Enhancing patient-provider communication with the electronic self-report assessment for cancer: a randomized trial

Development of an electronic health record-integrated patient-reported outcome-based shared decision-making dashboard in oncology

Objectives

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) describe a patient's unique experiences with disease or treatment, yet effective use of this information during clinical encounters remains challenging. This project sought to build a PRO based dashboard within the electronic health record (EHR), prioritizing interpretability and utility of PROs for clinical decision-making.

Materials and Methods

Codesign principles were used to define the goal, features, and visualization of the data elements on the dashboard. Codesign sessions occurred between February 2019 and May 2020 and involved a diverse group of stakeholders. Pilot evaluation of dashboard usability was performed with patients and clinicians not involved in the codesign process through qualitative interviews and the Systems Usability Scale.

Results

The dashboard was placed into a single tab in the EHR and included select PROM scores, clinical data elements, and goals of care questions. Real-time data analytics and enhanced visualization of data was necessary for the dashboard to provide meaningful feedback to clinicians and patients for decision-making during clinic visits. During soft launch, the dashboard demonstrated "good" usability in patients and clinicians at 3 and 6 months (mean total SUS score >70).

Discussion

The current dashboard had good usability and made PRO scores more clinically understandable to patients and clinicians. This paper highlights the development, necessary data elements, and workflow considerations to implement this dashboard at an academic cancer center.

Conclusion

As the use of PROs in clinical care is increasing, patient- and clinician-centered tools are needed to ensure that this information is used in meaningful ways.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Cancer Care: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) come directly from the patient, without clinician interpretation, to provide a patient-centered perspective.

Objective

To understand the association of PROM integration into cancer care with patient-related, therapy-related, and health care utilization outcomes.

Data Sources

Searches included MEDLINE and MEDLINE Epub ahead of print, in-process, and other nonindexed citations; Embase databases (OvidSP); PsychINFO; CENTRAL; and CINAHL from January 1, 2012 to September 26, 2022.

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that enrolled adult patients (ages 18 years and older) with active cancer receiving anticancer therapy using a PROM as an intervention.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Pairs of review authors, using prepiloted forms, independently extracted trial characteristics, disease characteristics, and intervention details. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guideline was followed. Random-effects analyses were conducted.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Overall mortality, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures, and hospital utilization outcomes.

Results

From 1996 to 2022, 45 RCTs including 13 661 participants addressed the association of PROMs with outcomes considered important to patients. The addition of a PROM likely reduced the risk of overall mortality (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.98; moderate certainty), improved HRQoL (range 0-100) at 12 weeks (mean difference [MD], 2.45; 95% CI, 0.42-4.48; moderate certainty). Improvements of HRQoL at 24 weeks were not significant (MD, 1.87; 95% CI, -1.21 to 4.96; low certainty). There was no association between the addition of a PROM and HRQoL at 48 weeks. The addition of a PROM was not associated with reduced ED visits (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.54-1.02; low certainty) or hospital admissions (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.73-1.02; low certainty).

Conclusion and Relevance

The findings of this study suggest that the integration of PROMs into cancer care may improve overall survival and quality of life.

Usability and Preliminary Efficacy of an Adaptive Supportive Care System for Patients With Cancer: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Using an iterative user-centered design process, our team developed a patient-centered adaptive supportive care system, PatientCareAnywhere, that provides comprehensive biopsychosocial screening and supportive cancer care to patients across the continuum of care adaptively. The overarching goal of PatientCareAnywhere is to improve health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and self-efficacy of patients with cancer by empowering them with self-management skills and bringing cancer care support directly to them at home. Such support is adaptive to the patient's needs and health status and coordinated across multiple sources in the forms of referrals, education, engagement of community resources, and secure social communication.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the usability of the new web-based PatientCareAnywhere system and examine the preliminary efficacy of PatientCareAnywhere to improve patient-reported outcomes compared with usual care.

METHODS

For phase 1, usability testing participants included patients with cancer (n=4) and caregivers (n=7) who evaluated the software prototype and provided qualitative (eg, interviews) and quantitative (eg, System Usability Scale) feedback. For phase 2, participants in the 3-month pilot randomized controlled trial were randomized to receive the PatientCareAnywhere intervention (n=36) or usual care control condition (n=36). HRQOL and cancer-relevant self-efficacy were assessed at baseline (preintervention assessment) and 12 weeks from baseline (postintervention assessment); mean differences between pre- and postintervention scores were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Participants were highly satisfied with the prototype and reported above-average acceptable usability, with a mean System Usability Scale score of 84.09 (SD 10.02). Qualitative data supported the overall usability and perceived usefulness of the intervention, with a few design features (eg, "help request" function) added based on participant feedback. With regard to the randomized controlled trial, patients in the intervention group reported significant improvements in HRQOL from pre- to postintervention scores (mean difference 6.08, SD 15.26) compared with the control group (mean difference -2.95, SD 10.63; P=.01). In contrast, there was no significant between-group difference in self-efficacy (P=.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, PatientCareAnywhere represents a user-friendly, functional, and acceptable supportive care intervention with preliminary efficacy to improve HRQOL among patients diagnosed with cancer. Future studies are needed to further establish the efficacy of PatientCareAnywhere as well as explore strategies to enhance user engagement and investigate the optimal intensity, frequency, and use of the intervention to improve patient outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02408406; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02408406.

Are all cancer survivors included when using electronically administered patient reported outcomes in primary healthcare cancer rehabilitation? A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Patient reported outcomes (PROs) are being used frequently in clinical practice. PROs often serve several purposes, such as increasing patient involvement, assessing health status, and monitoring and improving the quality-of-care at an aggregated level. However, the lack of representative PRO-data may have implications for all these purposes. This study aims to assess the association of non-administration of (not sending an electronic invite to PRO) and non-response to (not responding to PRO) electronically administered PROs with social inequality in a primary healthcare cancer rehabilitation setting. Furthermore, it examines whether the workflows surrounding PRO have an impact on non-administration and non-response.

METHODS

This is a cross sectional study using routinely collected data from electronic health records and registers including cancer survivors (CSs) over 18 years booked for an initial consultation in a primary healthcare cancer rehabilitation setting using PROs for systematic health status assessment. During the study period two different PRO platforms were used, each associated with different workflows. Non-administration and non-response rates were calculated for sociodemographic characteristics for each PRO platform. Crude and adjusted odds ratios were calculated using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

In total, 1868 (platform 1) and 1446 (platform 2) CSCSs were booked for an initial consultation. Of these, 233 (12.5%) (platform 1) and 283 (19.6%) (platform 2) were not sent a PRO (non-administration). Among those who received a PRO, 157 (9.6%) on platform 1 and 140 (12.0%) on platform 2 did not respond (non-response). Non-administration of and non-response to PROs were significantly associated with lower socioeconomic status. Moreover, the workflows surrounding PROs seem to have an impact on non-inclusion in and non-response to PROs.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-administration of and non-response to PROs in clinical practice is associated with determinants of social inequality. Clinical workflows and the PRO platforms used may potentially worsen this inequality. It is important to consider these implications when using PROs at both the individual and aggregated levels. A key aspect of implementing PROs in clinical practice is the ongoing focus on representativeness, including a focus on monitoring PRO administration and response.

BREAST-Q REACT: Qualitative Assessment of the Design, Functionality, and Clinical Utility of a New Score Interpretation Tool

BACKGROUND

The BREAST-Q real-time engagement and communication tool (REACT) was developed to aid with BREAST-Q score interpretation and guide patient-centered care.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the perspectives of patients and providers on the design, functionality, and clinical utility of REACT and refine the REACT based on their recommendations.

METHODS

We conducted three patient focus groups with women who were at least 6 postoperative months from their postmastectomy breast reconstruction, and two provider focus groups with plastic surgeons, breast surgeons, and advanced practice providers. Focus groups were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed thematically.

RESULTS

A total of 18 breast reconstruction patients and 14 providers participated in the focus groups. Themes identified by thematic analysis were organized into two categories: (1) design and functionality, and (2) clinical utility. On the design and functionality of REACT, four major themes were identified: visual appeal and usefulness; contextualizing results; ability to normalize patients' experiences, noting participants' concerns; and suggested modifications. On the clinical utility of REACT, three major themes were identified: potential to empower patients to communicate with their providers; increase patient and provider motivation to engage with the BREAST-Q; and effective integration into clinical workflow.

CONCLUSION

Patients and providers in this qualitative study indicated that with some modifications, REACT has a great potential to elevate the clinical utility of the BREAST-Q by enhancing patient-provider communication that can lead to patient-centered, clinically relevant action recommendations based on longitudinal BREAST-Q scores.

Cerebral palsy research network community registry adult surveys on function & pain: Successes, challenges, and future directions

NARRATIVE SUMMARY

The formation of a patient-reported outcomes registry to provide information about functional changes and pain among adults with cerebral palsy (CP) was identified as a priority to address the gap in knowledge and practice about aging and CP. The Cerebral Palsy Research Network collaborated with consumers, clinicians, and researchers to create an interactive internet platform, MyCP, to host a Community Registry. MyCP also provides educational programming, access to webinars and community forums, and fitness opportunities. The registry hosts surveys on function and pain for adults with CP, which provide cross-sectional and longitudinal data about these important issues. Surveys include previously validated measures with normative values that have been used with other populations and investigator developed questions. Enrollment in the registry is growing but needs to reflect the population of adults with CP, which limits generalizability. Future initiatives involve strategies to increase consumer engagement and enrollment.

