Do Australian state and territory cancer plans include survivorship-related objectives and propose quality survivorship outcomes and measures?

Abstract

Objective This study reviewed Australian jurisdictional cancer plans to: (i) assess alignment of survivorship-related objectives with recommendations from the 2006 US Institute of Medicine (IOM) survivorship report, and (ii) identify objectives in assessing survivorship outcomes. Methods Current government cancer plans were identified and reviewed for inclusion of survivorship-related objectives, which were coded based on alignment with the 10 IOM recommendations, as well as content relating to outcome assessment and measurement. Results Twelve policy documents were identified from seven Australian states and territories. There was variability in the number of IOM recommendations addressed (between 3 and 8 of 10), the number of survivorship-related objectives (between 4 and 37 per jurisdiction) and the number of survivorship-related outcomes (between 1 and 25 per jurisdiction). Recommendations for raising awareness of survivorship, quality measures and models of survivorship care were more consistently addressed in jurisdictional plans. Recently updated plans appeared to have more survivorship-focused objectives. The importance of measuring survivorship outcomes was highlighted in all 12 cancer plans. Quality of life, other patient reported outcomes, and 5-year survival rates were the most commonly suggested outcomes. There was no consensus on metrics to assess survivorship outcomes, and little detail regarding how to measure proposed outcomes. Conclusion Almost all jurisdictions included survivorship-focused objectives within cancer plans. There was considerable variation in (i) alignment with IOM recommendations, and (ii) focus on survivorship-related objectives, outcomes and outcome measures. Opportunity exists for collaboration and harmonisation of work to develop national guidelines and standards of quality survivorship care.