4/18/2012 1 Evaluating Patient Navigation: Patient reported outcomes Kevin Fiscella, MD, MPH Department of Family Medicine Wilmot Cancer Center Patient navigation was explicitly designed to address disparities in cancer care 2 “This disconnect between what we know and what we do is a major determinant of health disparities…Patient navigation is a healthcare delivery support system with the principle function of eliminating barriers to timely delivery of health care for individual patients across the healthcare continuum.” –Harold P. Freeman, MD 2011
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
procedures, practices, and payments that result in
inequitable allocation of resources for socially
disadvantaged patients across the cancer care
continuum.
� System dysfunction – Failure to match available
resources with the needs of socially disadvantaged
patients.14
4/18/2012
8
Patient navigation can mitigate the second source
� It is a “patient-centric health care service delivery
model” that aims to address patients’ unique needs
using available resources.
� Its power stems in part from a personal
relationship between the navigator and the patient.
� It offers potential for patient empowerment.
15
Cancer care without navigation
4/18/2012
9
Navigation helpstip the balance
to reducedisparities in
care across the cancer
continuum
Key scientific questions regarding navigation
� Under what circumstances will it prove most
effective?
� Which patients derive the most benefit?
� Who should we target?
� How should it be delivered?
� Which of its components produce what results?
18
4/18/2012
10
Answers require use of valid measures
� Research and program evaluation require use of
scientifically valid measures.
� What measures are appropriate to assess patient
navigation?
19
Identifying measures
� The ACS convened the National Patient Navigator
Leadership Summit, March 23-24, 2010.
� Diverse patient navigation stakeholders
participated.
� Our work group task: identify Patient Reported
Outcome measures for patient navigation across the
cancer care continuum.20
4/18/2012
11
What are patient reported outcome (PRO) measures?
� Scientifically valid measures reported by patients
that are specifically designed to capture outcomes
that are clinically relevant and meaningful to
patients.
� Common examples include patient ratings of their
health, symptoms, experience, pain and
psychological distress.21
Process of identifying PROs
� Agreement on a definition of navigation.
� Consensus on a conceptual model.
� Identification of key domains for PROs relevant to
navigation.
� Determination of criteria for selecting existing
measures from these domains.
� Selection of measures.22
4/18/2012
12
Definition of Patient Navigation
“Individualized assistance offered to patients, families, and caregivers to help overcome barriers and facilitate timely access to quality medical and psychosocial care from pre-diagnosis through all phase of the cancer experience.”
C-Change
23
Conceptual model for patient navigation
PatientNavigation
4/18/2012
13
Navigation starts with relationship
PatientNavigation
Navigator-Patient
Relationship
Technical competence is the other building block
PatientNavigation
Navigator-Patient
Relationship
Technical Competence
4/18/2012
14
Task #1: emotional support
PatientNavigation
Navigator-Patient
Relationship
Technical Competence
EmotionalSupport
PatientNavigation
Navigator-Patient
Relationship
Technical Competence
EmotionalSupport
Education &Coaching
Task #2: education and coaching
4/18/2012
15
PatientNavigation
Navigator-Patient
Relationship
Technical Competence
EmotionalSupport
Education &Coaching
Liaison &Advocate
Task #3: acting as a liaison and advocate
PatientNavigation
Navigator-Patient
Relationship
Technical Competence
EmotionalSupport
Education &Coaching
Liaison &Advocate
Referral toCommunity Resources
Task #4: referral to community resources
4/18/2012
16
PatientNavigation
Navigator-Patient
Relationship
Technical Competence
EmotionalSupport
Education &Coaching
Liaison &Advocate
Referral toCommunity Resources
Address logistical barriers
Task #5: addressing logistical barriers
Navigation is notprescriptive –one size fits
one size.
EmotionalSupport
Education &Coaching
Liaison &Advocate
Referral toCommunity Resources
Address logistical barriers
4/18/2012
17
33
EmotionalSupport
Education &Coaching
Liaison &Advocate
Referral toCommunity Resources
Address logistical barriers
Navigation represents a complex and
adaptivedelivery model that is grounded in the
needs and preferences of the
patient.
Intermediate PRO #1: satisfaction with navigation
34
EmotionalSupport
Education &Coaching
Liaison &Advocate
Referral toCommunity Resources
Address logistical barriers
SatisfactionWith PN
4/18/2012
18
35
EmotionalSupport
Education &Coaching
Liaison &Advocate
Referral toCommunity Resources
Address logistical barriers
SatisfactionWith PN
Self Management
Intermediate PRO #2: patient confidence in self management
36
EmotionalSupport
Education &Coaching
Liaison &Advocate
Referral toCommunity Resources
Address logistical barriers
SatisfactionWith PN
Self Management
Culturally Competent care
Intermediate PRO #3: patient perceived culturally competent
care
4/18/2012
19
37
EmotionalSupport
Education &Coaching
Liaison &Advocate
Referral toCommunity Resources
Address logistical barriers
SatisfactionWith PN
Self Management
Culturally Competent care
Barriers tocare
Intermediate PRO #4: patient perceived barriers
Major PROs #1: satisfaction with cancer related care
EmotionalSupport
Education &Coaching
Liaison &Advocate
Referral toCommunity Resources
Address logistical barriers
SatisfactionWith PN
Self Management
Culturally Competent care
Barriers tocare
SatisfactionWith Cancer
RelatedCare
4/18/2012
20
EmotionalSupport
Education &Coaching
Liaison &Advocate
Referral toCommunity Resources
Address logistical barriers
SatisfactionWith PN
Self Management
Culturally Competent care
Barriers tocare
SatisfactionWith Cancer
RelatedCare
Patient Function
Major PRO #2: Patient reported function
EmotionalSupport
Education &Coaching
Liaison &Advocate
Referral toCommunity Resources
Address logistical barriers
SatisfactionWith PN
Self Management
Culturally Competent care
Barriers tocare
SatisfactionWith Cancer
RelatedCare
Patient Function
PatientSymptomBurden
Major PRO #3: Patient symptoms
4/18/2012
21
Criteria for choice of PROs
� Face validity.
