Areas of Expertise
Oncology Program Strategic Planning
Operational and Business Planning
Physician Collaboration & Integration
Facility Assessment
Reading List and Summaries
Resources for Cancer Center Planning and Oncology Consulting
Radiation & Prostate Cancer
Dilemma & Decisions
|
Controversies over screening and treatment for early stage prostate disease are not the only debates going on in prostate cancer care. Physicians and radiation oncology leaders planning to expand their prostate treatment service lines must also assess the clinical (i.e. outcomes, side effects and biochemical control) and financial (i.e. cost versus reimbursement) aspects of the available radiation-based treatment modalities....
» Read More |
OMB Announces First Major Grants Policy Reforms Since 1970’s
Period for Public Comment Ends March 29, 2012
|
Federal grants, and the policies that guide them, including overhead (indirect costs) rates, audits, the cost of “computing devices”, and even revising and renaming the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance is on The Office of Management & Budget’s (OMB) radar screen. The OMB announced on February 28, 2012 that they intend to evaluate potential reforms to Federal grants policies. According to the Proposed Rules, printed in the Federal Register....
» Read More |
Target Therapy Finder
High Tech App Provides a New Cancer Care Decision Tool
|
Have you got an iPhone? Or maybe an iPad? Now it may help you and your physician identify appropriate diagnostic tests for melanoma, options for optimum treatment and clinical trials for this most serious of all skin cancers – options and trials that are keyed to an individual patient’s specific melanoma subtype and several specific patient characteristics....
» Read More |
Cancer Care and Survivors
Cancer Survivors’ Increase – Cancer Rehabilitation Programs Offer Program Opportunities
|
Today, almost 4% of the US public are cancer survivors, not including individuals diagnosed with common (non-melanoma) skin cancers. On March 11, 2011 the Centers for Disease Control announced in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly (Cancer Survivors – United States, 2007) that the number of cancer survivors in the US had increased to 11.7 million within this decade, up from 9.8 million in 2001, and from 3 million in 1971. The CDC study findings further reveal...
» Read More |
Rising Costs of Cancer Care
|
“Unsustainable Cancer Costs” read a Bloomberg News headline last month. The news story quoted an expert panel assembled by The Lancet Oncology medical journal, saying, "Cancer treatment costs are rising at such a rapid rate that they threaten to become 'unsustainable' even for rich countries.” Cancer care costs, estimated in 2009 to be $286B worldwide (1/2 of which are pegged to cancer treatment, with another 50% calculated as “lost production”) could not be sustained at that level. The Bloomberg story attributes the rise to the world population aging (leading to more cancer cases, as the century unfolds), higher costs for drugs and new technologies, and to “overuse of tests and expensive diagnostics.”...
» Read More |
Personal Medicine & Genomic Profiling Enter the Mainstream?
Direct-to-Physician Marketing
|
While limited prognostic genomic testing is available for breast cancer, for most tumor sites, personalized medicine tests are still seen as “on the drawing board” or at best, experimental. However, beginning in 2008, three companies have entered the market with commercially available tests that provide genomic profiles of individual patients’ tumors. Some front-line physicians, faced with patients for whom there exists no (or no untried) validated options available for their patients’ disease, or advanced state of disease, are drawn to the opportunities offered by these emerging, commercially available genomic tests...
» Read More |
Cancer Program Success Questions
Cancer Registry Class of Case as a Decision-Support Resource: Part II – Non-Analytic Cases
|
Non-analytic cases are classified, in the “new” system, according to the reason a patient is non-analytic (to the reporting institution), or the reason a patient who never received care at this institution has had his/her case abstracted. Non-analytic cases are coded with two-digit numbers ranging from 30-49. It may be important to note that the Commission on Cancer does not require accredited institutions to abstract non-analytic cases. However, many community registries do abstract such cases; perhaps they are required to by their central registries, by the hospital, by their State Registry, or as a program or hospital institution decision.