Assessment and Management of Sleep Disturbance in Palliative Care Settings

Background: Sleep disturbances, including insomnia, sleep-disordered breathing, and circadian rhythm disorders with potential consequences including excessive daytime somnolence and worsening fatigue, are prevalent yet largely under-measured and therefore under-managed problems in people receiving palliative care. This has the potential to negatively affect the person's functioning and quality of life. Objectives: We aimed to review the current practice of assessment and management of sleep disturbances in people with life-limiting illnesses in Australian and New Zealand palliative care settings, and to define areas for improvement in assessment and management of sleep disturbances and further research. Design: A cross-sectional, online survey was conducted with palliative care health professionals (PCHPs) to explore current approaches to routine assessment of sleep disturbances and PCHPs' awareness of, and perceived access to, evidence-based resources for assessing and managing sleep disturbances in their local settings. Results: Fifty-four PCHPs responded to the survey, including allied health professionals (44%), palliative care nurses (26%), and physicians (19%). Over 70% of PCHPs endorsed routine verbal screening of sleep symptoms, and >90% recommended management with basic behavioral strategies. However, none of PCHPs used validated patient-reported outcome measures for sleep, and <10% of PCHPs demonstrated awareness or use of sleep-specific interventions (including medications). Only 40% reported they had access to sleep specialist services for patients. Conclusion: Our findings provide a useful snapshot of current approaches to managing sleep disturbances in palliative care. Gaps in current practice are highlighted, including the lack of structured, clinical assessment, referral pathways, and PCHPs' perceived lack of access to targeted interventions for sleep disturbances.

Engagement Among Diverse Patient Backgrounds in a Remote Symptom Monitoring Program

PURPOSE

Previous randomized controlled trials have demonstrated benefit from remote symptom monitoring (RSM) with electronic patient-reported outcomes. However, the racial diversity of enrolled patients was low and did not reflect the real-world racial proportions for individuals with cancer.

METHODS

This secondary, cross-sectional analysis evaluated engagement of patients with cancer in a RSM program. Patient-reported race was grouped as Black, Other, or White. Patient address was used to map patient residence to determine rurality using Rural-Urban Commuting Area Codes and neighborhood disadvantage using Area Deprivation Index. Key outcomes included (1) being approached for RSM enrollment, (2) declining enrollment, (3) adherence with RSM via continuous completion of symptom surveys, and (4) withdrawal from RSM participation. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% CI were estimated from modified Poisson models with robust SEs.

RESULTS

Between May 2021 and May 2023, 883 patients were approached to participate, of which 56 (6%) declined RSM. Of those who enrolled in RSM, a total of 27% of patients were Black or African American and 67% were White. In adjusted models, all patient population subgroups of interest had similar likelihoods of being approached for RSM participation; however, Black or African American patients were more than 3× more likely to decline participation than White participants (RR, 3.09 [95% CI, 1.73 to 5.53]). Patients living in more disadvantaged neighborhoods were less likely to decline (RR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.24 to 1.02]), but less likely to adhere to surveys (RR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.97]). All patient populations had a similar likelihood of withdrawing.

CONCLUSION

Black patients and individuals living in more disadvantaged neighborhoods are at risk for lower engagement in RSM. Further work is needed to identify and overcome barriers to equitable participation.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures as an Intervention: A Comprehensive Overview of Systematic Reviews on the Effects of Feedback

OBJECTIVES

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have emerged as a promising approach to involve patients in their treatment process. Beyond serving as outcome measures, PROMs can be applied to provide feedback to healthcare providers and patients, thereby offering valuable insights that can improve health outcomes and care processes. This overview offers a comprehensive synthesis of the effects of PROM feedback, contributing to the evidence-based discussion on PROMs' potential to enhance patient care.

METHODS

Following Cochrane Collaboration recommendations, this overview included literature reviews across diverse treatment areas, investigating the impact of PROM feedback on patient health outcomes (including quality of life, symptoms, or survival) and care process outcomes (including communication, symptom identification, or clinical practice). The methodological quality of the evidence was assessed with a modified version of A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2, and the potential overlap of primary studies was quantified. Results were narratively synthesized.

RESULTS

Forty reviews grouped into 4 categories of treatment areas were included. Overall, their methodological quality was low. The overall overlap of primary studies was 2.2%, reaching up to 15.7% within specific treatment areas. The results indicate that PROM feedback may enhance the quality-of-care processes, whereas its effects on patient health outcomes remained less conclusive.

CONCLUSIONS

PROM feedback positively influences the interaction between physicians and patients across the included treatment areas. Further research is needed to comprehend the trickle-down effects of PROM feedback and how to enhance its potential in yielding health benefits for patients.

Assessing health outcomes: a systematic review of electronic patient-reported outcomes in oncology

PURPOSE

This study investigates the clinical impact of electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) monitoring apps/web interfaces, aimed at symptom-management, in cancer patients undergoing outpatient systemic antineoplastic treatment. Additionally, it explores the advantages offered by these applications, including their functionalities and healthcare team-initiated follow-up programmes.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted using a predefined search strategy in MEDLINE. Inclusion criteria encompassed primary studies assessing symptom burden through at-home ePRO surveys in adult cancer patients receiving outpatient systemic antineoplastic treatment, whenever health outcomes were evaluated. Exclusion criteria excluded telemedicine-based interventions other than ePRO questionnaires and non-primary articles or study protocols. To evaluate the potential bias in the included studies, an exhaustive quality assessment was conducted, as an additional inclusion filter.

RESULTS

Among 246 identified articles, 227 were excluded for non-compliance with inclusion/exclusion criteria. Of the remaining 19 articles, only eight met the rigorous validity assessment and were included for detailed examination and data extraction, presented in attached tables.

CONCLUSION

This review provides compelling evidence of ePRO monitoring's positive clinical impact across diverse cancer settings, encompassing various cancer types, including early and metastatic stages. These systems are crucial in enabling timely interventions and reducing communication barriers, among other functionalities. While areas for future ePRO innovation are identified, the primary limitation lies in comparing clinical outcomes of reviewed articles, due to scale variability and study population heterogeneity. To conclude, our results reaffirm the transformative potential of ePRO apps in oncology and their pivotal role in shaping the future of cancer care.

Patients' perceptions of patient-centered communication with healthcare providers and associated factors in Japan - The INFORM Study 2020

OBJECTIVE

To describe patients' perceptions of the patient-centeredness of their communication with healthcare providers in Japan, and to examine factors associated with these perceptions.

METHODS

We analyzed the cross-sectional data from the INFORM Study 2020, which is a nationwide survey on health information access in Japan. A total of 3605 respondents completed the survey. Our primary outcome was the nine elements of the patient-centered communication scale (PCCS), which was compiled from 2703 respondents (75.0%) reporting at least one provider visit within 12 months. It was rated on a four-point Likert scale: always, usually, sometimes, and never. We used binary logistic regression to examine the association between sociodemographic and health-related variables, and each element of the PCCS.

RESULTS

For all elements, the percentage of respondents who agreed that their healthcare providers always communicated in a patient-centered way was low (17-31%). Patients with higher age, higher education, poorer general health status and a larger number of visits to providers in the previous 12 months were more likely to have positive perception.

CONCLUSION

Patient-centered communication as reported in a national sample in Japan was low.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Efforts are needed to improve the patient-centeredness of patient-provider communication in Japan to optimize health outcomes.

Understanding Symptom Self-Monitoring Needs Among Postpartum Black Patients: Qualitative Interview Study

BACKGROUND

Pregnancy-related death is on the rise in the United States, and there are significant disparities in outcomes for Black patients. Most solutions that address pregnancy-related death are hospital based, which rely on patients recognizing symptoms and seeking care from a health system, an area where many Black patients have reported experiencing bias. There is a need for patient-centered solutions that support and encourage postpartum people to seek care for severe symptoms.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine the design needs for a mobile health (mHealth) patient-reported outcomes and decision-support system to assist Black patients in assessing when to seek medical care for severe postpartum symptoms. These findings may also support different perinatal populations and minoritized groups in other clinical settings.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with 36 participants-15 (42%) obstetric health professionals, 10 (28%) mental health professionals, and 11 (31%) postpartum Black patients. The interview questions included the following: current practices for symptom monitoring, barriers to and facilitators of effective monitoring, and design requirements for an mHealth system that supports monitoring for severe symptoms. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. We analyzed transcripts using directed content analysis and the constant comparative process. We adopted a thematic analysis approach, eliciting themes deductively using conceptual frameworks from health behavior and human information processing, while also allowing new themes to inductively arise from the data. Our team involved multiple coders to promote reliability through a consensus process.

RESULTS

Our findings revealed considerations related to relevant symptom inputs for postpartum support, the drivers that may affect symptom processing, and the design needs for symptom self-monitoring and patient decision-support interventions. First, participants viewed both somatic and psychological symptom inputs as important to capture. Second, self-perception; previous experience; sociocultural, financial, environmental, and health systems-level factors were all perceived to impact how patients processed, made decisions about, and acted upon their symptoms. Third, participants provided recommendations for system design that involved allowing for user control and freedom. They also stressed the importance of careful wording of decision-support messages, such that messages that recommend them to seek care convey urgency but do not provoke anxiety. Alternatively, messages that recommend they may not need care should make the patient feel heard and reassured.

