Patient navigation has expanded as a promising approach to improve cancer care coordination and patient adherence. This paper addresses the need to identify the evidence on the economic impact of patient navigation in colorectal cancer, following the Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines. Articles indexed in Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, and Web of Science between January 2000 and March 2017 were analyzed. We conducted a systematic review of the literature using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The quality assessment of the included studies was based on the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Inclusion criteria indicated that the paper’s subject had to explicitly address patient navigation in colorectal cancer and the study had to be an economic evaluation. The search yielded 243 papers, 9 of which were finally included within this review. Seven out of the nine studies included met standards for high-quality based on CHEERS criteria. Eight concluded that patient navigation programs were unequivocally cost-effective for the health outcomes of interest. Six studies were cost-effectiveness analyses. All studies computed the direct costs of the program, which were defined a minima as the program costs. Eight of the reviewed studies adopted the healthcare system perspective. Direct medical costs were usually divided into outpatient and inpatient visits, tests, and diagnostics. Effectiveness outcomes were mainly assessed through screening adherence, quality of life and time to diagnostic resolution. Given these outcomes, more economic research is needed for patient navigation during cancer treatment and survivorship as well as for patient navigation for other cancer types so that decision makers better understand costs and benefits for heterogeneous patient navigation programs.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13561-018-0196-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Purpose: The association between food insecurity and healthrelated quality of life (QOL) of racial/ethnic minority patients with cancer has not been examined. The purpose of this study is to determine the relationship between food insecurity and health-related QOL reported by racial/ethnic minority patients with cancer.Methods: A consecutive sample of 1,390 underserved ethnic minority patients receiving cancer care in 10 cancer clinics and hospitals in New York City participated in this study. Healthrelated QOL was measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) and food security was assessed by the US Department of Agriculture Core Food Security Module.Results: Of the 1,390 patients, 581 (41.8%) were classified as food secure, 571 (41.1%) with low food security, and 238 (17.1%) with very low food security. Health-related QOL decreased with each lower food security level. Patient self-reported physical, functional, social, and emotional well-being subscale scores decrease significantly with increasing food insecurity. After controlling for demographic and medical-related factors, the decreases in QOL, physical, functional, social and emotional well-being scores with increasing food insecurity remained significant. Conclusion:Food insecurity was associated with lower QOL in this sample of underserved racial/ethnic minority patients with cancer. Underserved ethnic minority patients diagnosed with cancer are a vulnerable patient population, at significant risk for inadequate food access and the related lower QOL.
IntroductionE-cigarette taxes have been enacted by 30 states through April 2020. E-cigarette tax schemas vary, in contrast to cigarette taxes in the USA that are levied almost exclusively as excise taxes per pack. Some states use excise taxes on liquid and containers, others ad valorem taxes on wholesale prices and others sales taxes. It is therefore difficult to understand the relative magnitudes of these e-cigarette taxes and the overall e-cigarette tax size relative to the cigarette tax size.ObjectiveTo create and publish a database of state and local quarterly e-cigarette taxes from 2010 to 2020, standardised as the rate per millilitre of fluid.MethodsUsing Universal Product Code-level e-cigarette sales from the NielsenIQ Retail Scanner Data along with e-cigarette product characteristics collected from internet searches and visits to e-cigarette retailers, we develop a method to standardise e-cigarette taxes as an equivalent average excise tax rate measured per millilitre of fluid.ResultsIn 2020, the average American resided in a location with $3.08 in cigarette taxes and $0.34 in e-cigarette taxes (assuming 1 pack=0.7 fluid mL).ConclusionsThe public availability of this state and local standardised e-cigarette tax data will allow tobacco control researchers to study the relationship between e-cigarette taxes and tobacco and related outcomes more effectively.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex people have unique health and health care needs that are inadequately met. An eight-hour symposium was developed at the George Washington University (GW) to better prepare health professional students and faculty to care for sexual and gender minority patients. This study compared surveyed learner knowledge, attitudes, and clinical preparedness, as well as perceived value of interprofessional learning, before and after the symposium. Learners at post-test were compared to an interprofessional group who did not attend the symposium. Results indicated statistically significant improvements for confidence in all learning objectives (p < .05) and for two of three factors (knowledge and clinical preparedness) of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Development of Clinical Skills Scale (LGBT-DOCSS). In contrast to the comparison group, symposium participants at posttest rated higher on learning objectives, the attitudes and knowledgeLGBT-DOCSS factors, and perceived value of interprofessional learning as measured by four items from the Interprofessional Learning Scale. This innovation is a starting point to address an identified learning gap. Findings support the benefit of greater curricular integration of sexual and gender minority health content through interprofessional learning to ensure preparedness of all practitioners. ARTICLE HISTORY
There is a growing number of post-treatment cancer survivors in the USA. Cancer survivors can have a variety of care needs and health care professionals must be prepared to meet these needs. The American Cancer Society (ACS) and the George Washington University (GW) Cancer Center developed The Cancer Survivorship E-Learning Series for Primary Care Providers (E-Learning Series) to address the need for cancer survivorship training and education among health care professionals with a focus on primary care. The GW Cancer Center analyzed evaluation data from 1341 learners who voluntarily completed a module pre-and postassessment between April 15, 2013, and December 31, 2017, to assess differences in self-rated confidence, on a five-point Likert scale, to meet learning objectives. Descriptive statistics characterize the sample and paired samples t tests were used to assess any statistically significant differences from pre to post (p < 0.05). Most learners were nurses (75.19%) and a majority of learners worked in oncology (74.68%) followed by primary care (11.60%). At pre-assessment, the module with the lowest mean selfconfidence rating was 3.16 (SD = 0.81) and the highest was 3.60 (SD = 0.73). At post-assessment, module means in self-confidence rating ranged from 4.08 (SD = 0.46) to 4.26 (SD = 0.56). All differences were statistically significant (p < 0.0001). Results highlight gaps in confidence among health care professionals regarding cancer survivorship care and the need for continuing education. There is also a need for additional uptake of the E-Learning Series among primary care providers. Results suggest that the E-Learning Series is an effective educational tool that increases learners' confidence in providing cancer survivorship care.
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.