Cargando…

Evaluating potential overuse of surveillance care in cancer survivors

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‐rel...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sheng, Jennifer Y., Snyder, Claire F., Smith, Katherine C., DeSanto, Jennifer, Mayonado, Nancy, Rall, Susan, White, Sharon, Blackford, Amanda L., Johnston, Fabian M., Joyner, Robert L., Mischtschuk, Joan, Peairs, Kimberly S., Thorner, Elissa, Tran, Phuoc T., Wolff, Antonio C., Choi, Youngjee
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10028154/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36369671
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.5346
Descripción
Sumario: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.