CONCLUSIONS

Future solutions for postpartum symptom monitoring should include both somatic and psychological symptoms, which may require combining existing measures to elicit symptoms in a nuanced manner. Solutions should allow for varied, safe interactions to suit individual needs. While mHealth or other apps may not be able to address all the social or financial needs of a person, they may at least provide information, so that patients can easily access other supportive resources.

Symptomatic and functional recovery after transurethral resection of bladder tumor: Data from ecological momentary symptom assessment

OBJECTIVES

To quantitatively describe the nature, severity, and duration of symptoms and functional impairment during recovery from transurethral resection of bladder tumors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients scheduled for transurethral resection were approached for enrollment in a text-message based ecological momentary symptom assessment platform. Nine patients reported outcomes were measured 7 days before surgery and on postoperative days 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, and 14 using a 5-point Likert scale. Self-reported degree of hematuria was collected using a visual scale. Clinical data was collected via retrospective chart review.

RESULTS

A total of 159 patients were analyzed. Postoperative symptoms were overall mild, with the largest differences from baseline to postoperative day 1 seen in dysuria (median 0/5 vs. 3/5) and ability to work (median 5/5 vs. 4/5). Recovery was generally rapid, with 76% of patients reporting ≥4/5 agreement with the statement "I feel recovered from surgery" by postoperative day 2, although 15% of patients reported persistently lower levels of agreement on postoperative day 10 or 14. Patients undergoing larger resections (≥2cm) did take longer to return to baseline in multiple symptom domains, but the difference of medians vs. those undergoing smaller resections was less than 1 day across all domains. Multivariable analysis suggested that receiving perioperative intravesical chemotherapy was associated with longer time to recovery. 84% of patients reported clear yellow urine by postoperative day 3.

CONCLUSION

In this population, hematuria and negative effects on quality of life resulting from transurethral resection of bladder tumors were generally mild and short-lived, although a small number of patients experienced longer recoveries.

Patient-reported outcome measurement implementation in cancer survivors: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) are increasingly used for cancer patients receiving active treatment, but little is known about the implementation and usefulness of PROMs in cancer survivorship care. This systematic review evaluates how cancer survivors and healthcare providers (HCPs) perceive PROM implementation in survivorship care, and how PROM implementation impacts cancer survivors' health outcomes.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from database inception to February 2022 to identify randomized and nonrandomized studies of PROM implementation in cancer survivors.

RESULTS

Based on prespecified eligibility criteria, we included 29 studies that reported on 26 unique PROMs. The studies were heterogeneous in study design, PROM instrument, patient demographics, and outcomes. Several studies found that cancer survivors and HCPs had favorable impressions of the utility of PROMs, and a few studies demonstrated that PROM implementation led to improvements in patient quality of life (QoL), with small to moderate effect sizes.

CONCLUSIONS

We found implementation of PROMs in cancer survivorship care improved health outcomes for select patient populations. Future research is needed to assess the real-world utility of PROM integration into clinical workflows and the impact of PROMs on measurable health outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Cancer survivors accepted PROMs. When successfully implemented, PROMs can improve health outcomes after completion of active treatment. We identify multiple avenues to strengthen PROM implementation to support cancer survivors.

Implementing a Patient-Reported Outcome Dashboard in Oncology Telemedicine Encounters: Clinician and Patient Adoption and Acceptability

PURPOSE

Telemedicine provides numerous benefits to patients, yet effective communication and symptom assessment remain a concern. The recent uptake of telemedicine provided an opportunity to use a newly developed dashboard with patient-reported outcome (PRO) information to enhance communication and shared decision making (SDM) during telemedicine appointments. The objective of this study was to identify barriers to using the dashboard during telemedicine, develop implementation strategies to address barriers, and pilot test use of this dashboard during telemedicine appointments in two practice settings to evaluate acceptability, adoption, fidelity, and effectiveness.

METHODS

Patients and clinicians were interviewed to identify determinants to dashboard use in telemedicine. Implementation strategies were designed and refined through iterative feedback from stakeholders. A pilot study of dashboard use was conducted from March to September 2022. Acceptability, adoption, and fidelity were evaluated using mixed methods. SDM was evaluated using the collaboRATE measure.

RESULTS

One hundred two patient encounters were evaluated. Most patients (62; 60%) had completed some PRO data at the time of their telemedicine encounter. Most (82; 80%) encounters had clinician confirmation that PRO data had been reviewed; however, collaborative review of the dashboard was documented in only 27%. Degree of SDM was high (mean collaboRATE score 3.40; SD, 0.11 [95% CI, 3.17 to 3.63] out of a maximum score of 4). Implementation strategies focused on patient engagement, education, and remote PRO completion. Clinician-facing strategies included education, practice facilitation, and small tests of change.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that implementation of a PRO-based dashboard into telemedicine appointments was feasible and had acceptable adoption and acceptability by patients and clinicians when several strategies were used to engage end users. Strategies targeting both patients and clinicians are needed to support routine and effective PRO integration in telemedicine.

Inflammatory Breast Cancer: Understanding the Patient Experience

BACKGROUND

Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is an aggressive, locally advanced cancer with a 5-year survival rate of approximately 40%. Although patients with IBC likely experience significant and variable symptom burden from diagnosis through survivorship, the description of the symptom burden in this population is limited.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to describe the experience of patients with IBC and define the content domain for a patient-reported outcome measure of IBC symptom burden.

METHODS

Twenty patients with IBC described their experience in single qualitative interviews. Content analysis was used to define the symptom burden content domain. Relevance ratings by a panel of experts reduced the number of items for a preliminary patient-reported outcome symptom burden measure.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) participant age was 52.8 (12.0) years; 50.0% had distant metastatic disease, and 85.0% were currently receiving treatment. Content analysis revealed 45 symptoms, with 20 symptoms reported by greater than or equal to 20% of participants. All participants described localized disease-related symptoms. Treatment-related symptoms varied among participants based on the modalities received.

CONCLUSION

Patients with IBC experience symptom burden that is distinct from the symptom burden experienced by patients with non-IBC.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Differentiating the disease-related symptoms of IBC may assist clinicians in making timely and accurate diagnoses for IBC. A disease- and treatment-specific measure of the symptom burden of IBC should be incorporated in clinical practice to allow for regular assessment and evaluation of symptom burden and implementation of evidence-based interventions for symptom management.

Patient-Centered Research and Outcomes in Cancer and Kidney Transplantation

Cancer has been identified by kidney transplant recipients as a critically important outcome. The co-occurrence of cancer and kidney transplantation represents a complex intersection of diseases, symptoms, and competing priorities for treatments. Research that focuses on biochemical parameters and clinical events may not capture the priorities of patients. Patient-centered research can improve the relevance and efficiency of research and is particularly pertinent in the setting of cancer and kidney transplantation to facilitate shared decision-making in complex clinical situations. In addition, patient-reported outcomes can facilitate the assessment of patients' experiences, symptom burden, treatment side effects, and quality of life. This review discusses patient-centered research in the context of kidney transplantation and cancer, including consumer involvement in research and patient-centered outcomes and their measures and inclusion in core outcome sets.

Evaluation of clinical decision support systems in oncology: An updated systematic review

With increasing reliance on technology in oncology, the impact of digital clinical decision support (CDS) tools needs to be examined. A systematic review update was conducted and peer-reviewed literature from 2016 to 2022 were included if CDS tools were used for live decision making and comparatively assessed quantitative outcomes. 3369 studies were screened and 19 were included in this updated review. Combined with a previous review of 24 studies, a total of 43 studies were analyzed. Improvements in outcomes were observed in 42 studies, and 34 of these were of statistical significance. Computerized physician order entry and clinical practice guideline systems comprise the greatest number of evaluated CDS tools (13 and 10 respectively), followed by those that utilize patient-reported outcomes (8), clinical pathway systems (8) and prescriber alerts for best-practice advisories (4). Our review indicates that CDS can improve guideline adherence, patient-centered care, and care delivery processes in oncology.

Implementing cancer symptom management interventions utilizing patient-reported outcomes: a pre-implementation evaluation of barriers and facilitators

PURPOSE

Symptoms can negatively impact quality of life for patients with a history of cancer. Digital, electronic health record (EHR)-integrated approaches to routine symptom monitoring accompanied by evidence-based interventions for symptom management have been explored as a scalable way to improve symptom management, particularly between clinic visits. However, little research has evaluated barriers and facilitators to implementing these approaches in real-world settings, particularly during the pre-implementation phase. Pre-implementation assessment is critical for informing the selection and sequencing of implementation strategies and intervention adaptation. Thus, this study sought to understand pre-implementation perceptions of a remote cancer symptom monitoring and management intervention that uses electronic patient-reported outcome measures for symptom assessment.

METHODS

We interviewed 20 clinical and administrative stakeholders from 4 geographic regions within an academic medical center and its affiliated health system during the months prior to initiation of a stepped-wedge, cluster randomized pragmatic trial. Transcripts were coded using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research [CFIR] 2.0. Two study team members reviewed coded transcripts to understand how determinants were relevant in the pre-implementation phase of the trial and prepared analytic memos to identify themes.

RESULTS

Findings are summarized in four themes: (1) ability of the intervention to meet patient needs [recipient characteristics], (2) designing with care team needs in mind [innovation design and adaptability], (3) fit of the intervention with existing practice workflows [compatibility], and (4) engaging care teams early [engaging deliverers].

