Professional Needs of Members
The Membership subcommittee of COSA is primarily concerned with providing leadership and direction in addressing resource issues for all cancer health professionals. The group aims to ensure that resource issues are adequately addressed for every step of the cancer journey.
This committee identified two areas of concern which have generated activity. They are:
Professional burnout
Professor Afaf Girgis, Director of the Centre for Health Research and Psycho-oncology (CHeRP), is presently undertaking a survey of all COSA members. CHeRP is funded by The Cancer Council NSW and based at the University of Newcastle. The objectives of the survey are to:
- assess the levels of burnout among the different member groups of COSA and to identify the predictors of higher levels of burnout, including professional group, extent of contact with cancer patients, and current work arrangements.
- seek members’ perceptions about major causes of burnout and strategies that would help to contain it, to inform recommendations to COSA and to Cancer Australia.
- disseminate the findings through reports and peer-reviewed publication to maximise the likelihood of debate regarding feasible options for addressing the recommendations.
COSA acknowledges the financial support provided by Cancer Australia to carry out this activity.
Principles for Care Coordination
At the 2006 COSA Annual Scientific Meeting a workshop was held to provide a forum for exploring strategies for achieving improved care coordination, reviewing progress in this area to date, and identifying possible future directions. The participants at the workshop identified three principles for care coordination:
Patient focus
Care coordination should:
- be patient, carer and family-centred
- be a key focus across the entire cancer journey
- enable patient choice (to not receive care coordination)
- emphasise patient empowerment
- improve patient access to services
- address equity of access
- improve care outcomes
Team focus
Care coordination takes a multidisciplinary team approach and is inclusive of medical and allied health professions as well as management and administrative staff.
Care coordination:
- focuses across the continuum of care
- is a shared responsibility, and is not solely the responsibility of an individual coordinator
- relies on the sharing of information and knowledge.
Systematic approach
Care coordination should:
- be evidence-based
- be sustainable and supported
- take a system-based approach
- be capable of use across different platforms, including public and private systems, metropolitan and rural and remote geographical settings and various care settings
- be built on a sound and robust evaluation framework.
Further these gaps and opportunities in care coordination were identified:
- Address funding and resourcing issues, including:
- development and utilisation of new funding models, including optimising the use of MBS items to support care coordination
- addressing the impact of financial implication on patient decisions
- Build patient empowerment through:
- patient held records or electronic records, including patient care pathways
- improved communication
- support with transition
- support with self-management of coordination
- provision of service directories
- Improve communication with primary care providers by improving:
- access to information including treatment plans
- discharge planning
- barriers resulting from professional boundaries between GPS and other specialists (for example by enabling GPs to deliver chemotherapy)
- utilisation of practice nurses
- Build sustainability in care coordination, through:
- workforce and career development and succession planning
- professional development
- management support
- mentoring and coaching
- clinical supervision
- Standardise care by:
- defining outcomes, standards and indicators
- using structured referral pathways
- measuring achievement against milestones
- Address rural and remote issues.