and Validation of a Short Version of the Metric for the Observation of Decision-Making in Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards: MODe-Lite

Funder: Maudsley Charity; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100012176Funder: Mark Foundation For Cancer Research; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100014599Funder: Guy's and St Thomas' Charity; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000380Funder: NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care South London; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100015091Abstract: Background: Evidence-based tools are necessary for scientifically improving the way MTBs work. Such tools are available but can be difficult to use. This study aimed to develop a robust observational assessment tool for use on cancer multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) by health care professionals in everyday practice. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional observational study was conducted in the United Kingdom from September 2015 to July 2016. Three tumor boards from three teaching hospitals were recruited, with 44 members overall. Six weekly meetings involving 146 consecutive cases were video-recorded and scored using the validated MODe tool. Data were subjected to reliability and validity analysis in the current study to develop a shorter version of the MODe. Results: Phase 1, a reduction of the original items in the MODe, was achieved through two focus group meetings with expert assessors based on previous research. The 12 original items were reduced to 6 domains, receiving full agreement by the assessors. In phase 2, the six domains were subjected to item reliability, convergent validation, and internal consistency testing against the MODe-Lite global score, the MODe global score, and the items of the MODe. Significant positive correlations were evident across all domains (p < 0.01), indicating good reliability and validity. In phase 3, feasibility and high inter-assessor reliability were achieved by two clinical assessors. Six domains measuring clinical input, holistic input, clinical collaboration, pathology, radiology, and management plan were integrated into MODe-Lite. Conclusions: As an evidence-based tool for health care professionals in everyday practice, MODe-Lite gives cancer MTBs insight into the way they work and facilitates improvements in practice

Delays in diagnosis and bladder cancer mortality

BACKGROUND: Mortality from invasive bladder cancer is common, even with high-quality care. Thus, the best opportunities to improve outcomes may precede the diagnosis. Although screening currently is not recommended, better medical care of patients who are at risk (ie, those with hematuria) has the potential to improve outcomes. METHODS: The authors used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked database for the years 1992 through 2002 to identify 29,740 patients who had hematuria in the year before a bladder cancer diagnosis and grouped them according to the interval between their first claim for hematuria and their bladder cancer diagnosis. Cox proportional hazards models were fitted to assess relations between these intervals and bladder cancer mortality, adjusting first for patient demographics and then for disease severity. Adjusted logistic models were used to estimate the patient's probability of receiving a major intervention. RESULTS: Patients (n = 2084) who had a delay of 9 months were more likely to die from bladder cancer compared with patients who were diagnosed within 3 months (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-1.50). This risk was not markedly attenuated after adjusting for disease stage and tumor grade (adjusted HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.14-1.45). In fact, the effect was strongest among patients who had low-grade tumors (adjusted HR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.69-2.64) and low-stage disease (ie, a tumor [T] classification of Ta or tumor in situ; adjusted HR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.54-2.64). CONCLUSIONS: A delay in the diagnosis of bladder cancer increased the risk of death from disease independent of tumor grade and or disease stage. Understanding the mechanisms that underlie these delays may improve outcomes among patients with bladder cancer. Cancer 2010. © 2010 American Cancer Society.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78303/1/25310_ftp.pd

De-implementation of low value castration for men with prostate cancer: protocol for a theory-based, mixed methods approach to minimizing low value androgen deprivation therapy (DeADT)

Abstract Background Men with prostate cancer are often castrated with long-acting injectable drugs termed androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Although many benefit, ADT is also used in patients with little or nothing to gain. The best ways to stop this practice are unknown, and range from blunt pharmacy restrictions to informed decision-making. This study will refine and pilot two different de-implementation strategies for reducing ADT use among those unlikely to benefit in preparation for a comparative effectiveness trial. Methods/design This innovative mixed methods research program has three aims. Aim 1: To assess preferences and barriers for de-implementation of chemical castration in prostate cancer. Guided by the theoretical domains framework (TDF), urologists and patients from facilities with the highest and lowest castration rates across the VA will be interviewed to identify key preferences and de-implementation barriers for reducing castration as prostate cancer treatment. This qualitative work will inform Aim 2 while gathering rich information for two proposed pilot intervention strategies. Aim 2: To use a discrete choice experiment (DCE), a novel barrier prioritization approach, for de-implementation strategy tailoring. The investigators will conduct national surveys of urologists to prioritize key barriers identified in Aim 1 for stopping incident castration as localized prostate cancer treatment using a DCE experiment design. These quantitative results will identify the most important barriers to be addressed through tailoring of two pilot de-implementation strategies in preparation for Aim 3 piloting. Aim 3: To pilot two tailored de-implementation strategies to reduce castration as localized prostate cancer treatment. Building on findings from Aims 1 and 2, two de-implementation strategies will be piloted. One strategy will focus on formulary restriction at the organizational level and the other on physician/patient informed decision-making at different facilities. Outcomes will include acceptability, feasibility, and scalability in preparation for an effectiveness trial comparing these two widely varying de-implementation strategies. Discussion Our innovative approach to de-implementation strategy development is directly aligned with state-of-the-art complex implementation intervention development and implementation science. This work will broadly advance de-implementation science for low value cancer care, and foster participation in our de-implementation evaluation trial by addressing barriers, facilitators, and concerns through pilot tailoring. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03579680 , First Posted July 6, 2018.https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/146541/1/13012_2018_Article_833.pd

The implications of baseline bone‐health assessment at initiation of androgen‐deprivation therapy for prostate cancer

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/142891/1/bju14075.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/142891/2/bju14075_am.pd