CONCLUSION

Attention to these aspects when planning intervention protocols can promote intervention compatibility with patients, providers, and practices thereby increasing implementation success.

The effectiveness of symptom management interventions based on electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) for symptom burden, quality of life, and overall survival among patients with cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To explore the effectiveness of ePRO-based symptom management interventions on symptom burden, quality of life, and overall survival among patients with cancer for the first time and to explore the effects of different types of these interventions.

BACKGROUND

Since advances in screening and treatment have transformed cancer into a chronic illness rather than a fatal disease, symptom management has become increasingly critical in oncology nursing. In recent decades, ePROs have been increasingly used in the symptom management of cancer patients to improve their symptom burden, quality of life and overall survival, but the existing findings are still inconsistent and equivocal.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web-of-Science, CENTRAL, and CINAHL-Plus-with-Full-Text from inception to January 31, 2023. The quality of methodology and evidence were evaluated by the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework. All data were analyzed using R within the RStudio platform, and the effects of interventions were determined by calculating SMD, HR and 95 %CI. Subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis and cumulative meta-analysis were performed, and statistical heterogeneity was examined by I2 statistic, P value, and Egger's or arcsine test. Statistical significance was defined as a two-tailed P value <0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 23 randomized controlled trials with 7231 patients were included. The results indicated that ePRO-based symptom management interventions could improve the symptom burden (SMD = -0.19, 95 % CI [-0.33, -0.05], P < 0.01), quality of life (SMD = 0.16, 95 % CI [0.06, 0.25], P < 0.01) and overall survival (HR = 0.84, 95 % CI [0.73, 0.97], P = 0.02) of cancer patients. Subgroup analysis showed that targeted interventions for patients undergoing specific treatments were effective in relieving the symptom burden and enhancing quality of life. Short-term (≤3 months) interventions or reporting via telephone call contributed to alleviating the symptom burden, while quality of life improved when the intervention was more than three months in duration or not reported by telephone call. The pooled results of symptom burden and quality of life were stable, and the beneficial trends of all three outcomes were steady. The overall quality of methodology and evidence was moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that ePRO-based symptom management interventions are conducive to improving symptom burden, quality of life, and overall survival of cancer patients. In addition to encouraging the integration of ePRO-based interventions into routine oncology care, interventions with tailored plans, proper intensity and multidimensional supports need to be developed in the future to optimize the symptom management of cancer patients.

REGISTRATION

CRD42023393330.

Novel Tools to Approach and Measure Outcomes in Patients with Fractures

Upper extremity fractures are prevalent and pose a great burden to patients and society. In the US alone, the annual incidence of upper extremity fractures is 67.6 fractures per 10,000 persons. While the majority of patients with upper extremity fractures demonstrate satisfactory outcomes when treated appropriately (the details of which are discussed in prior articles), the importance of follow-up and outcome measurement cannot be understated. Outcome measurement allows for accountability and improvement in clinical outcomes and research. The purpose of this article is to describe recent advances in methods and tools for assessing clinical and research outcomes in hand and upper extremity care. Three specific advances that are broadly changing the landscape of follow-up care of our patients include: 1) telemedicine, 2) patient-reported outcome measurement, and 3) wearables/remote patient monitoring.

Effects of digital self-management symptom interventions on symptom outcomes in adult cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Digital self-management (SM) interventions targeting symptom relief have demonstrated positive as well as null outcomes, whereas no study has synthesized the effect of the interventions. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of digital SM symptom interventions on symptom outcomes in adult cancer patients.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis based on the previous scoping review was conducted. Six databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, the Cochrane Library, RISS [Korean], and KoreaMed [Korean]) were searched. Population was adult cancer patients. Intervention was SM interventions applying digital health tool targeting symptom management. Comparison was usual care, waitlist controls or active controls. The primary outcome was symptom burden, and the secondary outcomes were individual symptoms.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis of 32 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 7888 patients demonstrated that digital SM symptom interventions had a significant effect on reducing symptom burden (effect size [ES] = -0.230) and relieving pain (ES = -0.292), fatigue (ES = -0.417), anxiety (ES = -0.320), and depression (ES = -0.261).

CONCLUSIONS

Digital SM interventions can improve symptom outcomes in adult cancer patients. Oncology nurses should be aware that digital SM interventions have demonstrated promising outcomes in cancer patient care.

The impact of routine Edmonton symptom assessment system use on receiving palliative care services: results of a population-based retrospective-matched cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

In 2007, Cancer Care Ontario began standardised symptom assessment as part of routine care using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS).

AIM

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of ESAS on receipt of palliative care when compared with a matched group of unexposed patients.

DESIGN

A retrospective-matched cohort study examined the impact of ESAS screening on initiation of palliative care services provided by physicians or homecare nurses. The study included adult patients diagnosed with cancer between 2007 and 2015. Exposure was defined as completing ≥1 ESAS during the study period. Using 4 hard and 14 propensity score-matched variables, patients with cancer exposed to ESAS were matched 1:1 to those who were not. Matched patients were followed from first ESAS until initiation of palliative care, death or end of study.

RESULTS

The final cohort consisted of 204 688 matched patients with no prior palliative care consult. The pairs were well matched. The cumulative incidence of receiving palliative care within the first 5 years was higher among those exposed to ESAS compared with those who were not (27.9% (95% CI: 27.5% to 28.2%) versus 27.9% (95% CI: 27.5% to 28.2%)), when death is considered as a competing event. In the adjusted cause-specific Cox proportional hazards model, ESAS assessment was associated with a 6% increase in palliative care services (HR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.08).

CONCLUSION

We have demonstrated that patients exposed to ESAS were more likely to receive palliative care services compared with patients who were not exposed. This observation provides real-world data of the impact of routine assessment with a patient-reported outcome.

Real-World Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome (ePRO) Tools Integrated in the Electronic Medical Record During Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer: Feasibility Study

Purpose Use of electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) tools in routine oncology practice can be challenging despite evidence showing they can improve survival, improve patient and practitioner satisfaction, and reduce medical resource utilization. Head and neck cancer (HNC) patients receiving radiation therapy (RT) may be a group that would particularly benefit from interventions focused on early symptom management. Methods Patients undergoing definitive RT for HNC were enrolled in a feasibility study and received ePRO surveys integrated within the electronic medical record (EMR) on a weekly basis during RT. After completion of each ePRO survey, a radiation oncology registered nurse documented the findings and subsequent interventions within the EMR. Results Thirty-four patients with HNC who received curative RT at a single center were enrolled. The total number of surveys completed was 194 with a median of 7 surveys per patient (range 1-8). There was a total of 887 individual abnormal findings reported on the ePROs, and the authors found that all 887 had a corresponding documented intervention. Post-treatment practitioner questionnaires highlighted that ePROs were felt to be helpful for the care team in providing care to HNC patients. Conclusion For patients with HNC receiving RT, ePROs can be effectively utilized to address patient symptoms within an integrated health care system. Creating an infrastructure for the use of ePROs integrated within the EMR in routine care requires an approach that accounts for local workflows and buy-in from patients and the entire care team.

Mobile health platform for self-management of pediatric cystic fibrosis: Impact on patient-centered care outcomes

BACKGROUND

Previously, we adapted a mobile health platform (Genia) to the needs of patients and families in a pediatric CF center in the United States. In this feasibility study, we tested the impact of Genia on measures of patient-centered care.

METHODS

In a one-group pre-post study with adolescents with CF and caregivers of children with CF, we tested Genia's effect over 6 months on patient satisfaction with chronic illness care (PACIC) and shared decision-making (CollaboRate). Feasibility and acceptability were assessed with exit interviews and app analytics.

RESULTS

The intervention included 40 participants: 30 caregivers of children with CF age ≤14 years and 10 patients with CF age ≥15 years. The use of Genia was associated with increased satisfaction with care (p = 0.024), including delivery system and decision support (p = 0.017), goal setting (p = 0.006), and shared decision-making (p<0.001). The use of Genia was associated with nominal improvements in all QOL domains and symptom scales. The platform was feasible, with participants recording more than 4,400 observations (mean 84.2) and submitting 496 weekly reports (mean 13.8) and 70 quarterly reports (mean 1.8), and acceptable (95% retention rate). For participants, the most useful app feature was pre-visit reports (66.7%), and the top symptom trackers were those for cough (23.7%), appetite (21.1%), energy (18.4%), and medicines (18.4%).

CONCLUSION

The use of Genia over 6 months was feasible, acceptable, and associated with improved measures of patient-centered care. Study results support wider use of Genia in clinical settings. Efficacy for clinical outcomes should be assessed in a randomized clinical trial.

Implementation of Patient Reported Outcomes in Outpatient Palliative Care: From Paper to Computer

BACKGROUND

This quality improvement project aimed to transition completion of Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) at our supportive care clinic from paper to electronic format.

MEASURES

Proportion of patients who completed electronic ESAS (eESAS).

INTERVENTION

Starting July 2018, patients could complete eESAS 24h before check-in (eESAS-before), eESAS after check-in (eESAS-after) or on paper (pESAS).

