The Impact of Healthcare Technology on Cancer Care
Cancer care is continuously evolving with the integration of modern-day technology. Teleoncology, for instance, has radically improved patient communication, enabling better assessments and even laden medication. Diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up processes for patients like Yuri K are well captured through technology leverage. Exemplary practices of teleoncology include remote after-surgery supervision, symptom management, and even cancer telegenetics. The audio and video communications are exemplary in guiding the patients through any complications, hence reducing unnecessary hospital visits.
Teleoncology promotes enhanced communication and remote monitoring, which are core elements of any worthwhile cancer care. Patients like Yuri K are well-updated on the medication plans, treatment progress, and any concerns that don’t necessarily require in-person visits. Elder et al. (2023) note that teleoncology radically improves cancer treatment progression and subsequent patient satisfaction. Cancer patients with anxieties or in need of clarification leverage Tele oncology to help infer physicians’ directions. Within my healthcare practice, I have seen teleoncology as exemplary in reducing unnecessary visits, hence saving on patient costs. Shirke et al. (2023) note that the extensive teleoncology leverage radically improves rural care for many cancer patients, helping mitigate the cost burden.
Poignantly, teleoncology attracts a plethora of data security and privacy issues derailing patient confidentiality. The Federal government, regarding HIPAA, aims at preserving patient information. In addition, teleoncology attracts concerns relating to patients’ access to digital literacy tools and the requisite technology. In the interview with Yuri K and their family, the accessibility aspect was well covered, and a path forward was chartered. Devoid of patient accessibility, teleoncology becomes inequitable, hence derailing the achievement of Healthy People 2030 goals.
Robotic Assisted Surgery
Breast cancer technologies are rapidly developing in a bid to improve overall precision and patient care. Micha et al. (2022) notes that robotic-assisted surgery is associated with lower intraoperative complications, fewer complications, and even shorter hospital stays. The advantages are exemplary in augmenting patient care quality, especially in terms of overall cost mitigation. Robotic-assisted surgery is a technology frontier revered for its ability to improve resolution, enhance magnification, and overall visualization (Morrow, 2021). At its core, robotic-assisted surgery within stage one cancers is exemplary in preventing future complications and could greatly reduce the recurrence.
Within my practice, I have witnessed one robotic-assisted surgery for a cancer patient. Compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery, leveraging robots promoted more precision when complemented with human skills. As such, the robotic-assisted surgery radically improved the patient outcomes by reducing their hospital stay. Poignantly, the robotic surgery costs were extensive compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery. Micha et al. (2022) noted that robotic surgery was 25% more expensive compared to conventional procedures. The major disadvantage associated with robotic-assisted surgery is its large costs, which could derail patient satisfaction. In addition, Morrow (2021) notes that robotic surgery is still at the initial adoption stage, hence, it has many efficacy and overall safety issues. There is need for sound research and patient agreement to the technologies adoption.
Barriers and Costs
There are various barriers and cost implications associated with both teleoncology and robotic-assisted surgery leverage. In teleoncology, the leverage of audio and video communication is heavily monitored by the HIPAA to prevent sharing of sensitive patient health information. Physicians must continuously ensure that patient health information is protected and not accessed by unauthorized parties. In addition, technology disparities among patients could trigger potential resistance. Issues relating to accessibility to the requisite technologies and the subsequent patient literacy warrants an analysis of the teleoncology importance within their context.
Robotic-assisted surgeries are costly procedures with high maintenance expenses. The implementation requires substantial financial resources and specialized healthcare professional training. The immediate barrier, as such, to robotic-assisted surgery leverage is the extensive costs, hence the need for patient and family involvement. In addition, there is a need for Yuri K and their family to accept the proposed methods for any worthwhile leverage of robotic-assisted surgery. With issues relating to efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted surgeries, patient acceptance of the treatment options is paramount.
Care Coordination and Community Resources
Care coordination is exemplary in navigating the complex challenges faced by cancer patients. At its core, care coordination aims to leverage shared decision-making and coordinated efforts to ensure patients receive worthwhile care. As such, patient outcomes are radically improved through the integration of requisite expertise in navigating the sensitive care process. Care coordination involves the seamless organization of healthcare activities and communication to ensure delivery of high-quality, patient-centered care. In Yuri K’s case, who is navigating Stage 1B breast cancer, care coordination becomes essential in orchestrating the various aspects of her treatment plan, involving surgery, radiation, and subsequent medication.
Care coordination aims to achieve continuity of care, improve overall access, transition patients, plan for discharge, and connect patients to supportive care. Moser and Narayan (2020) note that there are various benefits for care coordination in cancer care. For instance, they insist that care coordination improves patient satisfaction, enhances treatment adherence, and contributes to better health outcomes. In addition, they note that care coordination ensures that healthcare professionals work collaboratively, avoiding fragmentation in care delivery. Kern et al. (2020), however, note that fragmentation in communication could derail the interoperability core in any worthwhile care coordination.
In my nursing practice, I consistently witness the positive impact of care coordination. Regular interdisciplinary meetings, clear communication channels, and shared care plans contribute to a holistic approach to managing patients with complex conditions, aligning with the evidence supporting the benefits of care coordination. At its core, I believe communication greatly augments care coordination success.
