e-Poster Presentation Clinical Oncology Society of Australia Annual Scientific Meeting 2021

Do specialists use survivorship care plans? A qualitative analysis (#252)

Sim Yee (Cindy) Tan 1 2 3 , Haryana Dhillon 4 , Chanelle Mak 1 2 , Roger Liang 1 , Kim Kerin-Ayres 1 5 , Kylie Vuong 6 , Ashanya Malalasekera 1 , Janette Vardy 1 3
  1. Concord Cancer Centre , Concord Hospital, Concord, NSW, Australia
  2. Nutrition and Dietetics Department, Concord Hospital, Concord, NSW, Australia
  3. Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Concord, NSW, Australia
  4. Centre for Medical Psychology and Evidence-based Decision-making, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  5. Nursing Services, Concord Hospital, Concord, NSW, Australia
  6. School of Population Health, UNSW, Sydney

Background:

Survivorship Care Plans (SCP) have been proposed and used as communication tools to summarise cancer diagnosis and treatment, including survivors’ symptoms, side-effects, needs, and a plan to address these needs. The Sydney Cancer Survivorship Centre (SCSC) implemented the use of structured SCPs from its inception in 2013; they are completed at survivors’ first visit to the SCSC Clinic. It is currently unknown if and how cancer specialists use SCPs.

 

Aim: To explore cancer specialists’ use and perceptions of SCPs in follow-up cancer care.

 

Method:

We interviewed cancer specialists (medical oncologists, surgeons and radiation oncologists) who refer patients to the SCSC for survivorship care.  Consenting cancer specialists participated in a single interview conducted either face-to-face or via telephone. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Content analysis was performed to identify recurrent themes.

 

Results: A total of 15 interviews were completed; 1 was discarded due to poor audio quality. We analysed the interviews from nine medical oncologists, one radiation oncologist, and four surgeons. The median age was 43 years; nine interviewees were females and most reported less than 20 years of work experience as cancer specialists. Themes that emerged were: awareness, access, SCP (content and format), SPC use, value (SCP and SCSC service), process, systemic issues, and future recommendations.  Interviewees were aware of SCPs, but its use was limited and varied. Participants perceived SCPs as useful for cancer survivors and their general practitioners but of limited relevance to their own practice. The interviewees recommended: changes to the content and format of SCP to increase relevance and usability, increased information about follow-up guidelines, and greater information for survivors.

 

Conclusions:

Adapting the format of SCPs to more structured summaries and incorporating them into the hospital electronic medical record as a specific named file would improve accessibility and usability.