Optimizing veteran-centered prostate cancer survivorship care: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Abstract Background Although prostate cancer is the most common cancer among veterans receiving care in the Veterans Health Administration (VA), more needs to be done to understand and improve survivorship care for this large population. This study, funded by VA Health Services Research & Development (HSR&D), seeks to address the need to improve patient-centered survivorship care for veterans with prostate cancer. Methods/Design This is a two-armed randomized controlled trial (RCT) with a target enrollment of up to 325 prostate cancer survivors per study arm (total anticipated n = 600). Patients will be recruited from four VA sites. Patient eligibility criteria include age range of 40–80 years, one to ten years post-treatment, and currently experiencing prostate cancer symptom burden. We will compare the “Building Your New Normal” program, a personally-tailored automated telephone symptom management intervention for improving symptom self-management to usual care enhanced with a non-tailored newsletter about symptom management. Primary outcomes include changes in symptom burden, bother, and health services utilization at five and 12 months after enrollment. Secondary outcomes include long-term psychosocial outcomes (e.g. subjective health, perceived cancer control). We will use multivariable regression analysis to evaluate the impact of the intervention on primary and secondary outcomes. We will conduct a process evaluation to understand the effective intervention components and explore possibilities for broader implementation and dissemination. Discussion Our central hypothesis is that intervention group participants will have improved and more confident symptom self-management and prostate cancer quality of life following the intervention and that these outcomes will translate to more efficient use of health services. The study results will provide much needed information about how to optimize the quality of care, and life, of veteran prostate cancer survivors. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT01900561 ; Registered on 22 July 2013.https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/136600/1/13063_2017_Article_1925.pd

Technology-assisted stroke rehabilitation in Mexico: a pilot randomized trial comparing traditional therapy to circuit training in a Robot/technology-assisted therapy gym

Background Stroke rehabilitation in low- and middle-income countries, such as Mexico, is often hampered by lack of clinical resources and funding. To provide a cost-effective solution for comprehensive post-stroke rehabilitation that can alleviate the need for one-on-one physical or occupational therapy, in lower and upper extremities, we proposed and implemented a technology-assisted rehabilitation gymnasium in Chihuahua, Mexico. The Gymnasium for Robotic Rehabilitation (Robot Gym) consisted of low- and high-tech systems for upper and lower limb rehabilitation. Our hypothesis is that the Robot Gym can provide a cost- and labor-efficient alternative for post-stroke rehabilitation, while being more or as effective as traditional physical and occupational therapy approaches. Methods A typical group of stroke patients was randomly allocated to an intervention (n = 10) or a control group (n = 10). The intervention group received rehabilitation using the devices in the Robot Gym, whereas the control group (n = 10) received time-matched standard care. All of the study subjects were subjected to 24 two-hour therapy sessions over a period of 6 to 8 weeks. Several clinical assessments tests for upper and lower extremities were used to evaluate motor function pre- and post-intervention. A cost analysis was done to compare the cost effectiveness for both therapies. Results No significant differences were observed when comparing the results of the pre-intervention Mini-mental, Brunnstrom Test, and Geriatric Depression Scale Test, showing that both groups were functionally similar prior to the intervention. Although, both training groups were functionally equivalent, they had a significant age difference. The results of all of the upper extremity tests showed an improvement in function in both groups with no statistically significant differences between the groups. The Fugl-Meyer and the 10 Meters Walk lower extremity tests showed greater improvement in the intervention group compared to the control group. On the Time Up and Go Test, no statistically significant differences were observed pre- and post-intervention when comparing the control and the intervention groups. For the 6 Minute Walk Test, both groups presented a statistically significant difference pre- and post-intervention, showing progress in their performance. The robot gym therapy was more cost-effective than the traditional one-to-one therapy used during this study in that it enabled therapist to train up to 1.5 to 6 times more patients for the approximately same cost in the long term. Conclusions The results of this study showed that the patients that received therapy using the Robot Gym had enhanced functionality in the upper extremity tests similar to patients in the control group. In the lower extremity tests, the intervention patients showed more improvement than those subjected to traditional therapy. These results support that the Robot Gym can be as effective as traditional therapy for stroke patients, presenting a more cost- and labor-efficient option for countries with scarce clinical resources and funding. Trial registration ISRCTN98578807

Evaluation of changes to work patterns in multidisciplinary cancer team meetings due to the COVID-19 pandemic: A national mixed-method survey study

Background It is not well understood the overall changes that multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) have had to make in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, nor the impact that such changes, in addition to the other challenges faced by MDTs, have had on decision-making, communication, or participation in the context of MDT meetings specifically. Methods This was a mixed method, prospective cross-sectional survey study taking place in the United Kingdom between September 2020 and August 2021. Results The participants were 423 MDT members. Qualitative findings revealed hybrid working and possibility of virtual attendance as the change introduced because of COVID-19 that MDTs would like to maintain. However, IT-related issues, slower meetings, longer lists and delays were identified as common with improving of the IT infrastructure necessary going forward. In contrast, virtual meetings and increased attendance/availability of clinicians were highlighted as the positive outcomes resulting from the change. Quantitative findings showed significant improvement from before COVID-19 for MDT meeting organisation and logistics (M = 45, SD = 20) compared to the access (M = 50, SD = 12, t(390) = 5.028, p = 0.001), case discussions (M = 50, SD = 14, t(373) = −5.104, p = 0.001), and patient representation (M = 50, SD = 12, t(382) = −4.537, p = 0.001) at MDT meetings. Discussion Our study explored the perception of change since COVID-19 among cancer MDTs using mixed methods. While hybrid working was preferred, challenges exist. Significant improvements in the meeting organisation and logistics were reported. Although we found no significant perceived worsening across the four domains investigated, there was an indication in this direction for the case discussions warranting further ‘live’ assessments of MDT meetings