Community Resources
Community resources, including support networks, play a crucial role in complementing formal healthcare services. At their core, community resources aim to furnish both physiological and psychological care. For instance, The Cancer Support Community furnishes psychosocial support, education, and resources for cancer patients and their families. Leader and Aplin (2021) posit that community resources such as cancer communities, survivor networks, and online tools, among others, help promote patients’ physiological and psychological well-being. In addition, the psychological distress can be mitigated through integrating religious resources such as churches offering emotional and spiritual support.
Access to community resources, however, might trigger stigmatization. In addition, the lack of awareness or even the discernible geographical disparities may limit access to supportive networks (Crabtree-Ide et al., 2022). The multiple cultural factors or augmented need for privacy among various patients may prompt their indifference to leverage community resources. Within my practice, I have noticed that community resources play an exemplary role in patient’s overall psychosocial well-being. Through the support networks, patients develop the mental aptitude paramount to surviving cancer treatments.
State Board Nursing Practices, Federal, State and Local Policies Regarding Healthcare Technology, and Care Coordination and Community Resources Access
At the Federal level, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) establishes stringent guidelines for safeguarding patient information during the teleoncology process. In Minnesota, the Medical Assistance for Breast and Cervical Cancer Treatment Act (MABC) aimed to promote care access by enabling access to insurance, a crucial community resource. The MABC further notes the essence of safeguarding patient health information. As such, during the care coordination process, the Federal, State, and Local policies insist on the protection of patient information from unauthorized access while mitigating any barriers to effective care.
Nursing ethics are paramount in informing my approach to addressing the identified problem through technology, care coordination, and community resources. Ethical considerations, such as patient autonomy, promoting justice, and ensuring beneficence, guide technology’s integration, hence prioritizing patient safety and care quality. Care coordination efforts adhere to ethical principles by fostering equal access to resources and ensuring patient-centered, comprehensive care. Community resources are ethically applied to address the socio-economic impact of cancer care costs, promoting equity and supporting vulnerable populations.
Conclusion
Healthcare technologies, care coordination, and access to community resources are paramount in improving patient satisfaction and reducing cancer recurrence. Leveraging healthcare technologies like teleoncology and robotic-assisted surgery enhances communication, precision, and recovery. Care coordination proves pivotal in streamlining Yuri K’s treatment plan, ensuring a comprehensive and patient-centered approach. Community resources, including spiritual support, cater to her unique needs, fostering a holistic well-being. Adhering to state board nursing practice standards and policies, especially those safeguarding patient information and ensuring equitable access, should guide actions in applying the technologies and resources.
References
Elder, A. J., Alazawi, H., Shafaq, F., Ayyad, A., & Hazin, R. (2023). Teleoncology: Novel Approaches for Improving Cancer Care in North America. Cureus, 15(8), e43562. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.43562
Kale, S., Hirani, S., Vardhan, S., Mishra, A., Ghode, D. B., Prasad, R., & Wanjari, M. (2023). Addressing Cancer Disparities Through Community Engagement: Lessons and Best Practices. Cureus, 15(8), e43445. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.43445
Kern, L. M., Reshetnyak, E., Colantonio, L. D., Muntner, P. M., Rhodes, J. D., Casalino, L. P., Rajan, M., Pesko, M., Pinheiro, L. C., & Safford, M. M. (2020). Association Between Patients’ Self-Reported Gaps in Care Coordination and Preventable Adverse Outcomes: a Cross-Sectional Survey. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 35(12), 3517–3524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-020-06047-y
Leader, A. E., & Aplin, A. E. (2021). From the Community to the Bench and Back Again: The Value of Patient and Community Engagement in Cancer Research. Cancer discovery, 11(9), 2135–2138. https://doi.org/10.1158/2159-8290.CD-21-0693
Micha, J. P., Rettenmaier, M. A., Bohart, R. D., & Goldstein, B. H. (2022). Robotic-Assisted Surgery for the Treatment of Breast and Cervical Cancers. JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, 26(2), e2022.00014. https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2022.00014
Morrow M. (2021). Robotic mastectomy: the next major advance in breast cancer surgery?. The British journal of surgery, 108(3), 233–234. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znab010
Moser, E. C., & Narayan, G. (2020). Improving breast cancer care coordination and symptom management by using AI-driven predictive toolkits. Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland), 50, 25–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2019.12.006
Pareek, P., Vishnoi, J. R., Kombathula, S. H., Vyas, R. K., & Misra, S. (2020). Teleoncology: The Youngest Pillar of Oncology. JCO global oncology, 6, 1455–1460. https://doi.org/10.1200/GO.20.00295
Shirke, M. M., Shaikh, A. S., & Harky, A. (2020). Tele-oncology in the COVID-19 Era: The Way Forward? Trends in Cancer, 6(7), 547-549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trecan.2020.05.013
Yabroff, K. R., Reeder-Hayes, K., Zhao, J., Halpern, M. T., Lopez, A. M., Bernal-Mizrachi, L., Collier, A. B., Neuner, J., Phillips, J., Blackstock, W., & Patel, M. (2020). Health Insurance Coverage Disruptions and Cancer Care and Outcomes: Systematic Review of Published Research. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 112(7), 671–687. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djaa048
write