Methods for alerting clinicians to concerning symptom questionnaire responses during cancer care: Approaches from two randomized trials (STAR, AFT-39 PRO-TECT).

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (30_suppl) ◽  
pp. 158-158
Author(s):  
Angela M. Stover ◽  
Sydney Henson ◽  
Allison Mary Deal ◽  
Carrie Tompkins Stricker ◽  
Karen Joan Hammelef ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High School ◽  
Physical Function ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Patient Reported

158 Background: There is limited research on methods for alerting clinicians to concerning patient-reported outcome (PRO) responses and how often PROs trigger alerts to nurses during cancer care. Methods: In two randomized trials, adults with advanced cancer receiving chemotherapy were enrolled. Participants were randomized to usual care vs. weekly PROs completed between visits (with automated feedback to nurses). PRO responses in the intervention arm triggered automated email alerts to nurses for frequent, severe, or worsening symptoms in the last 7 days. Alert thresholds for PROs were chosen a priori but were unique to each study. The “Symptom Tracking and Reporting” (STAR) trial was conducted at one academic medical center. The “PROs to Enhance Cancer Treatment” (PRO-TECT [AFT-39]) cluster-randomized trial is being conducted in > 30 community practices. Results: In STAR, 766 patients participated (58% female, 38% ages ≥65, 17% minority, 28% ≤high school). 441 participants were randomized to the intervention arm, where 1,431/84,212 items (2%) triggered a concerning symptom alert, during 1,070/8,498 weeks (13%). Frequent alerts were for fatigue (62%), pain (32%), and appetite (16%). In PRO-TECT (AFT-39), 300 patients have been enrolled (58% female, 49% ages ≥65, 8% minority, 47% ≤high school) out of 1,000. 146 participants have been randomized to the intervention arm, where 1,422/24,739 items (6%) triggered an alert, during 824/2249 weeks (37%). Common alerts were for pain (48%), physical function (35%), and diarrhea (15%). PRO-TECT provided clinical decision support with alerts. Conclusions: In two randomized trials in advanced cancer, PROs collected during care delivery enabled tailored treatment based on issues identified on PROs. Pain, physical function, appetite, and diarrhea commonly triggered alerts for concerning symptoms. Early PRO-TECT results are showing a trend for higher weekly alert rates for concerning symptoms (37% vs. 13% in STAR), which may indicate that the PRO intervention will be even more effective in community practices. Results assist in addressing logistical considerations for implementing PROs into routine care. Clinical trial information: NCT03249090.

scholarly journals Implementation of a cloud-based electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) platform in patients with advanced cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Olga Generalova ◽  
Mohana Roy ◽  
Evan Hall ◽  
Sumit A. Shah ◽  
Kristen Cunanan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Supportive Care ◽  
Healthcare Utilization ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Data Privacy ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract Background Patient reported outcomes (PROs) have been associated with improved symptom management and quality of life in patients with cancer. However, the implementation of PROs in an academic clinical practice has not been thoroughly described. Here we report on the execution, feasibility and healthcare utilization outcomes of an electronic PRO (ePRO) application for cancer patients at an academic medical center. Methods We conducted a randomized trial comparing an experimental ePRO arm to standard of care in patients with advanced cancer in the thoracic, gastrointestinal, and genitourinary oncology groups at Stanford Cancer Center from March 2018 to November 2019. We describe the pre-implementation, implementation, and post-implementation phases of the ePRO arm, technological barriers, electronic health record (EHR) integration, clinician burden, and patient data privacy and security. Feasibility was pre-specified to be at least 70% completion of all questionnaires. Acceptability was based on patient and clinician feedback. Ambulatory healthcare utilization was assessed by reviewing numbers of phone messages, electronic portal messages, and referrals for supportive care. Results Of 617 ePRO questionnaires sent to 72 patients, 445 (72%) were completed. Most clinicians (87.5%) and patients (93%) felt neutral or positive about the ePRO tool’s ease of use. Exposure to ePRO did not cause a measurable change in ambulatory healthcare utilization, with a median of less than two phone messages and supportive care referrals, and 5–6 portal messages. Conclusions Web-based ePRO tools for patients with advanced cancer are feasible and acceptable without increasing clinical burden. Key lessons include the importance of pilot testing, engagement of stakeholders at all levels, and the need for customization by disease group. Future directions for this work include completion of EHR integration, expansion to other centers, and development of integrated workflows for routine clinical practice.

