Electronic real-time assessment of patient-reported outcomes in routine care—first findings and experiences from the implementation in a comprehensive cancer center

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Freya Trautmann ◽  
Leopold Hentschel ◽  
Beate Hornemann ◽  
Anke Rentsch ◽  
Michael Baumann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Routine Care ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Time Assessment

Implementation of Real-Time Assessment of Patient-Reported Outcomes in a Heart Failure Clinic: A Feasibility Study

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (11) ◽  
pp. 813-816 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josef Stehlik ◽  
Carlos Rodriguez-Correa ◽  
John A. Spertus ◽  
Joshua Biber ◽  
Jose Nativi-Nicolau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Feasibility Study ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Heart Failure Clinic ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Time Assessment

scholarly journals Integrative Oncology Physician Consultations at a Comprehensive Cancer Center: Analysis of Demographic, Clinical and Patient Reported Outcomes

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 395-402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel Lopez ◽  
Jennifer McQuade ◽  
Lorenzo Cohen ◽  
Jane T Williams ◽  
Amy R Spelman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Integrative Oncology ◽  
Patient Reported

Pilot study of iPad-based patient-reported outcomes at the MGH Cancer Center.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (30_suppl) ◽  
pp. 190-190
Author(s):  
Aparna Raj Parikh ◽  
Margaret Soriano ◽  
Ephraim P. Hochberg ◽  
Courtney McLeish ◽  
Inga Tolin Lennes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Completion Rates ◽  
Breast Lymphoma ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Front Desk ◽  
Chemotherapy Patients ◽  
To Receive

190 Background: Patient reported outcomes (PROs) have been shown to improve outcomes in cancer patients in clinical trials and have also been shown to improve the patient experience, provide real-time access to patient reported symptoms and are increasingly used across disciplines. Given the importance of PROs, at the MGH Cancer Center, we implemented a pilot using iPADs to capture patient reported outcomes for patients receiving IV chemotherapy in the breast and lymphoma clinics as well all IV chemotherapy patients at one of the MGH satellite clinics where patients across all disease groups are seen. Methods: 12 measures from the PRO-CTCAE were selected to be applicable to all cancer patients. Working with the technology team and EPIC team at MGH the selected PROs were loaded into iPADs and are automatically assigned to patients receiving IV chemotherapy. Staff and clinicians were trained in the breast, lymphoma and satellite clinic. Patient who were receiving IV chemotherapy were assigned iPADs at check in. Patients completed the questionnaire and in real-time, the data was available in the EPIC chart. The objectives of the pilot were to assess the feasibility of collecting iPAD based PROs at the MGH Cancer Center. Results: In the 4-month pilot, there were 2,304 visit types that were eligible to receive an iPAD for PRO collection, 79% (N = 1,1816) patients were assigned an iPAD. Of the 1,816 patients assigned an iPAD, 65% (N = 1,173) patients completed the PROs, 4% (N = 36) partially completed the PROs. In terms of completion at the main disease specialty clinic vs the satellite, completion rates were higher at the satellite (77% vs 44%). During one week, we asked the front desk to record why patients did not complete the PROs-93 patients were assessed, 45% of patient refused the iPAD, in 28% of these patients the staff did not capture the reason and 22% were not given an iPAD. Conclusions: This pilot demonstrates the feasibility of collecting PROs in an oncology clinic for patients receiving IV chemotherapy. We plan to continue to improve the assignment of PROs to eligible patients, educate staff, providers and patients on the important of PROs and plan to expand to all the clinics at MGH Cancer Center and satellite centers.

Patient reported outcomes in acute inpatient rehabilitation in a comprehensive cancer center.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e21579-e21579
Author(s):  
Amy Ng ◽  
Diane D Liu ◽  
Swati Bansal ◽  
Janet L. Williams ◽  
Jack Brian Fu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Inpatient Rehabilitation ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Patient Reported

Real-Time Assessment of Patient Reported Outcomes in Heart Failure Clinic

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (8) ◽  
pp. S29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Rodriguez-Correa ◽  
Joshua Biber ◽  
Rachel Hess ◽  
John A. Spertus ◽  
Jose Nativi-Nicolau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Heart Failure Clinic ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Time Assessment

Predictors of adherence to patient reported outcomes and psychosocial needs questionnaire in a culturally diverse ambulatory oncology setting: The My Wellness Check Program.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 173-173
Author(s):  
Akina Natori ◽  
Vandana Devika Sookdeo ◽  
Tulay Koru-Sengul ◽  
Matthew Schlumbrecht ◽  
Carmen Calfa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Support Services ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Psychosocial Needs ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Cancer Support ◽  
Ambulatory Oncology ◽  
Patient Reported

