Nordic collaboration cancer care pathways Agenda 11.00 Welcome 11.10 Aim of the network 11.30 Selection of board for the network 11.45 Status for cancer care pathways in Sweden 12.00 Lunch 13.00 Status for cancer care pathways in Denmark and Norway 13.30 Cancer care pathways in Finland 14.15 Coffee 14.45 Ongoing research 16.45 Closing Remarks
Ongoing research A comparative Study of introducing standardized patient pathway as • health care reform in the three Scandinavian countries. (Per Magnus Maehle, Senada Hajdarevic, Rikke Aarhus, Erna Håland) • Identification and early detection of cancer patients in primary care. (Marcela Ewing) • Elderly Cancer Patients in Denmark - Routes to diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. (Bolette Danckert) • Exploring the implementation of the standardized cancer patient pathways (CPPs) in Sweden- a qualitative study. (Sara Ronja-Li Delilovic) Crowding out effects, what is the consequences in introducing • standardized patient pathway. (Sara Ronja-Li Delilovic) • Bacteriuria and other risk modulating factors for urothelial cancer in patients with macroscopic hematuria-A study made possible by the SVF investigation protocols. (Oskar Kulander)
Nordic collaboration cancer care pathways- Background • Meeting in Stockholm, Oslo and København • Areas for collaboration: – Diagnostic centres – Equal care – Patient experience – National cohorts – Coordinator – Individualized vs standardized care – Crowding out/side effects • Funding: • Swedish government- one meeting/year • Nordic Cancer Union- meeting, webbsite, common workspace (projectplace) • Application to Nordic council of ministers (Nordiska ministerrådet) TBD 15-16 nov
Webbsite • Contact information • Description of ongoing projects • Reporting on publications
Projectplace • Common workplace where we can share documents, communicate within the goups and with subgroups • Check out Webinars and videos on how to work in projectplace
Forming of Steering Committe • Two representatives from each country – Denmark: Linda Aagaard Thomsen, Henry Jensen – Finland:? – Iceland:? – Norway: Line Melby, Sissi Espetvedt – Sweden: Helena Brändström, Marcela Ewing • Responsibilites: – Arrange meeting(s) and workshop(s) – Decide on project support – Other functions?
Discussion in groups • Responsibilites for steering Committe? • Do we need common workspace and webbsite? • New areas of collaboration • Which groups are viable: – Diagnostic centres – Equal care – Patient experience – National cohorts – Coordinator – Individualized vs standardized care – Crowding out/side effects • Contact person in each group?
500 million Swedish kronor 2015 – 2018 to o Reduce waiting times o Reduce regional differences o More equal care with increased quality and improve patient experience o More predictive care for the patients
Status Cancer patient pathways (pakkeforlob) in Sweden • Last year of initial governmental focus on CPP (2015-2018) • All political parties (except Sverigedemokraterna) have annonuced a continuation with at least 500 000 000 SEK/ year for at least 4 more years • 31 CPP implemented, only adults • On national level: follow-up on waiting times and patient experience measurements (PREM) • County councils responsible for implementation and report every half year to the governement on status of the work.
Where are we going? Goal for 2020 o 70 % of patients should be included in CPP o 80 % of patients sholud be diagnosed and start treatment within the maximum lead time
Where are we now?
Patients included in SVF (goal 70%)
Patient reported No of patients starting experience treatment measurements (PREM)
Waiting times a big problem in Sweden Trend curve showing amount of patients where the watinig time is shorter than ”vårdgarantin 90 days ” Treatement of malignanices are not included (Källa: www.vantetider.se) 170328 SKL | Varje erfarenhet räknas
Also in cancer care
Waiting times cancer patient pathways?
Waitning times breast cancer 170328 SKL | Varje erfarenhet räknas
Obstacles! o Increasing/not decreasing waiting time due to shortages of personell for example nurses o IT-systems!! Problems to get accurate reproting on waiting times for CPP o Reporting of CPPs over county council boundaries o Crowding-out effects are under discussion. 2018-02-02 Helena Brändström | SVF-dag RCC Väst
Better results in many places 170328 SKL | Varje erfarenhet räknas
TACK! Helena.brandstrom@skl.se
Ongoing research A comparative Study of introducing standardized patient pathway as • health care reform in the three Scandinavian countries. (Per Magnus Maehle, Senada Hajdarevic, Rikke Aarhus, Erna Håland) • Identification and early detection of cancer patients in primary care. (Marcela Ewing) • Elderly Cancer Patients in Denmark - Routes to diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. (Bolette Danckert) • Exploring the implementation of the standardized cancer patient pathways (CPPs) in Sweden- a qualitative study. (Sara Ronja-Li Delilovic) Crowding out effects, what is the consequences in introducing • standardized patient pathway. (Sara Ronja-Li Delilovic) • Bacteriuria and other risk modulating factors for urothelial cancer in patients with macroscopic hematuria-A study made possible by the SVF investigation protocols. (Oskar Kulander)
Closing remarks • Next meeting- Norway! • Theme: Alarm symptoms, comparisons of Nordic cohorts other? • Criteria for application to support projects? • Ongoing projects that need support? 170328 SKL | Varje erfarenhet räknas
170328 SKL | Varje erfarenhet räknas
Recommend
More recommend