� Potential responsiveness to navigation.
� Reliability.
� Construct validity in relevant populations.
41
Review of existing measures
� PROMIS -Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement
Information System.
see http://www.nihpromis.org/
� CAHPS -Consumer Assessment of Health Providers.
see https://www.cahps.ahrq.gov/default.asp
� Measures developed through the NCI-sponsored Patient
Navigation Research Program.
� Other PROs potentially relevant to navigation.42
4/18/2012
22
Screening
� Self reported adherence to screening (NHIS).
� Self efficacy (Perceived Health Competence)
� Barriers (MEPS).
� Cultural competency (CAHPS supplemental
measures).
43
Follow-up on abnormal screening
� Self reported adherence to follow-up (NHIS).
� Patient Satisfaction with Cancer Care (PNRP).
� Psychological distress (PROMIS).
44
4/18/2012
23
Cancer treatment
� Self reported adherence to treatment (MOS
general adherence).
� Self reported medication adherence (Morisky).
� Attitudes and Beliefs about Medication (BMQ).
� Cost-related non-adherence (MCBS non-adherence
scale).
45
Cancer treatment
� Self efficacy for communication (CASE-Cancer).
� Alliance -Patient satisfaction with patient
navigation (PNRP).
� Health status – PROMIS/FACIT.
� Symptoms – PROMIS.
� Comorbidity – Charlson.46
4/18/2012
24
Survivorship
� Previously mentioned generic measures.
� Patient Activation Measure (PAM).
47
End of Life
� Symptom burden (PROMIS).
� Functional status (PROMIS).
� Family satisfaction (FamCare).
� Caregiver burden (Zarit Burden Interview).
48
4/18/2012
25
Conclusion
� There are range of PROs relevant to patient
navigation across the cancer care continuum.
� Which will prove most sensitive to navigation for
whom and under what circumstances is area ripe for
research.
49
Acknowledgements
PRO Work Group: Sean Ransom (Co-chair), Pascal
Jean-Pierre, David Cella, Kevin Stein, Joseph Bauer,
Rebecca Crane Okada, Sharon Gentry, Rosalie
Canosa, Tenbroeck Smith, Jean Sellers, Emelia
Jankowski, and Karyn Walsh.
Funders: ACS and NCI (U01 CA116924-01)
50
4/18/2012
26
THANK-YOU
51
Satisfaction with cancer related Care
� health concerns were understood.
�I felt that I was treated with courtesy and respect.
�I felt included in decisions about my health.
�I was told how to take care of myself.
�I felt encouraged to talk about my personal health concerns.
�I felt I had enough time with my doctor.
�I felt too rushed.
�My questions were answered to my satisfaction.
52
4/18/2012
27
Satisfaction with cancer related Care
� The written materials I received were useful to me.
� I did not get a good explanation of all the tests I took.
� Health condition explained in a way I could understand.
� My treatment was explained in a way I could understand
� I had to wait a long time at the clinic or hospital.
� Making an appointment was easy.
� I was worried about paying for the services I received.
� It was a hassle to arrange for transportation to the clinic.
53
Satisfaction with navigation (interpersonal)
I feel my navigator …..
�1. is easy to talk to
�2. listens to my problems
�3. is dependable
�4. is easy for me to reach
�5. cares about me personally
�6. is courteous and respectful to me
�7. gives me enough time
�8. figures out the important issues in my health care
�9. makes me feel comfortable 54
4/18/2012
28
Satisfaction with navigation (logistical)For this problem, were you very satisfied, a little satisfied, not satisfied with the
help you received from the navigator or this was not a problem.
� making medical appointments
� understanding what you were being told to do
� getting results of tests
� dealing with financial concerns related to getting the care…
� getting transportation to the doctor’s office
� encouraging you to talk to the doctor about your concerns
� dealing with fears related to your health issues
� getting the health information you needed
� making you more involved in decisions about your health care55
� dealing with work or employer issues related to health care
�understanding your health issues
� knowing who to call when you had a question
� learning about services in the community that are available to you
� dealing with housing and landlord issues
� dealing with the paperwork
� understanding letters, reports, and health education materials
� getting child care or eldercare so that you could go…
� dealing with health insurance matters
� dealing with doctors…others who do not speak your language
� overcoming barriers related to a physical disability