173 Background: Electronic health record (EHR) integrated symptom monitoring using patient reported outcomes (PRO) has been associated with improved outcomes, including health-related quality of life (HRQoL), in cancer survivors. However, these improvements have been documented through reasonably high completion rates of PRO measures in predominantly non-Hispanic White patient populations using only English language assessments. This study aimed to 1) examine factors associated with the completion of PRO assessments and 2) test differences in referrals to cancer support services between PRO responders and non-responders in a cohort of cancer survivors with significant racial, ethnic, and primary language diversity. Methods: A retrospective analysis (October 2019-February 2021) was performed for patients who were assigned the My Wellness Check (MWC) program at a tertiary, comprehensive cancer center. MWC is an EHR-based PRO assessment and referral program that uses PROMIS computer adaptive tests for depression, anxiety, pain, fatigue, and physical function as well as a psychosocial needs assessment. MWC PRO questionnaire is available in English or Spanish based on patient preference. Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients were collected and incorporated in multivariable binary logistic regression model to examine factors associated with completion of the MWC PRO questionnaires. The frequency of referrals to cancer support services was compared by Chi-square test between MWC PRO responders and non-responders. Adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were calculated. Results: Of the 5306 patients eligible to complete MWC PRO questionnaire, the majority were female (64.1%), White (86.9%), Hispanic (65.8%), English speaker (55.4%), and 46.0% were responders. Patients who were younger than 65 (aOR 1.39; 95%CI 1.22-1.59; p < 0.0001), female (1.23; 1.09-1.41; p = 0.0019), non-Hispanic/Latino (1.43; 1.25-1.64; p < 0.0001), living with partners ( = 1.28; 1.13-1.46; p = 0.0001), and receipt of active treatment (1.37; 1.18-1.58; p < 0.0001) were significantly associated with MWC PRO completion. Responders were referred to cancer support services more often than non-responders (16.6% vs 5.4%, p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Patient-level and clinical factors predict completion of PRO measures, and responders were more likely to have a referral to cancer support services. To optimize supportive care for ambulatory cancer patients, further research is needed to identify factors that can promote patient engagement, particularly in patients who are under-utilizers of such services.

Integrative oncology consultations at a comprehensive cancer center: Analysis of patient reported outcomes.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e21690-e21690
Author(s):  
Gabriel Lopez ◽  
Jennifer Leigh McQuade ◽  
Richard T. Lee ◽  
Bryan Fellman ◽  
Yisheng Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Integrative Oncology ◽  
Patient Reported

Distribution and frequency of patient-reported symptomatic adverse events at a comprehensive cancer center.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19117-e19117
Author(s):  
Jessica Cleveland ◽  
Michael J. Hassett ◽  
Sherry Lee ◽  
Isaac S. Chua ◽  
Laura Stewart Dominici ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Surgical Oncology ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Shortness Of Breath ◽  
Ambulatory Oncology ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Oncology Practice ◽  
Practice Methods

e19117 Background: Systematic review of electronic patient reported outcomes (ePRO) has been shown to improve quality of life and overall survival in clinical trial. We previously demonstrated feasibility of ePRO across Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI). We sought to examine the distribution and frequency of first symptomatic adverse events (SAEs) among ePRO responders in ambulatory oncology practice. Methods: The ePRO tool uses the validated NCI developed Patient Reported Outcomes – Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) instrument to assess attributes of 15 core SAEs (fatigue, insomnia, general pain, decreased appetite, nausea, vomiting, constipation, diarrhea, shortness of breath, numbness and tingling, rash, concentration, fever, anxiety, sadness) selected by clinician stakeholders and deployed via any internet-enabled device once every 7 days. Responses are viewable in the EHR, scored 0 to 3 using an algorithm, with scores of 3 highlighted to indicate severe grade SAEs. Results: We examined the distribution and frequency of the first 5183 unique ePRO reports for unselected patients seen in the medical, radiation and surgical oncology outpatient clinics of four pilot multidisciplinary clinics (Breast, Genitourinary, Gastrointestinal and Head and Neck) between September 2018-December 2019. Twenty one percent of eligible patients responded to ePRO (5183 of 26,084). Most respondents were female (59%), Caucasian (89%), and age 50-69 years (56% compared to 16% age <50 years, 28% age ≥70; range 19-98 years). The frequency of grade 3 SAEs was pain (10%), fatigue (6%), insomnia (4%), constipation (3%), numbness and tingling/concentration/anxiety/decreased appetite (2%), diarrhea/shortness of breath/sadness (1%), and rash/fever/nausea/vomiting (none) (Table). Conclusions: We observed a consistent distribution of SAEs across cancer types, age and sex. The most frequently reported SAEs are those clinicians struggle to treat with medications - pain, fatigue, insomnia and anxiety. Research to develop effective strategies to address this constellation of SAEs should be prioritized. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document