Barriers and facilitators to implementation of the interoperable Survivorship Passport (SurPass) v2.0 in 6 European countries: a PanCareSurPass online survey study

Selina R. van den Oever, Ismay A. E. de Beijer, Leontien C. M. Kremer, Marie Alfes, Julia Balaguer, Edit Bardi, Adela Cañete Nieto, Giorgio Cangioli, Eliana Charalambous, Catherine Chronaki, Tiago Costa, Alexander Degelsegger, Vanessa Düster, Anna-Liesa Filbert, Desiree Grabow, Gerald Gredinger, Hannah Gsell, Riccardo Haupt, Maria van Helvoirt, Ruth LadensteinThomas Langer, Anja Laschkolnig, Monica Muraca, Jelena Rascon, Günter Schreier, Zuzana Tomasikova, Maria Teresa Tormo, Justas Trinkunas, Jessica Trollip, Kathrin Trunner, Anne Uyttebroeck, Helena J. H. van der Pal, Saskia M. F. Pluijm,

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Purpose Long-term follow-up (LTFU) care for childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) is essential to improve and maintain their
quality of life. The Survivorship Passport (SurPass) is a digital tool which can aid in the delivery of adequate LTFU care.
During the European PanCareSurPass (PCSP) project, the SurPass v2.0 will be implemented and evaluated at six LTFU
care clinics in Austria, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Lithuania and Spain. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to the
implementation of the SurPass v2.0 with regard to the care process as well as ethical, legal, social and economical aspects.
An online, semi-structured survey was distributed to 75 stakeholders (LTFU care providers, LTFU care program
managers and CCSs) affiliated with one of the six centres. Barriers and facilitators identified in four centres or more were
defined as main contextual factors influencing implementation of SurPass v2.0.
Fifty-four barriers and 50 facilitators were identified. Among the main barriers were a lack of time and (financial)
resources, gaps in knowledge concerning ethical and legal issues and a potential increase in health-related anxiety in CCSs
upon receiving a SurPass. Main facilitators included institutions’ access to electronic medical records, as well as previous
experience with SurPass or similar tools.
We provided an overview of contextual factors that may influence SurPass implementation. Solutions should
be found to overcome barriers and ensure effective implementation of SurPass v2.0 into routine clinical care.
Implications for Cancer Survivors These findings will be used to inform on an implementation strategy tailored for the six
Original languageEnglish
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of Cancer Survivorship
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 20 Feb 2023

Research Field

  • Exploration of Digital Health


  • Paediatric oncology
  • Long-term follow-up care
  • Survivorship
  • Aftercare
  • Cancer survivors
  • Passport
  • SurPass
  • Care plan
  • Survivorship Passport


Dive into the research topics of 'Barriers and facilitators to implementation of the interoperable Survivorship Passport (SurPass) v2.0 in 6 European countries: a PanCareSurPass online survey study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this