Benefits of a Multidisciplinary Clinic Operations Workgroup as a Forum for Navigator Coordinators and Quality Improvement

November 2017 Vol 8, No 11
Alyssa Pauls, RN, BSN, OCN
Lehigh Valley Health Network
Allentown, PA
Kathleen Sevedge, RN, MA, AOCN
Lehigh Valley Health Network
Allentown, PA
Cynthia Smith, RN, BSN, OCN, MA
Lehigh Valley Health Network
Allentown, PA
Laura Beaupre, RN, BSN, OCN, CN-BN
Lehigh Valley Health Network
Allentown, PA
Maritza Chicas, RN, BSN, OCN
Lehigh Valley Health Network
Allentown, PA

Background: Multidisciplinary care is recognized as a sign of quality cancer care according to several organizations, including the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the Institute of Medicine, the National Cancer Institute Community Cancer Centers Program (NCCCP), and the Oncology Roundtable. Navigators are identified as an effective strategy for promoting care coordination. The NCCCP developed an assessment tool to measure maturation and quality improvement of multidisciplinary care. This tool was used for measuring baseline and improvement in developing multidisciplinary clinics (MDCs) at Lehigh Valley Health Network (LVHN). Assessment areas associated with nurse navigators include case planning, treatment team integration, integration of care coordinators, clinical trials, and quality improvement. In 2011, LVHN implemented nurse navigator–coordinated MDCs utilizing the NCCCP Navigation Assessment Tool. Navigators provide individualized needs assessment and ancillary service referrals for all MDC patients, which promote quality care coordination (Friedman et al, 2014). Presently, we have disease-specific MDCs for patients with thoracic, gastrointestinal, skin/soft tissue, breast, and genitourinary cancers. The need was recognized for an MDC workgroup to identify and discuss operational challenges for MDCs and implement process improvements.

Objectives: Workgroup objectives include identifying MDC operational challenges, tracking referrals, volumes, clinical trial accrual, patient outmigration, and implementing and evaluating process improvements.

Methods: Monthly meetings are attended by navigators, a physician champion, cancer center leadership, oncology practice managers, and schedulers. An Excel spreadsheet is used to track MDC data. The navigators enter and report the data for each respective MDC, including number of referrals, total number of visits, and target referral volumes. Reasons for discrepancies between referral target volumes and actual visits are discussed. Trends in referral volumes help determine the need for and frequency of MDCs and optimal patient volumes. Operational challenges encountered within the MDCs are discussed, as are reasons for patient outmigration. Navigator referrals for patients with head and neck cancer are tracked in anticipation of the development of an MDC for this population.

Results: All MDCs have increased from a baseline score of Level 1 to Level 5 based on the NCCCP Navigation Assessment Tool for the areas associated with the navigator role. All MDC patients are screened for clinical trials, with an average annual accrual of 25 patients. Referrals increased from 379 in FY14 to 608 in FY17. Visits increased from 260 in FY14 to 412 in FY16. Operational process improvement included designation of physician backup to avoid cancellations due to lack of physician availability. Annual review of skin/soft tissue volume data has resulted in decreasing the number of appointment slots by 1 appointment per MDC. Improvement in timely scheduling of patients for post-MDC appointments has occurred through increased involvement of navigators in identifying and facilitating appointments. Head and neck cancer patient referrals support development of an MDC for this population, and planning is under way.

Conclusions: The navigator-coordinated MDC work-group provides a forum for process improvement. Utilizing the NCCCP Navigation Assessment Tool provides a baseline and pathway for MDC improvement. Outmigration data collected in FY17 will serve as a baseline as we focus on patient retention in FY18.

Related Articles
Assessment of Side Effects (SEs) Impacting Quality of Life (QOL) in Patients (Pts) Undergoing Treatment (tx) for Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC) in Clinical Practice: A Real-World (RW) Multicountry Survey
November 2022 Vol 13, No 11
To examine how SEs impacting QOL in pts with ABC are perceived.
Intracranial Activity of Tepotinib in Patients with MET Exon 14 (METex14) Skipping Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Enrolled in VISION
November 2022 Vol 13, No 11
To provide analysis of the intracranial activity of tepotinib in patients with METex14 skipping NSCLC with BM from the VISION study to aid oncology nurse navigators who manage this population of patients.
MOMENTUM: Phase 3 Randomized Study of Momelotinib (MMB) versus Danazol (DAN) in Symptomatic and Anemic Myelofibrosis (MF) Patients Previously Treated with a JAK Inhibitor
November 2022 Vol 13, No 11
MF is a rare bone marrow cancer characterized by fibrosis, abnormal blood cell production, and dysregulated JAK/STAT signaling.1,2
Last modified: August 10, 2023

Subscribe Today!

To sign up for our print publication or e-newsletter, please enter your contact information below.

I'd like to receive:

  • First Name *
    Last Name *
     
     
    Profession or Role
    Primary Specialty or Disease State
    Country