Building a Navigation Program

  • Mandi Pratt-Chapman
  • Linda Burhansstipanov
  • Lillie D. Shockney
Chapter

Abstract

Building a patient navigation program is a multistep process. Most of the processes are comparable whether the program is based in a clinical or community setting. For any program to succeed, it needs planning, administrative support, adequate resources, and policies and procedures that utilize evidence-based methods. Important to the process of planning is comprehensive needs assessment, program design, identification of program champions, and ongoing quality improvement. Questions to consider and sample tools for assessment are included. An extended case example of the evolution of an American Indian patient navigation program is provided.

Keywords

Patient navigation Program planning American Indian Implementation science 

References

  1. 1.
    Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, 42 U.S.C. § 18001. 2010.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    American College of Surgeons. Accreditation Committee Clarifications for Standard 3.3 Survivorship Care Plan. 2014. www.facs.org/publications/newsletters/coc-source/special-source/standard33.
  3. 3.
    National Accreditation Program of Breast Centers. Clarifications/Changes to NAPBC Standards. 2016. www.facs.org/quality-programs/napbc/standards/changes.
  4. 4.
    Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Oncology Care Model. 2017. https://innovation.cms.gov/initiatives/oncology-care/.
  5. 5.
    Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Oncology Care Model Request for Applications. 2015. https://innovation.cms.gov/Files/x/ocmrfa.pdf.
  6. 6.
    GW Cancer Institute. Executive training on navigation and survivorship: finding your patient focus: guide for program development. Washington, DC: The George Washington University; 2014.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    GW Cancer Institute. Executive training on navigation and survivorship: finding your patient focus: program development workbook. Washington, DC: The George Washington University; 2014.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barnett K. Best practices for community health needs assessment and implementation strategy development: a review of scientific methods, current practices and interviews of experts. Report of proceedings from a public forum and interviews of experts. The Public Health Institute, Oakland; 2012 p. iv. www.phi.org/uploads/application/files/dz9vh55o3bb2x56lcrzyel83fwfu3mvu24oqqvn5z6qaeiw2u4.pdf.
  9. 9.
    Barnett K. Best practices for community health needs assessment and implementation strategy development: a review of scientific methods, current practices and interviews of experts. Report of proceedings from a public forum and interviews of experts. The Public Health Institute, Oakland; 2012. www.phi.org/uploads/application/files/dz9vh55o3bb2x56lcrzyel83fwfu3mvu24oqqvn5z6qaeiw2u4.pdf.
  10. 10.
    Catholic Health Initiatives. (n.d.) Navigation program resource guide: best practices for patient navigation programs. p. 15. https://mdpnn.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/chi-navigation-program-resource-guide-_final-012013_.pdf.
  11. 11.
    Freund KM. Implementation of evidence-based patient navigation programs. Acta Oncol. 2017;56:123–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Willis A, Hoffler E, Villalobos A, Pratt-Chapman M. Advancing the field of cancer patient navigation: a toolkit for comprehensive cancer control professionals. Washington, DC: The George Washington University Cancer Institute; 2016.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gunn C, Battaglia TA, Parker VA, Clark JA, Paskett E, Calhoun E, Snyder FR, Bergling E, Freund KM. What makes navigation most effective: defining useful tasks and networks. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2017;28:663–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McCoy M, Caron SE, Battaglia TA. Prevention and early detection case study: patient navigation in the breast health program at Boston Medical Center. In: Calhoun E, Esparza A, editors. Patient navigation: overcoming barriers to care. New York, NY: Springer; 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1007/1978-1-4939-6979-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    National Cancer Institute. National community cancer program assessment tool. 2011. http://www.accc-cancer.org/oncology_issues/supplements/NCCCP-Navigation-Matrix-Tool.pdf.
  16. 16.
    Rocque GB, Partridge E, Pisu M, Martin MY, Demark-Wahnfriend W, Acemgil A, Kenzik K, Kvale EA, Meneses K, Li X, Li Y, Halilova KI, Jackson BE, Chambless C, Lisovicz N, Fouad M, Taylor R. The patient care connect program: transforming health care through lay navigation. J Oncol Pract. 2016;12:e633–42.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JOP.2015.008896.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marley KA, Collier DA, Goldstein SM. The role of clinical and process quality in achieving patient satisfaction in hospitals. Decis Sci. 2004;35:349–69.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.00117315.2004.02570.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Institute for Healthcare Improvement. (n.d.). Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) Worksheet. http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Tools/PlanDoStudyActWorksheet.aspx.
  19. 19.
    Coury J, Schneider JL, Rivellie JS, Petrik AF, Seibel E, D’Agostin B, Taplin SH, Green BB, Coronado GD. Applying the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) approach to a large pragmatic study involving safety net clinics. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17:411–21.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2364-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Aasebø U, Strøm HH, Postmyr M. The Lean method as a clinical pathway facilitator in patients with lung cancer. Clin Respir J. 2012;6(3):169–74.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-699X.2011.00271.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dydyk D, Franco T, Lebsack J. The cancer service line’s use of Six Sigma in the health care setting: creating standardized processes and helping nurses become more efficient with less work while improving staff and patient satisfaction. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2007;34:516–7.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Burhansstipanov L, Bad Wound D, Capelouto N, Goldfarb F, Harjo L, Hatathlie L, Vigil G, White M. Culturally relevant “Navigator” patient support: the Native Sisters. Cancer Pract. 1998;6:191–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Burhansstipanov L, Dignan MB, Bad Wound D, Tenney M, Vigil G. Native American recruitment into breast cancer screening: the NAWWA project. J Cancer Educ. 2000;15:29–33.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Burhansstipanov L, Christopher S, Schumacher A. Lessons learned from community-based participatory research in Indian country. Cancer Control. 2005;12:70–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dignan MB, Burhansstipanov L, Hariton J, Harjo L, Rattler T, Lee R, Mason M. A comparison of two Native American Navigator formats: face-to-face and telephone. Cancer Control. 2005;12:28–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kaur JS, Coe K, Rowland J, Braun KL, Conde FA, Burhansstipanov L, Heiney S, Kagawa-Singer M, Lu Q. Enhancing life after cancer in diverse communities. Cancer. 2012;118:5366–73.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.27491.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Burhansstipanov L, Krebs LU, Bradley A, Gamito E, Osborne K, Kaur JS. Lessons learned while developing “Clinical Trials Education for Native Americans” Curriculum. Cancer Control. 2003;10:29–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Valaitus RK, Carter N, Lam A, Nicholl J, Feather J, Cleghorn L. Implementation and maintenance of patient navigation programs linking primary care with community-based health and social services: a scoping review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17:116.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2046-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mandi Pratt-Chapman
    • 1
  • Linda Burhansstipanov
    • 2
  • Lillie D. Shockney
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute for Patient-Centered Initiatives & Health EquityThe George Washington University Cancer CenterWashington, DCUSA
  2. 2.Native American Cancer Research CorporationPineUSA
  3. 3.Johns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations