The current status of follow-up services for childhood cancer survivors, are we meeting goals and expectations: A report from the consortium for New England childhood cancer survivors

Background National guidelines for follow‐up care of childhood cancer survivors have been established. It has not been determined if pediatric oncology programs have successfully incorporated these standards for long term survivor care into clinical practice. Methods To describe survivor services av...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Pediatric blood & cancer 2011-12, Vol.57 (6), p.1062-1066
Hauptverfasser: Kenney, Lisa B., Bradeen, Heather, Kadan-Lottick, Nina S., Diller, Lisa, Homans, Alan, Schwartz, Cindy L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background National guidelines for follow‐up care of childhood cancer survivors have been established. It has not been determined if pediatric oncology programs have successfully incorporated these standards for long term survivor care into clinical practice. Methods To describe survivor services available in a geographically and socio‐economically diverse region of the US we surveyed all 12 academic institutions with pediatric oncology programs in the New England (NE) region. Results Participating sites diagnose a median of 34 (range 10–250) new pediatric cancers annually. The 12 institutions have 11 survivor clinics. Clinics are staffed by: pediatric oncologists (11/11); nurse practitioners (7/11); social workers/psychologists (9/11); RNs (5/11); primary care physicians (3/11); and sub‐specialists (3/11). Most clinics recommend annual follow‐up for all survivors (7/11); however, point of entry into survivor programs is variable. Treatment summaries and care plans are part of survivor care at each program. Almost all (10/11) refer to sub‐specialists to manage late effects. Only 4 programs identified a policy for transitioning survivors to adult care (2 to adult survivor programs, 2 to adult primary‐care) and 4 reported this as a problem. Two clinics had no designated funding for survivor services; 8/11 receive institutional support; 5/11 philanthropic. Five institutions conduct research in survivorship (1 government‐funded, 2 philanthropy‐funded, and 2 both). Conclusions Pediatric oncology services in the NE region are making progress toward meeting follow‐up care goals for childhood cancer survivors. Funding for resource intense programs, transitioning care to adult clinical services, volume of sub‐specialty referral, and participation in research are common challenges. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2011; 57: 1062–1066. © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
ISSN:1545-5009
1545-5017
DOI:10.1002/pbc.22924