OUTCOMES

A total of 6631 cancer patients had 25,767 clinic visits between July 13, 2018 and November 5, 2021. The ESAS completion rate was 100%. eESAS uptake gradually increased over time, first reaching ≥75% eESAS completion in 5/2019 (eESAS-after 61.9%; eESAS-before 14.0%; pESAS 24.1%). We observed a sharp uptake in eESAS-before since adoption of telehealth during the pandemic (May 2020) and the ≥75% eESAS target was consistently achieved from November 2020 onwards (eESAS-after 0.6%; eESAS-before 76.7%; pESAS 22.7%). In an anonymous survey, we identified several modifiable barriers to implementing eESAS.

CONCLUSIONS

Transition to eESAS was a gradual process and was catalyzed by the pandemic.

A Remote Symptom Monitoring Tool As Part of Ambulatory Cancer Surgery Recovery: A Qualitative Analysis of Patient Experience

PURPOSE

Patients recovering from ambulatory cancer surgery at home may find it difficult to determine whether their postoperative symptoms are normal or potentially serious. We developed the Recovery Tracker to help patients navigate such issues. The Recovery Tracker is a 10-day, web-based electronic survey that monitors symptoms daily and provides feedback as to whether reported symptoms are expected or require follow-up. We sought to examine patient perceptions using this tool.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted from August 2017 to September 2019 with a convenience sample of patients from a larger randomized controlled trial of the Recovery Tracker. Patients undergoing surgery at an ambulatory cancer center dedicated to the surgical treatment of breast, gynecologic, urologic, head, and neck cancers and benign tumors were included. Thematic analysis was applied to derive key themes and codes via NVivo qualitative analysis software. Recruitment was conducted iteratively until thematic saturation.

RESULTS

Forty-three patients were interviewed. Interview responses were organized into five main themes: (1) The Recovery Tracker led to more seamless communication with the care team; (2) symptoms not expected or not listed on the Recovery Tracker caused stress; (3) the Recovery Tracker was perceived as an extension of care, prompting reflection about symptoms and recovery; (4) Enhanced Feedback provided reassurance and helped set expectations; and (5) the Recovery Tracker was easy to use.

CONCLUSION

The patient experience of electronic symptom monitoring and feedback is congruent with the aims of such monitoring and feedback. Further qualitative research is required in more diverse populations.

Barriers and Best Practices for the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Emergency Medicine

Patient-reported outcome measures are commonly used in clinical trials and have been incorporated into routine clinical care in select specialties but have not been widely implemented in emergency medicine research and clinical care. We describe measurement-related barriers to patient-reported outcome measure use in the emergency department; administrative and practical considerations; implications of developing novel emergency medicine-specific patient-reported outcome measures; and key considerations for the use of patient-reported outcome measures in emergency medicine research and clinical care. Despite the unique barriers of the ED environment, potential solutions include the use of ED-validated patient-reported outcome measures when available; adapting existing short-form, multidimensional patient-reported outcome measures previously validated in diverse populations, ideally using computer-adapted testing; and collecting responses during anticipated wait times. With this work, we aim to inform barriers and best practices to the use of patient-reported outcome measures in emergency medicine research and clinical care to support future, more widespread implementation of patient-reported outcome measures within emergency care. The successful adoption of patient-reported outcome measures for diverse ED patient populations within the unique constraints of the acute care environment may help researchers, clinicians, and policymakers improve the quality and patient-centeredness of acute care.

Exploring Patients' Understanding of Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy

Little quantitative evidence exists surrounding patients' level of understanding of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) symptoms (numbness, tingling, pain in the hands/feet) and consequences (e.g., negatively affect physical functioning or chemotherapy dosing) at the beginning of chemotherapy. The purpose of this cross-sectional, secondary analysis was to describe CIPN knowledge and education patterns among adults early in a course of neurotoxic chemotherapy for the treatment of cancer (< three infusions). Following consent, participants completed an electronic questionnaire about their perceptions of CIPN symptoms, incidence, and education. Participants (N = 92) were mainly female (76%), white (91%), and diagnosed with breast (46%) or gastrointestinal (40%) cancers. Most participants without CIPN (n = 48) did not expect to develop CIPN (45%) or were unaware of CIPN as a side-effect (30%). Furthermore, 71% of participants without CIPN (n = 31) estimated CIPN to occur in ≤ 30% of patients receiving neurotoxic chemotherapy. Overall, participants learned about CIPN from their doctor or nurse prior to beginning chemotherapy (90%). Clinicians delivered education about CIPN symptoms (75%), but less frequently delivered education about CIPN management (14%), or the impact of CIPN on the ability to continue chemotherapy (16%) or physical functioning (24%). Finally, participants reported that a discussion with their doctor/nurse would be the best way to learn about CIPN (92%). Results revealed that participants without CIPN were largely unaware of the adverse consequences or incidence of CIPN during treatment. Further research is needed to investigate optimal methods to promote patient-clinician communication about CIPN during chemotherapy to enhance patients' retention of CIPN information and activation in their care.

Patient-Reported Outcomes, Digital Health, and the Quest to Improve Health Equity

The theme of the 2023 American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting is Partnering With Patients: The Cornerstone of Cancer Care and Research. As we aim to partner with patients to improve their health care, digital tools have the potential to enhance patient-centered cancer care and make clinical research more accessible and generalizable. Using electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) to collect patients' reports of symptoms, functioning, and well-being facilitates patient-clinician communication and improves care and outcomes. Early studies suggest that racial and ethnic minority populations, older patients, and patients with less education may benefit even more from ePRO implementation. Clinical practices looking to implement ePROs can refer to the resources of the PROTEUS Consortium (Patient-Reported Outcomes Tools: Engaging Users & Stakeholders). Beyond ePROs, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, cancer practices have rapidly adopted other digital tools (eg, telemedicine, remote patient monitoring). As implementation grows, we must be aware of the limitations of these tools and implement them in ways to promote optimal function, access, and ease of use. Infrastructure, patient, provider, and system-level barriers need to be addressed. Partnerships across all levels can inform development and implementation of digital tools to meet the needs of diverse groups. In this article, we describe how we use ePROs and other digital health tools in cancer care, how digital tools can expand access to and generalizability of oncology care and research, and prospects for broader implementation and use.

Evaluating Nurses' Time to Response by Severity and Cancer Stage in a Remote Symptom Monitoring Program for Patients With Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

Remote symptom monitoring (RSM) using electronic patient-reported outcomes enables patients with cancer to communicate symptoms between in-person visits. A better understanding of key RSM implementation outcomes is crucial to optimize efficiency and guide implementation efforts. This analysis evaluated the association between the severity of patient-reported symptom alerts and time to response by the health care team.

METHODS

This secondary analysis included women with stage I-IV breast cancer who received care at a large academic medical center in the Southeastern United States (October 2020-September 2022). Symptom surveys with at least one severe symptom alert were categorized as severe. Response time was categorized as optimal if the alert was closed by a health care team member within 48 hours. Odds ratios (ORs), predicted probabilities, and 95% CIs were estimated using a patient-nested logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Of 178 patients with breast cancer included in this analysis, 63% of patients identified as White and 85% of patients had a stage I-III or early-stage cancer. The median age at diagnosis was 55 years (IQR, 42-65). Of 1,087 surveys included, 36% reported at least one severe symptom alert and 77% had an optimal response time by the health care team. When compared with surveys that had no severe symptom alerts, surveys with at least one severe symptom alert had similar odds of having an optimal response time (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.38). The results were similar when stratified by cancer stage.

CONCLUSION

Response times to symptom alerts were similar for alerts with at least one severe symptom compared with alerts with no severe symptoms. This suggests that alert management is being incorporated into routine workflows and not prioritized based on disease or symptom alert severity.

Patient and clinician-reported experiences of using electronic patient reported outcome measures (ePROMs) as part of routine cancer care

BACKGROUND

Cancer and its treatment can have significant impacts on health status, quality of life and functioning of patients. Direct information from patients regarding these aspects can be collected via electronic platforms in the form of electronic Patient Reported Outcome Measures (ePROMs). Research has shown that the use of ePROMS in cancer care leads to improved communication, better symptom control, prolonged survival and a reduction in hospital admissions and emergency department attendance. Acceptability and feasibility of routine ePROM collection has been reported by both patients and clinicians but to date their use has predominantly been limited to clinical trials. MyChristie-MyHealth is an initiative from a UK comprehensive cancer centre The Christie NHS Foundation Trust which incorporates the regular collection of ePROMs into routine cancer care. This study, carried out as part of a service evaluation, explores patient and clinician experiences of using the MyChristie-MyHealth ePROMs service.

RESULTS

100 patients with lung and head and neck cancers completed a Patient Reported Experience questionnaire. All patients reported that MyChristie-MyHealth was easy to understand and, almost all found it timely to complete and easy to follow. Most patients (82%) reported it improved their communication with their oncology team and helped them to feel more involved with their care (88%). A large proportion of clinicians (8/11) felt ePROMs helped communication with their patients and over half (6/10) felt they led to consultations being more patient focused. Clinicians also felt that the use of ePROMs resulted in patients being more engaged in consultations (7/11) and their cancer care in general (5/11). Five clinicians reported that the use of ePROMs altered their clinical decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

Regular ePROMs collection as part of routine cancer care is acceptable to both patients and clinicians. Both patients and clinicians feel their use improved communication and increased the feeling of patient involvement with their care. Further work is needed to explore the experiences of patients that did not complete the ePROMs as part of the initiative and to continue to optimize the service for both patients and clinicians.

