Distress Screening Through Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) at an Academic Cancer Center and Network Site: Implementation of a Hybrid Model

PURPOSE

Cancer care guidelines recommend regular distress screening of patients, with approximately one in three patients with cancer experiencing significant distress. However, the implementation of such programs is variable and inconsistent. We sought to assess the feasibility of implementing a hybrid electronic and paper screening tool for distress in all patients coming to a large academic cancer center and an associated integrated network site.

METHODS

Patients at an academic cancer center (Stanford Cancer Center) and its associated integrated network site received either an electronic or on-paper modified Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Global Health questionnaire, to assess overall health and distress. We used the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance implementation framework to test and report on the feasibility of using this questionnaire. Iterative workflow changes were made to implement the questionnaire throughout the healthcare system, including processes to integrate with existing electronic health records.

RESULTS

From June 2015 to December 2017, 53,954 questionnaires representing 26,242 patients were collected. Approximately 30% of the questionnaires were completed before the visit on an electronic patient portal. The number of patients meeting the positive screen threshold remained around 40% throughout the study period. Following assessment, there were 3,763 referrals to cancer supportive services. Of note, those with a positive screen were more likely to have a referral to supportive care (odds ratio, 6.4; 95% CI, 5.8 to 6.9; P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

The hybrid electronic and on-paper use of a commonly available patient-reported outcome tool, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Global Health, as a large-scale distress screening method, is feasible at a large integrated cancer center.

Distress screening through PROMIS at an academic cancer center and network site: Implementation of a hybrid model

2021

Background: The NCCN guidelines recommend routine distress screening of patients with cancer, but the implementation of such programs is inconsistent. Up to one in three such patients experience distress, however fewer than half of them are identified and referred for supportive services. Methods: We implemented a hybrid (electronic and paper) distress screening tool, using a modified version of the PROMIS-Global Health questionnaire. Patients received either an electronic or in-clinic paper questionnaire to assess overall health and distress at the Stanford Cancer Center and its associated integrated network site. Iterative changes were made including integration with the electronic health record (EHR) to trigger questionnaires for appointments every 60 days. A consensus “positive screen” threshold was defined, with data collected on responses and subsequent referrals placed to a supportive care services platform. Results: Between June 2015 and December 2017, 53,954 unique questionnaires representing 12,744 distinct patients were collected, with an average completion rate of 58%. Approximately 30% of the questionnaires were completed prior to the visit electronically through a patient portal. The number of patients meeting the positive screen threshold remained ~ 40% throughout this period. Following assessment by the clinical team, there were 3763 referrals to cancer supportive services. Among the six most common referral categories, those with a positive screen were more likely to have a referral placed (OR 6.4, 95% CI 5.8-6.9 p- < 0.0001), with a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 61%. However, 89% of responses with a positive screen did not have a referral to supportive care services. Conclusions: The hybrid electronic and paper use of a commonly available patient reported outcome tool, as a high throughput distress screening tool, is feasible at a multi-site academic cancer center. Our positive screen rate for referrals was sensitive and consistent, but with a low positive predictive value. This screening also resulted in variable clinical response and overall increased clinical burden. Future directions for our group have included refining the threshold for a positive screen and implementation of a real-time response system, especially to address acute concerns.

Effect of Medical Scribes on Outpatient Oncology Visits at a Multidisciplinary Cancer Center

PURPOSE

The use of medical scribes has emerged as a strategy to increase clinic workflow efficiency and reduce physician burnout. While oncology clinics may be ideally suited to scribe integration because of the high burden of documentation, oncology-specific scribe research has been limited. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of scribe integration on clinic workflow efficiency and physician satisfaction and quality of life in outpatient oncology clinics.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, concurrent qualitative and quantitative analysis of patient visit durations and survey data for 129 attending physicians affiliated with an academic hospital's cancer center between January 2017 and January 2019. Thirty-three physicians were paired with scribes in each physician's individual clinic or clinics.

RESULTS

In terms of clinic efficiency, physicians with scribes had a 12.1% decrease in their overall average patient visit duration compared with their own time before receiving a scribe (P < .0001) and spent significantly less time completing charts at the end of the day (P = .04). Compared with their peers, oncologists with scribes showed a 10%-20% decrease in the duration of all patient visits. Scribes also contributed to patient care, as shown by 90% of physicians surveyed who strongly agreed that they spent less time at the computer and more time with patients; 100% of physicians surveyed strongly agreed that scribes improved their quality of life.

CONCLUSION

The integration of medical scribes into oncology clinics across several oncologic disciplines has the potential to reduce burnout through increasing physician satisfaction and quality of life, improving patient care, and streamlining clinic workflow.

PathWell: The development of a triage center and access hub for comprehensive palliative care in oncology

162

Background: Routine screening to identify palliative care (PC) needs, followed by assessment and management of needs is critical for high-quality cancer care. Our current healthcare system there is poor screening for PC needs, low referral rates to PC services, and unmet needs. In response to these gaps, we developed a dedicated triage center to streamline the assessment of PC needs and better connect patients with appropriate supportive care services. Methods: We identified 24 services at our academic cancer center that provide PC and supportive services. Examples include PC, psycho-oncology, survivorship, nutrition, and social work. Representatives from these groups convened to map service overlap and develop referral structures based on patient need and acuity. A triage hub (PathWell) was established to complete uniform assessments of patient needs and determine appropriate referrals. The hub utilized a centralized scheduling platform, new patient coordinators, and an oncology nurse for assessment and triage. Referrals to the hub were made via EHR, direct patient contact, or prompted by routine distress screening. Results: PathWell launched on February 1, 2016. Referral volume to the hub was 54 in February, 91 in March and 74 in April. Referrals from PathWell were distributed amongst the 24 services, the majority of referrals going to PC, psycho-oncology and nutrition. All programs that were part of the triage center experienced growth in volume; PC 41%, psycho-oncology 14%, nutrition 16%. Conclusions: Partnerships between specialist services and dedicated triage staff can improve early access to resources for PC needs. Early data from PathWell reveals improved assessment and management of patient needs via referrals to appropriate services. The hub has also unveiled important resource gaps (e.g. physical therapy, integrative medicine). These gaps were not previously quantified, and thus not prioritized by leadership. Future state for PathWell includes reporting operational and health-related outcomes, optimizing distress screening, establishing care pathways for patient subtypes (e.g., metastatic disease), and hosting interdisciplinary tumor boards for complex distress management.

Economic assessment of the association of northern california oncologists member practices

In late 2009 and early 2010, the Association of Northern California Oncologists conducted an economic assessment on a volunteer sample (n = 14) of northern California state oncology society member practices to measure key economic factors, diagnose economic viability, and prescribe changes to practice management to enhance practice economic viability. Recommendations for individual member practices as well as for the state oncology society were made as a result of the findings of this study. Results from follow-up interviews conducted with study practices approximately 1 year after the original assessments reveal that most recommendations were implemented and seem to have generally strengthened the economic performance of the practices.