Hospital Patient Navigator - Research Paper Example

Hospital Patient Navigator Hospital Patient Navigator Patient navigators are individuals that assist the patients in the healthcare system to improve access and understanding for sever sufferers of cancer. Navigations programs can improve access while it is unclear on their ability to offer efficient cancer diagnostic and therapeutic services at an affordable cost. The challenges of evaluating cost-effective navigation program include a distant relation between navigation programs and outcome of interest. Evaluating the cost and impact of navigation requires the use of a novel method that is critical in recommendation in the dissemination of navigation programs. The populations with limited access on the healthcare system encounter difficulty in using the system leading to delay in cancer diagnosis, added costs, less efficient, and effective use of recommended therapies. The patient navigation programs provide support and guidance to people with the goal of improving access to the cancer care system and overcome barriers to quality care. This paper will present a conceptual model to evaluate cost-effectiveness of cancer patient navigation-programs, discuss challenges, and the best approach to address the challenges. Evaluating the economic impact of patient navigation has a wide array of activities that involves different settings while it suffers from inadequate of information. Different cost elements differ in the study perspective. Different researchers present interventions to determine the relevant cost measures that assess the economic value of patient navigation. The history of the patient navigation programs attributes to Harold Freeman the chair of American Cancer Society that commissioned the study of barrier to cancer among the poor in America. The success of the pioneer program and recognition of significant barriers to cancer diagnosis continue to exist among the minority and the underserved populations. Currently, many patient navigation programs work to reduce barriers to care at all levels. The growing popularity and publication of promising observational studies fail to evaluate the efficacy of navigator programs. Researchers are yet to establish the cost-effectiveness and the impact of navigation programs on cancer-related morbidity and survival. The patient navigator programs can be time and resource intensive. Similar to other interventions may improve the health of poor and underserved populations. One should view the navigation programs in the context of allocating resources to maximize health outcomes on limited budgets. It is important to evaluate cost-effectiveness of publicly funded navigator programs since the funding comes from global health budgets fixed in the short run from many competing needs, A cost-effectiveness analysis will aid the decision makers to demonstrate health benefit for the expenditure navigation programs in relation to other alternatives. For a Patient Navigation Research Program, a conceptual model for cost-effectiveness will compare incremental costs of navigation interventions versus those of the status quo in a given target population. Cost-effectiveness analysis compares different alternatives such as navigation versus usual care where patients and their relatives seek care without having formal assistance. Evaluating cost-effectiveness of patient navigation poses different challenges in the Patient Navigation Research Program. A related issue is that programs differ in expectations, training, qualifications, and supervision of navigators. In most settings, navigators have the skill to assist patients with abnormal screening tests foe several cancer. The recommended measure for effectiveness of navigation for cost-effectiveness analyses is the evaluation of health state preference and other utilities. A simulation model will address the need to extrapolate from the observation period to estimate impact of navigation over a lifetime. The use of local cancer registries can project the life expectancy and the mortality experience of the group patients. Modeling the effects of mortality base on the delays to portray screening benefits on an intervention that leads to an early stage diagnosis to a patient that would have been lost to follow-up presented at an advanced stage. Less dramatic within-stage shifts of local disease versus the stage shifts do not affect cancer-specific mortality. Sensitivity analysis will evaluate different assumptions that regard stage shift or cure affects results. If the navigations is not cost-effective under the most favorable assumptions of small effects, one can conclude that investment does not yield a return on investments. One will consider programs with small effects to have potential to be cost-effective under the assumptions they are clinically reasonable. Even if a navigation intervention does not improve survival, it may still improve an individual quality of life. The cost-effectiveness analyses to evaluate changes in the association between the specific input parameters and the adherence to screening recommendations that influence long-term outcomes. The cost-effectiveness analyses, evaluates changes in the association between the specific input parameters. Multiattribute utility instruments are questionnaires filled out by respondents to assess their quality of life across several domains. The approach provides societal instead of individual patient ratings of the potential quality of life improvements to generalize the results of navigation. The cost impact of the navigation programs include allocated fixed and variable costs. Other costs associate with training navigators that include replacements. We denote the total direct medical care cost of diagnostic services and treatment received for persons using navigation programs, patients, and caregivers incur nonmedical costs while they seek care such as time costs, transportation, treatment, and time lost from work. Medical and nonmedical costs have higher navigation programs due to improvements in patient access of care and adherence to protocols. The Patient Navigation Research Program assesses direct medical care that relate to navigation based on the routine core data elements. The longer-term costs include lifetime costs that relate to cancer treatment based on the published sources. It is rare for an economic evaluation to remain free of conceptual and practical challenges as the cost-effectiveness analysis of cancer is no exception. It is the responsibility of the Patient Navigation Research Program to identify and assess costs in the effectiveness of the navigation programs. Most of the navigation programs are tailored to specific situations to merit evaluation of economic value in the local setting. Navigation translates to improved cancer survival to improve the effectiveness of cancer at a reasonable cost. The process of identifying process, costs, and outcomes will provide valuable information for the local decision makers to allocate limited health resources to navigation programs. References Walkinshaw, E. (2011). Patient navigators becoming the norm in canada. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association Journal = Journal De lAssociation Medicale Canadienne, 183(15), E1109-e1110. Ungar, M. (2010). Families as navigators and negotiators: Facilitating culturally and contextually specific expressions of resilience. Family Process, 49(3), 421-35. Schwaderer, Karen A, RN,B.S.N., O.C.N., & Itano, Joanne K, RN,PhD., O.C.N. (2007). Bridging the healthcare divide with patient navigation: Development of a research program to address disparities. Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing, 11(5), 633-9. Read More