Implementing Innovation: Informatics-Based Technologies to Improve Care Delivery and Clinical Research

Improving technology has promised to improved health care delivery and the lives of patients. The realized benefits of technology, however, are delayed or less than anticipated. Three recent technology initiatives are reviewed: the Clinical Trials Rapid Activation Consortium (CTRAC), minimal Common Oncology Data Elements (mCODE), and electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes. Each initiative is at a different stage of maturity but promises to improve the delivery of cancer care. CTRAC is an ambitious initiative funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) to develop processes across multiple NCI-supported cancer centers to facilitate the development of centralized electronic health record (EHR) treatment plans. Facilitating interoperability of treatment regimens has the potential to improve sharing between centers and decrease the time to begin clinical trials. The mCODE initiative began in 2019 and is currently Standard for Trial Use version 2. This data standard provides an abstraction layer on top of EHR data and has been implemented across more than 60 organizations. Patient-reported outcomes have been shown to improve patient care in numerous studies. Best practices for how to leverage these in an oncology practice continue to evolve. These three examples show how innovative has diffused into practice and evolved cancer care delivery and highlight a movement toward patient-centered data and interoperability.

'Why should I fill out this questionnaire?' A qualitative study of cancer patients' perspectives on the integration of e-PROMs in routine clinical care

PURPOSE

There is increasing interest in integrating electronic patient-reported outcomes (e-PROs) into clinical routines in cancer settings. However, little is known about patients' experiences with and perceptions of e-PRO measures (e-PROMs). This study examines patients' experiences with e-PROMS, particularly their perspectives about its usefulness and its implications for the clinical encounter with their doctors.

METHOD

A total of 19 individual in-person interviews with cancer patients at a Comprehensive Cancer Center in northern Italy conducted in 2021 inform this study.

RESULTS

The findings suggested that, overall, patients had positive attitudes towards data collection using e-PROMs. On the one hand, most patients found the integration of e-PROMs into routine clinical practice as beneficial in treating patients with cancer. The main benefits of e-PROMs according to this group of patients were that: they promoted patient-centred care; could be used to tailor and improve the quality of care through a holistic approach; supported early detection of problematic symptoms; increased patient self-awareness; and contributed to clinical research. On the other hand, many patients did not fully understand the purpose of e-PROMs and some patients were also sceptical about their usefulness in routine clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings have several practical implications for ensuring the successful implementation of e-PROMs in routine clinical practice. These include the following preconditions: patients are informed about the purposes of data collection; physicians provide feedback to patients about the e-PROMs' results; and that hospital administrators allocate sufficient time for clinical interactions to integrate e-PROMs into routine clinical practice.

A NEw MOdel of individualized and patient-centered follow-up for women with gynecological cancer (the NEMO study)-protocol and rationale of a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Follow-up programs for gynecological cancer patients are currently under revision. There is limited evidence that traditional follow-up and clinical examinations improve survival in an early-stage gynecological setting. Further, traditional follow-up programs fail to accommodate the patient's need for psychosocial and sexual supportive care and to actively involve patients and their relatives in the follow-up process. Individualized programs may replace traditional routine follow-up with fixed intervals and length. Focusing on alarm-symptoms and self-reporting may ensure detection of recurrence while allowing a continuous attention to the patient's well-being and return to daily life. In this study, a nurse-led, individualized, and need-based intervention with a specific focus on patient empowerment is tested against a standard physician-led model primarily focusing on the detection of recurrence.

METHODS

The study is designed as a clinical, randomized trial conducted in one of four national onco-gynecological centers in Denmark. Patients with early-stage cervical or endometrial cancer are eligible for inclusion. The intervention group undergoes individualized, nurse-led follow-up supporting patient empowerment including repeated use of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) before each contact as a dialogue support tool. The follow-up contacts are mainly conducted by telephone. All project nurses attended a special training program before project start and are all well-educated and dedicated onco-gynecological nurses. The control group receives standard, physician-led, follow-up without use of ePROMs or specific focus on empowerment. The effect of the intervention is evaluated by questionnaires completed by patients at baseline (3 months after surgery) and 12, 18, and 36 months after surgery. Outcomes include empowerment using the Skill and technique subscale of the HEI-Q questionnaire as the primary outcome while fear of cancer recurrence and health-related quality of life as well as the remaining subscales of the HEI-Q represent secondary outcomes. Data is collected by use of the REDCap technology, which also provides a customized visual support function for the dialogue tool.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide new information about follow-up in early-stage gynecological cancer settings and thereby contribute to improvement of future follow-up programs. Importantly, the study will provide knowledge about the impact of specific focus on patient empowerment in follow-up programs and, further, how to facilitate empowerment among patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov: ID no. NCT03838861. Registered on 6 February 2019. Protocol version 2, issue date 21 November 2022.

"You need a team": perspectives on interdisciplinary symptom management using patient-reported outcome measures in hemodialysis care-a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are standardized instruments used for assessing patients' perspectives on their health status at a point in time, including their health-related quality of life, symptoms, functionality, and physical, mental, and social wellbeing. For people with kidney failure receiving hemodialysis, addressing high symptom burden and complexity relies on care team members integrating their expertise to achieve common management goals. In the context of a program-wide initiative integrating PROMs into routine hemodialysis care, we aimed to explore patients' and clinicians' perspectives on the role of PROMs in supporting interdisciplinary symptom management.

METHODS

We employed a qualitative descriptive approach using semi-structured interviews and observations. Eligible participants included adult patients receiving intermittent, outpatient hemodialysis for > 3 months, their informal caregivers, and hemodialysis clinicians (i.e., nurses, nephrologists, and allied health professionals) in Southern Alberta, Canada. Guided by thematic analysis, team members coded transcripts in duplicate and developed themes iteratively through review, refinement, and discussion.

RESULTS

Thirty-three clinicians (22 nurses, 6 nephrologists, 5 allied health professionals), 20 patients, and one caregiver participated in this study. Clinicians described using PROMs to coordinate care across provider types using the resources available in their units, whereas patients tended to focus on the perceived impact of this concerted care on symptom trajectory and care experience. We identified 3 overarching themes with subthemes related to the role of PROMs in interdisciplinary symptom management in this setting: (1) Integrating care for interrelated symptoms ("You need a team", conducive setting, role clarity and collaboration); (2) Streamlining information sharing and access (symptom data repository, common language for coordinated care); (3) Reshaping expectations (expectations for follow-up, managing symptom persistence).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that use of PROMs in routine hemodialysis care highlighted symptom interrelatedness and complexity and helped to streamline involvement of the interdisciplinary care team. Issues such as role flexibility and resource constraints may influence sustainability of routine PROM use in the outpatient hemodialysis setting.

Digital Health Interventions for Adult Patients With Cancer Evaluated in Randomized Controlled Trials: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Digital care has become an essential component of health care. Interventions for patients with cancer need to be effective and safe, and digital health interventions must adhere to the same requirements.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify currently available digital health interventions developed and evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) targeting adult patients with cancer.

METHODS

A scoping review using the JBI methodology was conducted. The participants were adult patients with cancer, and the concept was digital health interventions. The context was open, and sources were limited to RCT effectiveness studies. The PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library, Research Information Sharing Service, and KoreaMed databases were searched. Data were extracted and analyzed to achieve summarized results about the participants, types, functions, and outcomes of digital health interventions.

RESULTS

A total of 231 studies were reviewed. Digital health interventions were used mostly at home (187/231, 81%), and the web-based intervention was the most frequently used intervention modality (116/231, 50.2%). Interventions consisting of multiple functional components were most frequently identified (69/231, 29.9%), followed by those with the self-manage function (67/231, 29%). Web-based interventions targeting symptoms with the self-manage and multiple functions and web-based interventions to treat cognitive function and fear of cancer recurrence consistently achieved positive outcomes. More studies supported the positive effects of web-based interventions to inform decision-making and knowledge. The effectiveness of digital health interventions targeting anxiety, depression, distress, fatigue, health-related quality of life or quality of life, pain, physical activity, and sleep was subject to their type and function. A relatively small number of digital health interventions specifically targeted older adults (6/231, 2.6%) or patients with advanced or metastatic cancer (22/231, 9.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review summarized digital health interventions developed and evaluated in RCTs involving adult patients with cancer. Systematic reviews of the identified digital interventions are strongly recommended to integrate digital health interventions into clinical practice. The identified gaps in digital health interventions for cancer care need to be reflected in future digital health research.

Usability and acceptability of the electronic self-assessment and care (eSAC) program in advanced ovarian cancer: A mixed methods study

OBJECTIVE

To determine usability and acceptability of the electronic self-assessment and care (eSAC) web-based, patient reported outcome (PRO) program for people with advanced ovarian cancer.

METHODS

Patient participants recruited from a single ambulatory site were prompted by email to answer symptom/quality of life items prior to each clinic visit. Patient participant acceptability was measured with the Acceptability E-Scale Score (AES). Usability was measured among a subset of patient participants using semi-structured interviews. Clinician participant acceptability and usability were measured via survey and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic content analysis. A mixed methods analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Of 163 eligible patients approached, 143 (87.7%) provided written consent. Patient participants (n = 71) who created an eSAC report prior to at least 3 clinic visits, rated eSAC as acceptable with a mean AES score of 26.19 ± 3.36 (out of 30). Interview data from patient participants (n = 33) revealed that eSAC was easy to use and important to the clinic visit conversation. Data from clinician surveys (n = 8) and focus groups (n = 3) revealed that the eSAC program was acceptable and useful for clinicians. Qualitative analysis suggested process improvements from patients and clinicians for effectiveness in the advanced ovarian cancer setting. Mixed methods analysis demonstrated no major discrepancies between quantitative and qualitative findings, with the qualitative data broadening understanding of quantitative ratings.

