M. Hewitt, S. Greenfield and E. Stovall, “From Cancer Patient to Cancer Survivor: Lost in Transition. Committee on Cancer Survivorship: Improving Care and Quality of Life, National Cancer Policy Board. Institute of Medicine and National Research Council of the National Academies,” National Academy Press, Washington DC, 2005.

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: Evaluation of Methods for Dissemination of Prostate Cancer Survivorship Guidelines: A Survey of Primary Care Providers

  AUTHORS: Shawn J. Mendonca, Manijeh Berenji, Conrad M. Tobert, Heather Stetler, Deb Bisel, Brian R. Lane

  KEYWORDS: Prostate Cancer; Survivorship; Survey; Primary Care Physicians; Guidelines

  JOURNAL NAME: Open Journal of Urology, Vol.3 No.3, July 12, 2013

  ABSTRACT: Objectives: To assess potential knowledge gaps between primary care providers (PCPs) and cancer specialists, Michigan Cancer Consortium guidelines were developed and disseminated statewide. We evaluated the impact of dissemination of these guidelines on PCP attitudes and beliefs regarding management of prostate cancer (PC) post-treatment sequelae. Methods: Guidelines were disseminated via hard-copy and web-link mailed to 12,000 Michigan PCPs in 2009, and via 5 CME presentations to 181 PCPs in 2010-2011. 132 initial surveys were collected from CME attendees and 549 follow-up surveys were received 20 months after the initial mailing. Results: Surveyed PCPs indicated erectile dysfunction (88%), incontinence (84%), anxiety (54%) and fear of the unknown (50%) as frequent post-treatment sequelae. A minority of PCPs (≤41%) felt “very comfortable” assessing PC patients for ten post-treatment sequelae at the initial survey, which increased by up to 27% on follow-up survey. 93% of PCPs that received guidelines by mail and CME presentation had incorporated them into practice, compared with 72% of PCPs that received guidelines solely by mailing. Similarly, a greater proportion reported practice pattern changes (65% vs. 34%, p = 0.0003). A higher proportion felt CME events (69% vs. 57%) and expert presentations (64% vs. 44%) were “very effective”, when comparing attendees and non-attendees. Conclusions: Guideline distribution resulted in increased comfort with survivorship issues and incorporation into the practices of the majority of PCPs surveyed. A greater impact was observed in PCPs that attended a CME presentation than in those that received guidelines only by mailing.