PMU111 - BEST PRACTICE METHODS AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT, EVALUATION, AND IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERVIEWER-ADMINISTERED PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES (ADPROS)

e18312 Background: Establishing a system to monitor patient reported outcomes (“PRO”) has been demonstrated to be essential for a well-functioning cancer system. Studies have shown that routine collection of PROs allows providers to address medical issues earlier and impacts a patient’s overall survival. Unmet needs for symptom management are prevalent in the cancer population, especially patients with advanced cancer. Approximately 35% of UCLA Hematology-Oncology patients with advanced cancer in 2016 presented to Emergency Rooms for symptom-related complaints such as nausea, pain, constipation, dehydration, and fatigue. We hypothesize that the creation of an electronic PRO platform through EPIC MyChart will ensure patients receive timely evaluation of their symptoms, resulting in improved quality of life, and decreased ER and hospital utilization. Methods: We developed an innovative PRO platform through Epic MyChart along with a Best Practice Advisory alert system to identify patients at risk for worsening symptoms, ER visits, and inpatient admissions. We then built an electronic version of the Edmonson Symptoms Assessment System, which providers can push to patients through Epic MyChart, with results stored within the Flowsheets section of Epic. We also built a passive alert using Epic’s Best Practice Advisory (“BPA”) system, to notify providers when a patient’s MyChart ESAS Assessment Scores have exceeded a defined threshold. Results: Preliminary data from surveys sent to a series of advanced cancer patients seen in an outpatient palliative oncology clinic over 1 month, demonstrated a 100% response rate (6/7) surveys completed when sent one week prior to patient’s being seeing in clinic, and 17% response rate (1/6) when sent two to three weeks prior to clinic visit. The average total ESAS score reported was 40, with average individual score of 4/10 for any given symptom. Conclusions: We will implement this electronic PRO platform in multiple oncology clinics at UCLA, and measure provider and patient satisfaction, completion rates, and monitor outcomes such as ED visits and inpatient admissions. We hope this system will lead to an overall survival benefit. This project demonstrates the potential of developing innovative PRO platforms through Epic MyChart and the importance of clinical workflows in the implementation process.

Download Full-text

What Is the Evidence for Early Mobilisation in Elective Spine Surgery? A Narrative Review

Healthcare ◽

10.3390/healthcare7030092 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 7 (3) ◽

pp. 92 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Burgess ◽

Wainwright

Keyword(s):

Length Of Stay ◽

Spinal Surgery ◽

Patient Reported Outcomes ◽

Best Practice ◽

Enhanced Recovery ◽

Bed Rest ◽

Narrative Review ◽

Early Mobilisation ◽

Specific Protocol ◽

Patient Reported

Early mobilisation is a cornerstone of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) and is encouraged following spinal procedures. However, evidence of its implementation is limited and there are no formal guidelines on optimal prescription. This narrative review aimed to evaluate the evidence for the effect of early mobilisation following elective spinal surgery on length of stay, postoperative complications, performance-based function and patient-reported outcomes. Four trials (five articles) that compared a specific protocol of early in-hospital mobilisation to no structured mobilisation or bed rest were selected for inclusion. Nine studies that investigated the implementation of a multimodal intervention that was inclusive of an early mobilisation protocol were also included. Results suggest that goal-directed early mobilisation, delivered using an evidence-based algorithm with a clear, procedure-specific inclusion and exclusion criteria, may reduce length of stay and complication rate. In addition, there is evidence to suggest improved performance-based and patient-reported outcomes when compared to bed rest following elective spinal surgery. Whilst this review reveals a lack of evidence to determine the exact details of which early mobilisation protocols are most effective, mobilisation on the day of surgery and ambulation from the first postoperative day is possible and should be the goal. Future work should aim to establish consensus-based, best practice guidelines on the optimal type and timing of mobilisation, and how this should be modified for different spinal procedures.

Download Full-text

Effectiveness and Quality of Implementing a Best Practice Model of Care for Low Back Pain (BetterBack) Compared with Routine Care in Physiotherapy: A Hybrid Type 2 Trial

Journal of Clinical Medicine ◽

10.3390/jcm10061230 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (6) ◽

pp. 1230

Author(s):

Karin Schröder ◽

Birgitta Öberg ◽

Paul Enthoven ◽

Henrik Hedevik ◽

Maria Fors ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Patient Reported Outcomes ◽

Best Practice ◽

Illness Perception ◽

Intervention Group ◽

Routine Care ◽

Control Group ◽

Model Of Care ◽

Practice Model ◽

Patient Reported

Low back pain (LBP) occurs in all ages and first-line treatment by physiotherapists is common. The main aim of the current study was to evaluate the effectiveness of implementing a best practice model of care for LBP (intervention group—BetterBack☺ MoC) compared to routine physiotherapy care (control group) regarding longitudinal patient reported outcomes. The BetterBack☺ MoC contains clinical guideline recommendations and support tools to facilitate clinician adherence to guidelines. A secondary exploratory aim was to compare patient outcomes based on the fidelity of fulfilling a clinical practice quality index regarding physiotherapist care. A stepped cluster randomized design nested patients with LBP in the three clusters which were allocated to control (n = 203) or intervention (n = 264). Patient reported measures were collected at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months and analyzed with mixed model regression. The primary outcome was between-group changes from baseline to 3 months for pain intensity and disability. Implementation of the BetterBack☺ MoC did not show any between-group differences in the primary outcomes compared with routine care. However, the intervention group showed significantly higher satisfaction at 3 months and clinically meaningful greater improvement in LBP illness perception at 3 months and quality of life at 3 and 6 months but not in patient enablement and global impression of change compared with the control group. Physiotherapists’ care that adhered to all clinical practice quality indices resulted in an improvement of most patient reported outcomes with a clinically meaningful greater improved LBP illness perception at 3 month and quality of life at 3 and 6 months, significantly greater improvement in LBP illness perception, pain and satisfaction at 3 and 6 months and significantly better enablement at all time points as well as better global improvement outcomes at 3 months compared with non-adherent care. This highlights the importance of clinical guideline based primary care for improving patient reported LBP outcomes.

Download Full-text

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

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2020.38.15_suppl.e19117 ◽

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]

Download Full-text