CONCLUSION

eSAC was useful and acceptable in this setting. This PRO is a promising strategy for enhancing patient-centered care for people with advanced ovarian cancer.

Feasibility of a pharmacist-led symptom monitoring and management intervention to improve breast cancer endocrine therapy adherence

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) for breast cancer reduces mortality, but one-third to one-half of patients discontinue it early or are nonadherent.

OBJECTIVE

We developed a pilot single-site study of patients with evidence of early nonadherence to AET to assess the feasibility of a novel, clinical pharmacist-led intervention targeting symptom and medication management.

METHODS

Patients with prescription fill records showing nonadherence were enrolled in a single-arm feasibility study. Automated reminders were sent by e-mail or text with a link to symptom monitoring assessments weekly for 1 month and monthly until 6 months. Clinical oncology pharmacists used guideline-based symptom management and other medication management tools to support adherence and ameliorate symptoms reported on the assessments. Patient-reported outcome assessments included physical, mental, and social health domains and self-efficacy to manage symptoms and medications. Feasibility outcomes included completion of symptom reports and pharmacist recommendations.

RESULTS

Of 19 participants who were nonadherent who enrolled and completed initial assessments, 18 completed all final study procedures, with 14 completing all assessments and no patient missing more than 3 assessments. All 18 participants reported at least one of 3 symptom types, and the majority reported attempting pharmacist recommendations. Patient-reported measures of physical, mental, and social health and self-efficacy improved, and 44% of the patients became adherent.

CONCLUSION

An intervention using pharmacists in an oncology practice to systematically monitor and manage symptoms shows promise to reduce symptoms, enhance support and self-efficacy, and improve adherence to AET.

Use of Daily Patient-Reported Outcome Measurements in Pediatric Cancer Care

IMPORTANCE

Patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) are emerging as an important component of adult cancer care, but little has been done with regard to PROMs for pediatric cancer care.

OBJECTIVES

To identify pediatric patients with cancer who are at risk of severe adverse effects of treatment and provide individualized supportive care using PROMs.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This single-center cohort study with PROMs implemented in daily clinical routine was conducted from May 1, 2020, to November 15, 2021, among pediatric patients with a cancer diagnosis or their proxies. Inclusion criteria were treatment with chemotherapy and at least 30 days of active participation. Patients were followed up until completion of therapy or through ongoing therapy until November 15, 2021; data were analyzed from November 15, 2021, through January 31, 2022.

EXPOSURES

Cancer treatment, including chemotherapy, surgery, and radiotherapy.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was occurrence and severity of ubiquitous complications of cancer treatment, such as nausea, appetite loss, pain, sleep disturbance, and deterioration of physical functioning. The secondary outcome was the identification of early and appropriate clinical interventions based on detection of cancer-related symptoms via PROMs.

RESULTS

A total of 4410 daily PROMs from 7082 therapy days for 40 children (35 children aged 5-18 years and 5 proxies for children aged 1-4 years) (median age, 9.1 [IQR, 6.3-12.2] years; 26 [65.0%] male) were analyzed during a median follow-up of 145.5 (IQR, 103.8-244.5) days. All participants were White. The overall median completion rate was 60.1% (IQR, 37.9%-81.0%); this rate was slightly lower during home care vs inpatient stay (57.5% [IQR, 30.7%-85.9%] vs 65.0% [IQR, 49.6%-92.5%], respectively; P = .01), with a decreasing trend over time (65.6% [IQR, 51.6%-85.9%] for the first 90 days vs 42.9% [IQR, 29.3%-82.3%] for beyond 90 days; P < .001). Severe symptoms were reported on 657 days (14.9%); most symptoms were associated with physical functioning, followed by pain, sleep disturbance, and nausea and appetite loss. In total, 321 adverse events (AEs) and cases of health deterioration were documented, and PROMs were completed for 251 (78.2%) of these events. Across all AEs, self-reported pain was the most useful marker, particularly when analyzed on the day before onset, and was associated with an odds ratio of 3.65 (95% CI, 1.54-8.62; P = .005) for the presence of mucositis.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this cohort study suggest that PROMs reflect daily symptoms in pediatric patients with cancer and assist in clinical management and intervention for AEs.

Co-created Mobile Apps for Palliative Care Using Community-Partnered Participatory Research: Development and Usability Study

Background

Open design formats for mobile apps help clinicians and stakeholders bring their needs to direct, co-creative solutions. Palliative care for patients with advanced cancers requires intensive monitoring and support and remains an area in high need for innovation.

Objective

This study aims to use community-partnered participatory research to co-design and pretest a mobile app that focuses on palliative care priorities of clinicians and patients with advanced cancer.

Methods

In-person and teleconference workshops were held with patient and family stakeholders, researchers, and clinicians in palliative care and oncology. Question prompts, written feedback, semistructured interviews, and facilitated group discussions identified the core palliative care needs. Using Chorus, a no-code app-building platform, a mobile app was co-designed with the stakeholders. A pretest with 11 patients was conducted, with semistructured interviews of clinician and patient users for feedback.

Results

Key themes identified from the focus groups included needs for patient advocacy and encouragement, access to vetted information, patient-clinician communication support, and symptom management. The initial prototype, My Wellness App, contained a weekly wellness journal to track patient-reported symptoms, goals, and medication use; information on self-management of symptoms; community resources; and patient and caregiver testimonial videos. Initial pretesting identified value in app-based communication for clinicians, patients, and caregivers, with suggestions for improving user interface, feedback and presentation of symptom reports, and gamification and staff coordinators to support patient app engagement.

Conclusions

The development of a mobile app using community-partnered participatory research is a low-technology and feasible intervention for palliative care. Iterative redesign and user interface expertise may improve implementation.

Towards a novel approach guiding the decision-making process for anticancer treatment in patients with advanced cancer: framework for systemic anticancer treatment with palliative intent

Background

Weighing risks and benefits is currently the primary criterion for decisions regarding systemic anticancer treatment (SACT) in far advanced cancer patients, also in the modern immunotherapy- and molecular-targeted driven oncology. Decision aids rarely include substantially key concepts of early integrated palliative care (PC) and communication science. We compiled decisional factors (DFs) important for guiding the use of SACT with palliative intent (SACT-PI) and explored these DFs regarding their applicability in routine clinical care.

Patients and methods

Clinician (participants: n = 28) and patient (n = 15) focus groups were conducted in an integrated oncology and PC setting. Thematic analysis was used to identify DFs. A Delphi survey of clinicians ranked the importance of DFs in routine decision-making. DFs were aligned with elements of the typical decision-making process, resulting in an eight-step guide for making SACT-PI decisions in clinical practice.

Results

Eight focus groups revealed 55 DFs relating to established topics like providing information and risk–benefit analysis, as well as to PC topics like patients’ attitudes, beliefs, and hopes; patient–physician interaction; and physician attitudes. Agreement on the relative importance was reached for 34 (62%) of 55 DFs, assigned to five elements: patient/family, clinicians/system, patient-clinician-interaction, information/patient education, risk–benefit weighting/actual decision. These themes are embedded in a potential clinically useful SACT-PI Decision Framework, which includes eight steps: assess, educate, verify, reflect, discuss, weigh, pause, and decide.

Conclusions

The SACT-PI Decision Framework integrates subjective patient factors, interpersonal factors, and PC issues into decision-making. Our findings complement existing decision aids and prompt lists by framing DFs in the context of SACT-PI and enforce the decision ‘process’, not the decision act. Further research is needed to explore the relative importance of DFs in specific patient situations and test structured decision-making processes, such as our SACT-PI Decision Framework, against standard care.

•

Patient-centered decisions in advanced cancer care demand a stepwise decisional process, not a single decision act.

•

The decision process includes key palliative care domains, e.g. illness understanding, symptom control, or end-of-life preparation.

•

Patients’ attitudes, beliefs, hopes, patient–physician interaction, and physician attitudes demand structured observation.

•

The SACT-PI Decision Framework includes concrete steps: assess, educate, verify, reflect, discuss, weigh, pause, decide.

•

Interprofessionally working oncology clinicians may transform decision-making processes in oncology beyond decision aids.

Evaluating the implementation and impact of navigator-supported remote symptom monitoring and management: a protocol for a hybrid type 2 clinical trial

Background

Symptoms in patients with advanced cancer are often inadequately captured during encounters with the healthcare team. Emerging evidence demonstrates that weekly electronic home-based patient-reported symptom monitoring with automated alerts to clinicians reduces healthcare utilization, improves health-related quality of life, and lengthens survival. However, oncology practices have lagged in adopting remote symptom monitoring into routine practice, where specific patient populations may have unique barriers. One approach to overcoming barriers is utilizing resources from value-based payment models, such as patient navigators who are ideally positioned to assume a leadership role in remote symptom monitoring implementation. This implementation approach has not been tested in standard of care, and thus optimal implementation strategies are needed for large-scale roll-out.

Methods

This hybrid type 2 study design evaluates the implementation and effectiveness of remote symptom monitoring for all patients and for diverse populations in two Southern academic medical centers from 2021 to 2026. This study will utilize a pragmatic approach, evaluating real-world data collected during routine care for quantitative implementation and patient outcomes. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) will be used to conduct a qualitative evaluation at key time points to assess barriers and facilitators, implementation strategies, fidelity to implementation strategies, and perceived utility of these strategies. We will use a mixed-methods approach for data interpretation to finalize a formal implementation blueprint.

