Patient Navigation: Development of a Protocol for Describing What Navigator's Do

Department of Health Policy and Management, Boston University School of Public Health, 715 Albany St. T3W, Boston, MA 02118-2526, USA.
Health Services Research (Impact Factor: 2.78). 04/2010; 45(2):514-31. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2009.01079.x
Source: PubMed


To develop a structured protocol for observing patient navigators at work, describing and characterizing specific activities related to their goals.
Fourteen extended observations of navigators at three programs within a national trial of patient navigation.
Preliminary observations were guided by a conceptual model derived from the literature and expert consensus, then coded to develop and refine observation categories. These findings were then used to develop the protocol.
Observation fieldnotes were coded, using both a priori codes and new codes based on emergent themes. Using these codes, the team refined the model and constructed an observation tool that enables consistent categorization of the observed range of navigator actions.
Navigator actions across a wide variety of settings can be categorized in a matrix with two dimensions. One dimension categorizes the individuals and organizational entities with whom the navigator interacts; the other characterizes the types of tasks carried out by the navigators in support of their patients.
Use of this protocol will enable researchers to systematically characterize and compare navigator activities within and across programs.

Download full-text


Available from: Jack A Clark, Sep 30, 2015
26 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patient navigation requires that patient load be equitably distributed. We examined whether navigators could predict the relative amount of time needed by different patients for navigation. Analysis of 139 breast and colorectal cancer patients randomized to the navigation arm of a trial evaluating the effectiveness of navigation. Navigators completed a one-item scale estimating how much navigation time patients were likely to require. Participants were mostly females (89.2%) with breast cancer (83.4%); barriers to cancer care were insurance difficulties (26.6%), social support (18.0%), and transportation (14.4%). Navigator baseline estimates of navigation intensity predicted total navigation time, independent of patient characteristics. The total number of barriers, rather than any specific type of barrier, predicted increased navigator time, with a 16% increase for each barrier. Navigators' estimate of intensity independently predicts navigation time for cancer patients. Findings have implications for assigning navigator case loads.
    Journal of Cancer Education 05/2011; 26(4):761-6. DOI:10.1007/s13187-011-0234-y · 1.23 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Navigation services may be strengthened by establishing a partnership between the patient, family/caregiver, and the navigator. Involvement of a patient's familial or social network in the navigation process would allow patient navigators to spend more time and resources with the subset of patients who do not have support from family and friends. The Partnership Approach evolves from combining the strength of a patient's existing social support and network with the delivery of navigation services. To develop this novel approach, the Family and Caregiver Workgroup was convened at the American Cancer Society's National Leadership Summit. Individuals were asked to serve in this group due to their interest, research, or experience in family and caregiver issues. By the end of the Summit, the workgroup had achieved 3 major outcomes: 1) enhancement of current patient navigation services by building a partnership between the patient, family or primary caregivers, and navigators; 2) identification of a set of core functions that a family/caregiver could perform in a partnership; and 3) consensus on a set of metrics to use with caregivers and patients. Five major domains were selected to measure patient and/or caregiver outcomes: quality of life, satisfaction with care, social support, distress, and caregiver burden. Metrics appropriate for each domain were recommended. Integration of these domains and scales in current navigation services is needed to develop future research. Evidence from such research would help determine whether the Partnership Approach contributes to improved patient and caregiver outcomes.
    Cancer 08/2011; 117(15 Suppl):3592-3602. DOI:10.1002/cncr.26263 · 4.89 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The lack of comparable metrics to evaluate prevention and early detection patient navigation programs impeded the ability to identify best practices. The Prevention and Early Detection Workgroup of the Patient Navigation Leadership Summit was charged with making recommendations for common clinical metrics specific to the prevention and early detection phase of the cancer care continuum. The workgroup began with a review of existing literature to characterize variability in published navigation metrics; then developed a list of priority recommendations that would be applicable to the range of navigation settings (clinical, academic, or community-based). Recommendations for researchers and program evaluators included the following: 1) Clearly document key program characteristics; 2) Use a set of core data elements to form the basis of your reported metrics; and 3) Prioritize data collection using methods with the least amount of bias. If navigation programs explicitly state the context of their evaluation and choose from among the common set of data elements, meaningful comparisons among existing programs should be feasible.
    Cancer 08/2011; 117(15 Suppl):3553-64. DOI:10.1002/cncr.26267 · 4.89 Impact Factor
Show more