Background: Research has described widespread racial disparities in cancer outcomes across the spectrum of prevention, screening, diagnosis, and treatment. A recent study suggested treatment disparities were mediated when patients were treated at NCI cancer centers. Participation of underserved groups in these centers, however, has been historically poor. In January, 2012, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI), in conjunction with Whittier Street Health Center (WSHC), a federally qualified health center in Roxbury Massachusetts, initiated a clinical outreach program as part of a comprehensive Cancer Care Equity Program. A conceptual model was developed to combine prevention, diagnosis, education, and treatment interventions. Methods: The intervention was developed inductively through the identification of several contributing factors to cancer disparities derived from observations during clinical practice. Most importantly, the lack of integrated cancer care spanning the continuum from prevention to treatment and end of life, in community health centers that predominately cared for the underserved. These observations were confirmed by review of the clinical literature, indicating that there were few clinical cancer outreach programs in the urban community; moreover, no program providing comprehensive cancer care was identified within an established community health center. The development and integration of services between the community health care center and cancer center, including medical, administrative, financial, interpreters, and social support, was achieved by incorporating clinical and administrative stakeholders from each institution into working group sessions through a structured facilitation process. Results: The intervention, funded by philanthropic support, incorporates a community cancer clinic, staffed by DFCI personnel, within a primary health care center. Primary care providers refer patients to the clinic for diagnostic evaluation, abnormal screening, and selected non-chemotherapy follow-up. Patients with previous cancer histories are also referred to re-establish connections with oncology. The integrated evaluation service is provided on-site at the community cancer clinic. All medical records are maintained within the primary health care center's database so that the primary care providers can track their patients. Patients with an active cancer-related issue are then referred to the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, with patient navigation and access management services to facilitate a smooth transition. To promote collaborations between the primary health care center and community cancer clinic, formal and informal provider-provider consultations, didactic sessions, and community-level educational sessions have also been established. The conceptual model details the patient referral pathways and services across institutions. Conclusion: The intervention's impact is currently being evaluated. The formation of this model demonstrates collaboration between academic centers and a primary health care center, focused on eliminating cancer disparities and emphasizing a cohesive clinical service in a novel manner. Citation Format: Laura T. Waldman, Brian F. Young, Ludmila A. Svoboda, Christopher S. Lathan. Development and implementation of a community-based clinical cancer outreach initiative. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Fifth AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2012 Oct 27-30; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2012;21(10 Suppl):Abstract nr A18.
Background: Education in consultation is a potentially valuable, but understudied, element of medical education. Inpatient consultation is an opportunity for significant subspecialist contact for resident trainees and an avenue for improving their knowledge and patient care across content areas. We evaluated the perceived educational effectiveness of education in consultation among internal medicine residents, within a university and a communitybased program, as well as the role of barriers in medical training that may limit education. Methods: We used a web-based survey expanded from a previously published survey consisting of 12 questions, including one free-response, on education in consultation. Data were analyzed descriptively and qualitatively. We surveyed residents from two internal medicine programs in 2016. One within a large university-based hospital and the second within a smaller community-based safety-net hospital. Results: 91/198 (46%) of residents responded. Overall results from both programs were similar despite their structural differences. Residents viewed education in consultation as a priority and the majority felt it was at least moderately effective but underutilized. Importantly, educational interactions are largely dependent on outreach from residents. While in-person teaching interactions were the most effective, key barriers to these interactions include a lack of time, difficulty locating residents, and the perception of residents as being too busy. Conclusions: Inpatient consultation offers a unique opportunity for specialist-led education for internal medicine
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.