Discussion

This pragmatic evaluation of real-world implementation of remote symptom monitoring will generate a blueprint for future efforts to scale interventions across health systems with diverse patient populations within value-based healthcare models.

Trial registration

NCT04809740; date of registration 3/22/2021.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07914-6.

Development and evaluation of the efficacy of a web-based education program among cancer patients undergoing treatment with systemic chemotherapy: a randomized controlled trial

Purpose

The study aimed to develop a web-based education program among cancer patients undergoing treatment with systemic chemotherapy and to evaluate the efficacy of the program on symptom control, quality of life, self-efficacy, and depression.

Methods

A web-based education program was prepared in line with patient needs, evidence-based guidelines, and expert opinions and tested with 10 cancer patients. The single-blind, randomized controlled study was conducted at a medical oncology unit of a university hospital. Pretests were applied to 60 cancer patients undergoing treatment with systemic chemotherapy, and the patients (intervention: 30, control: 30) were randomized. The intervention group used a web-based education program for 3 months, and they were allowed to communicate with researchers 24/7 via the website. The efficacy of a web-based education program at baseline and after 12 weeks was evaluated. The CONSORT 2010 guideline was performed.

Results

In the first phase results of the study, it was found that most of the patients with cancer wanted to receive education about symptom management and the side effects of the treatment. Expert opinions on the developed website were found to be compatible with each other (Kendall’s Wa = 0.233, p = 0.008). According to the randomized controlled study results, patients who received web-based education reported significantly fewer symptoms (p = 0.026) and better quality of life (p = 0.001), but there was no statistically significant difference in the self-efficacy and depression levels during the 3-month follow-up period (p˃0.05). The most frequently visited links in the web-based education program by the patients with cancer were the management of chemotherapy-related symptoms (62.6%).

Conclusion

A web-based education program was found to be efficacy in remote symptom management and improving the quality of life of cancer patients.

Trial registration

www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT05076916 (October 12, 2021, retrospectively registered).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07039-w.

Visualization formats of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice: a systematic review about preferences and interpretation accuracy

PURPOSE

The use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for individual patient management within clinical practice is becoming increasingly important. New evidence about graphic visualization formats for PROMs scores has become available. This systematic literature review evaluated evidence for graphic visualization formats of PROMs data in clinical practice for patients and clinicians, for both individual and group level PROMs data.

METHODS

Studies published between 2000 and 2020 were extracted from CINAHL, PubMed, PsychInfo, and Medline. Studies included patients ≥ 18 years old in daily clinical practice. Papers not available in English, without full-text access, or that did not specifically describe visualization of PROMs data were excluded. Outcomes were: visualization preferences; interpretation accuracy; guidance for clinical interpretation.

RESULTS

Twenty-five out of 789 papers were included for final analysis. Most frequently studied formats were: bar charts, line graphs, and pie charts. Patients preferred bar charts and line graphs as these were easy and quick for retrieving information about their PROMs scores over time. Clinicians' interpretation accuracy and preferences were similar among graphic visualization formats. Scores were most often compared with patients' own previous scores; to further guide clinical interpretation, scores were compared to norm population scores. Different 'add-ons' improved interpretability for patients and clinicians, e.g. using colors, descriptions of measurement scale directionality, descriptive labels, and brief definitions.

CONCLUSION

There was no predominant graphical visualization format approach in terms of preferences or interpretation accuracy for both patients and clinicians. Detailed clarification of graph content is essential.

The effect of decision support systems on pain in patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

This study was conducted to systematically examine the effect of decision support systems (DSSs) applied to patients with cancer on pain severity.

REVIEW METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis. A search was done on Web of Science, Science Direct, PubMed, ProQuest, EBSCOhost/CINAHL Complete, Scopus, Springer Link, Cochrane Library, and Ovid databases, which covered a period until September 2021. Meta-analysis of the data was conducted on the CMA 3 software package. Comprehensive reviews were conducted by two independent researchers in line with the PICOS criteria. The study was conducted according to the PRISMA checklist.

FINDINGS

Five randomized controlled trials with 1.880 participants were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. In the study, visits, consultations, simulation of patient outcomes, telephone support, and email applications were employed for periods ranging from 6 weeks to 6 months. The evaluation of the meta-analysis results indicated that DSSs had positive effects on pain severity in patients with cancer (Hedge's g = 0.22; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis show that DSSs can be used as an effective and comfortable technological application in reducing the severity of pain in patients with cancer.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The use of DSSs for pain severity in patients with cancer is an effective method. In line with the findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis, awareness and knowledge levels of all health disciplines about DSSs will increase. It is believed that the use of DSSs to improve patient-centered care will be guiding.

A PRO-cision medicine intervention to personalize cancer care using patient-reported outcomes: intervention development and feasibility-testing

PURPOSE

PRO-cision medicine refers to personalizing care using patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We developed and feasibility-tested a PRO-cision Medicine remote PRO monitoring intervention designed to identify symptoms and reduce the frequency of routine in-person visits.

METHODS

We conducted focus groups and one-on-one interviews with metastatic breast (n = 15) and prostate (n = 15) cancer patients and clinicians (n = 10) to elicit their perspectives on a PRO-cision Medicine intervention's design, value, and concerns. We then feasibility-tested the intervention in 24 patients with metastatic breast cancer over 6-months. We obtained feedback via end-of-study surveys (patients) and interviews (clinicians).

RESULTS

Focus group and interview participants reported that remote PRO symptom reporting could alert clinicians to issues and avoid unneeded/unwanted visits. However, some patients did not perceive avoiding visits as beneficial. Clinicians were concerned about workflow. In the feasibility-test, 24/236 screened patients (10%) enrolled. Many patients were already being seen less frequently than monthly (n = 97) or clinicians did not feel comfortable seeing them less frequently than monthly (n = 31). Over the 6-month study, there were 75 total alerts from 392 PRO symptom assessments (average 0.19 alert/assessment). Patients had an average of 4 in-person visits (vs. expected 6.5 without the intervention). Patients (n = 19/24) reported high support on the end-of-study survey, with more than 80% agreeing with positive statements about the intervention. Clinician end-of-study interviews (n = 11/14) suggested that PRO symptom monitoring be added to clinic visits, rather than replacing them, and noted the increasing role of telemedicine.

CONCLUSIONS

Future research should explore combining remote PRO symptom monitoring with telemedicine and in-person visits.

Clinicians' Attitudes and Behaviors Towards Communicating Electronically with Patients: A Grounded Practical Theory Approach

Secure messaging (SM), asynchronous communication between patients and clinicians, is an increasingly popular tool among patients to contact clinicians about their care. Despite patients' enthusiasm, clinicians have been hesitant to embrace the technology to communicate with patients. Using the theoretical and methodological framework of Grounded Practical Theory (GPT), we analyzed and interpreted clinicians' perceptions, attitudes, and approaches toward SM to communicate with patients. Twenty clinicians in medical oncology and radiation oncology participated in audio-recorded, semi-structured interviews. Findings revealed the problems with using SM, such as difficulty interpreting low-quality messages, the amount of time needed to devote to responding, and its potential to negatively affect the patient-clinician relationship. Techniques employed to manage such problems consisted of using different forms of communication and utilizing messaging to expedite workloads. The philosophical rationale of clinicians toward SM was that it can improve patient care and this form of communication is already embedded within existing patient care. Overall, this article clarifies how clinicians can re-conceptualize how they think about SM so that it becomes a productive, informative, and useful aspect of patient care.

Adoption of Patient-Generated Health Data in Oncology: A Report From the NCCN EHR Oncology Advisory Group

BACKGROUND

Collecting, monitoring, and responding to patient-generated health data (PGHD) are associated with improved quality of life and patient satisfaction, and possibly with improved patient survival in oncology. However, the current state of adoption, types of PGHD collected, and degree of integration into electronic health records (EHRs) is unknown.

METHODS

The NCCN EHR Oncology Advisory Group formed a Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Workgroup to perform an assessment and provide recommendations for cancer centers, researchers, and EHR vendors to advance the collection and use of PGHD in oncology. The issues were evaluated via a survey of NCCN Member Institutions. Questions were designed to assess the current state of PGHD collection, including how, what, and where PGHD are collected. Additionally, detailed questions about governance and data integration into EHRs were asked.

RESULTS

Of 28 Member Institutions surveyed, 23 responded. The collection and use of PGHD is widespread among NCCN Members Institutions (96%). Most centers (90%) embed at least some PGHD into the EHR, although challenges remain, as evidenced by 88% of respondents reporting the use of instruments not integrated. Forty-seven percent of respondents are leveraging PGHD for process automation and adherence to best evidence. Content type and integration touchpoints vary among the members, as well as governance maturity.

CONCLUSIONS

The reported variability regarding PGHD suggests that it may not yet have reached its full potential for oncology care delivery. As the adoption of PGHD in oncology continues to expand, opportunities exist to enhance their utility. Among the recommendations for cancer centers is establishment of a governance process that includes patients. Researchers should consider determining which PGHD instruments confer the highest value. It is recommended that EHR vendors collaborate with cancer centers to develop solutions for the collection, interpretation, visualization, and use of PGHD.