Using navigators to improve care of underserved patients: current practices and approaches.

Institute for Health Policy Studies and Department of Anthropology, History, and Social Medicine, University of California-San Francisco, CA 94118, USA.
Cancer (Impact Factor: 4.9). 09/2005; 104(4):848-55. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.21214
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Logistic, cultural, educational, and other barriers can impede the delivery of high-quality cancer care to underserved patients. Patient navigation services represent one innovation for addressing perceived barriers to care encountered by disadvantaged patients. In this report, the authors have 1) defined patient navigation, distinguishing it from other cancer support services; 2) described how programs are organized; and 3) discussed the need for research on program effectiveness.
Information was examined on navigation programs published in the scientific literature and on line. Qualitative research also was conducted, consisting of direct observation of patient care in cancer clinics with and without navigators in northern California, in-person interviews with personnel and patients in the clinics observed, and telephone interviews with navigators at four sites across the United States.
The authors found that navigation services have been implemented at all stages of cancer care: prevention, screening, treatment, and survival. Navigators differ from other cancer support personnel in their orientation toward flexible problem solving to overcome perceived barriers to care rather than the provision of a predefined set of services. There are no rigorous demonstrations of the effects and effectiveness of navigation, although such studies are underway.
Currently, patient navigation is understudied, and literature documenting its effects and effectiveness is scant. Rigorous studies are needed of the navigator role and program costs and benefits. Such studies will facilitate an assessment of program effectiveness, feasibility across a range of health care settings, and performance relative to alternative approaches for addressing barriers to care among the underserved.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Feasibility studies play a crucial role in determining whether complex, community-based interventions should be subject to efficacy testing. Reports of such studies often focus on efficacy potential but less often examine other elements of feasibility, such as acceptance by clients and professionals, practicality, and system integration, which are critical to decisions for proceeding with controlled efficacy testing. Although stakeholder partnership in feasibility studies is widely suggested to facilitate the research process, strengthen relevance, and increase knowledge transfer, little is written about how this occurs or its consequences and outcomes. We began to address these gaps in knowledge in a feasibility study of a health intervention for women survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV) conducted in partnership with policy, community and practitioner stakeholders. We employed a mixed-method design, combining a single-group, pre-post intervention study with 52 survivors of IPV, of whom 42 completed data collection, with chart review data and interviews of 18 purposefully sampled participants and all 9 interventionists. We assessed intervention feasibility in terms of acceptability, demand, practicality, implementation, adaptation, integration, and efficacy potential. Our findings demonstrate the scope of knowledge attainable when diverse elements of feasibility are considered, as well as the benefits and challenges of partnership. The implications of diverse perspectives on knowledge transfer are discussed. Our findings show the importance of examining elements of feasibility for complex community-based health interventions as a basis for determining whether controlled intervention efficacy testing is justified and for refining both the intervention and the research design. © 2015 The Authors. Research in Nursing & Health published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    Research in Nursing & Health 02/2015; · 1.16 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives Interventions are needed to reduce disparities in breast and cervical cancer (BCC) for Latinas in the USA. This study compares screening adherence between two educational outreach messages followed by navigation support to increase BCC screening for Latinas. Methods A cluster-randomized study (by group) of 1,333 diverse Latinas in Arkansas, Buffalo, and New York City (2007–2009) attending group educational programs on cancer or diabetes screening was conducted. Screening adherence by each program type was analyzed at 2 months followed by analysis of navigation support for non-adherent women at 8 months. Results Participation in educational programs alone significantly increased mammography (O.R. = 2.16), clinical breast exams (O.R. = 2.14), and Pap tests (O.R. = 2.14) from baseline to 2 months with no significant differences by message type. Screening further increased with the addition of navigation. Conclusions Specific health messaging may not be as critical to increasing BCC screening behaviors as cultural- and language-specific outreach into the community disseminating resources about accessing services. Moreover, the addition of navigation services and, potentially, the time lapse between follow-up intervals, significantly increased screening regardless of country of birth, documentation status, insurance status, or geographic location.
    Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities. 06/2014; 1(2):85-100.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cancer patients face a myriad of psychosocial and practical issues. Especially challenging is the time from an initial diagnosis to the onset of treatment and patient navigation services are important to guide patients, especially underserved populations, through this maze of uncertainty. Here we report on the Pennsylvania Patient Navigator Demonstration Project (PaPND) designed to evaluate the acceptability, feasibility, and impact of a culturally and linguistically appropriate non-clinical navigator program. The development of the project, based on behavioral theory and community-based participatory research principles, is described. Forty-four cancer patients from diverse backgrounds participated, which included a baseline assessment, navigation services, and a four week and twelve week follow-up assessment. On average, participants experienced 1.8 barriers with transportation and insurance issues the most common barriers. The majority (56%) of the barriers required more than an hour of the navigator's time to address, with insurance, transportation and caregiver/support issues requiring the most time. Overall patients were fairly satisfied with the navigation services. The findings showed improvement patient's stress-related thoughts, cognition (understanding of their disease), expectancies and beliefs or values/goals, as well as self-efficacy of managing cancer related issues from the baseline to follow-up assessments. The evaluation results suggest that providing and connecting cancer patients to appropriate information to improve their understanding of their diagnosis and recommended treatments needs to be addressed, and where the integration of non-clinical and clinical navigation is essential. In addition, more attention to the assessment of psychosocial issues, such as the patients' emotional worries, and more comprehensive training in these areas would enhance navigation programs.
    Journal of oncology navigation & survivorship. 06/2012; 3(3):14-23.