» Read More » Click here to read Part I of this article |
IOM Releases New Report on Cancer Treatment Planning
|
Earlier this month, on June 13, 2011, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) issued a pre-publication copy of a Workshop Summary that may assist community cancer program leaders to establish more formal multidisciplinary pre-treatment planning—a model that includes written treatment plans—for their cancer patients.
» Read More |
Cancer Program Success Questions
Cancer Registry Class of Case as a Decision-Support Resource: Part I – Analytic Cases
» Read More » Click here to read Part II of this article |
Operational and Financial Benchmarking for Oncology
| Cancer Program leaders often ask for accepted standards or benchmarks to establish baselines as they prepare a compelling (and successful) business case for whatever service extension, facility improvement, or staff recruitment challenge the program currently faces. Certain benchmarks, such as profitability, are well established. To address several less quantified data standards, The Oncology Group queried participants on the Association of Cancer Executives (ACE) listserv. The authors asked experienced administrators “What oncology-specific benchmarks or metrics do you find useful for financial reporting?” This article displays and discusses various operational and financial benchmarks, as identified in the original survey (2007) and in the follow-up survey (2010). » Download More |
Providing Palliative Care: The Right Thing to Do
| Providing access to palliative care is the right thing to do for patients and is an integral part of quality patient care. The number of Palliative Care Programs in large and not-for-profit U.S. hospitals has increased significantly over the last eight years. Even with these improved numbers, there are still gaps in providing palliative care for cancer patients. Palliative care for cancer patients can be integrated into the therapy regimen without sacrificing curative intent, while hospice care is clearly focused on the dying patient who no longer benefits from therapy. This article identifies the reasons for providing Palliative Care Programs, discusses models for such programs, and includes information on how to involve the cancer care team. » Read More |
Comparative Effectiveness Research: Implications for Healthcare Executives©
| Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) aims to improve health outcomes by developing and disseminating evidence-based information to patients, physicians, and healthcare decision makers. This information compares efficacy among all, or many, of the most often-used treatment options. CER’s purpose is to identify the most effective and efficient interventions that have the potential to cure the disease or alleviate specific healthcare problems. This article provides an overview of Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) as the federal government uses it in various bills and funding opportunities. Ms. Edens also discusses CER’s impact on reducing health care costs. » Download More |
Developing a Quality Improvement Program
| Many oncology program leaders continue to search for a clear Quality Improvement process framework for their cancer programs. Rodger Winn, MD, former Director of the NQF Cancer Project and former Senior Associate with the Oncology Group, developed a QI framework to enable community cancer program leaders to evaluate the quality of their oncology services. » Download More |
Design of the Ideal Workplace: Strategies and Lessons Learned
| As the demand for cancer care grows, the concomitant drive toward developing cancer centers and similar facilities also grows. A cancer center’s facility design must appropriately address patient and family needs, while supporting the high tech treatment and interventional processes endemic to 21st century cancer treatment. Moreover, successful buildings also maximize the feelings of comfort and reassurance while the patient is receiving treatment or counseling. This article discusses outpatient cancer-care design and issues the lead administrator will encounter during a cancer center design/build project. » Download More |
Fragmented Care Summary
| Patients have increased their expectations for a coordinated cancer care experience at their local community Cancer Center. Clinical and administrative leaders have struggled with providing integrated care in a setting that encompasses multiple private practices, few shared EHRs, numerous physician offices (and other sites of service), and unaligned financial incentives. The Institute of Medicine weighed in on the consequences of fragmented cancer patient care 10 years ago. Today, numerous cancer programs have invested heavily in patient navigators in efforts to mitigate dissatisfaction with sequential care. This TOG Research Brief offers data on the lack of coordinated care (at the community hospital level), exclusive focus group findings about patient satisfiers, as well as specific 'Next Steps' program leaders can take to ramp up their institution's integrated cancer care delivery. » Download More |
Niche Summary
| Can a hospital develop a site-specific niche service, such as a breast center or a prostate services program, without first establishing a robust general cancer program? The Oncology Group asked this question to experienced cancer program administrators. Their answers varied, but their advice was practical and actionable. To learn more, read about it in the exclusive TOG Research Brief on Niche Programs. » Download More |