Correlating wearable activity monitor data with PROMIS detected distress and physical functioning in advanced cancer patients.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e21689-e21689 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arvind Manohar Shinde ◽  
Gillian K. Gresham ◽  
Andrew Eugene Hendifar ◽  
Quanlin Li ◽  
Brennan Spiegel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Function ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Physical Functioning ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Sleep Time ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Therapeutic Trial ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Patient Reported

e21689 Background: Patients with advanced cancer experience significant distress. Timely identification and treatment of distress can improve outcomes and quality of life. Domains of distress (i.e. pain, fatigue, physical function) can be assessed using patient reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires. However, PROs can be burdensome to patients, particularly when performed serially. Given the relationship between physical activity and sleep with domains of distress, wearable activity monitors may assist in the real-time detection of distress in advanced cancer patients. Methods: We conducted a prospective, observational study at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and enrolled patients with measurable stage 3+ cancer, ≥18yr, English speaking, ambulatory, with a smartphone, and prognosis of > 3 months. Patients wore a Fitbit Charge HR continuously through 3 consecutive clinic visits, and completed NIH PROMIS tools (Physical Function, Pain, Sleep, Fatigue, and Emotional Distress) during visits. Fitbits recorded average daily step counts, stairs climbed, and sleep time. We conducted regression analyses that adjusted for baseline confounding variables and accounted for correlated responses. Results: 35 patients (Mean age 62; 53% males; 82% GI cancers) were evaluated. Patients had ECOG PS of 0 (20%), 1 (40%), 2 (23%), and 3(17%). The table below displays regression coefficients for steps, floors, and sleep in each PROMIS distress domain. Conclusions: There is a significant association between steps and floors climbed with multiple domains of distress and physical functioning. The lack of association between total sleep time and these PROs, may suggest that other metrics of sleep quality (i.e. awakenings), may be more relevant. These findings support further exploration of wearable data as a continuously monitored PRO surrogate in advanced cancer patients; wearable data should be further validated for use in both clinical and therapeutic trial settings. Clinical trial information: NCT02659358. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals A Comparison of PROMIS Physical Function and Pain Interference Scores in Patients With Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: Research Collection Versus Routine Clinical Collection

Hand ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 771-775 ◽  
Author(s):  
David N. Bernstein ◽  
Bilal Mahmood ◽  
Constantinos Ketonis ◽  
Warren C. Hammert
Keyword(s):  
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome ◽  
Physical Function ◽  
Carpal Tunnel ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Pearson Correlation ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Pain Interference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Tunnel Syndrome

Background: There is a concern that patients may answer patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires differently depending on the purpose—clinical care or research (eg, “Hawthorne effect”). We sought to determine whether Patient-Reported Outcomes Management Information System (PROMIS) scores differ at the same clinic visit based on whether a patient was completing the PRO tool for study or clinical care purposes. Methods: Patients presenting to one surgeon at an academic medical center hand clinic were asked to complete PROMIS Physical Function (PF) and Pain Interference (PI) questionnaires as part of routine care. Those diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome from February 2015 to April 2017 were then asked to participate in a clinical research project, which had them complete PROMIS PF and PROMIS PI again. Data from those who completed both routine and research PROs at each visit were compared. Between the 2 settings, test-retest reliability was determined using Pearson correlation coefficients ( r), and internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach α. Results: A total of 128 unique office visits representing 67 patients fit our inclusion criteria. There was a strong correlation between PROMIS PF and PI in the research and patient care setting (PF: r = 0.82, P < .01; PI: r = 0.83, P < .01). Both domains had a Cronbach α of 0.90. The PROMIS PF scores were not different between the 2 groups ( P = .19), but the PROMIS PI scores were slightly different ( P < .01). Conclusions: Patients appear to be consistent when completing PROMIS for both clinical care and research, supporting the idea that data obtained in either setting are generalizable and appropriate for research purposes.

Implementation of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes in Routine Cancer Care at an Academic Center: Identifying Opportunities and Challenges

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. e1255-e1263
Author(s):  
Sahil Sandhu ◽  
Zoe King ◽  
Michelle Wong ◽  
Sean Bissell ◽  
Jessica Sperling ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Care ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Qualitative Interviews ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Implementation Strategies ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Patient Reported

PURPOSE: Electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) can help clinicians proactively assess and manage their patients’ symptoms. Despite known benefits, there is limited adoption of ePROs into routine clinical care as a result of workflow and technologic challenges. This study identifies oncologists’ perspectives on factors that affect integration of ePROs into clinical workflows. METHODS: We conducted semistructured qualitative interviews with 16 oncologists from a large academic medical center, across diverse subspecialties and cancer types. Oncologists were asked how they currently use or could imagine using ePROs before, during, and after a patient visit. We used an inductive approach to thematically analyze these qualitative data. RESULTS: Results were categorized into the following three main themes: (1) selection and development of ePRO tool, (2) contextual drivers of adoption, and (3) patient-facing concerns. Respondents preferred diagnosis-based ePRO tools over more general symptom screeners. Although they noted information overload as a potential barrier, respondents described strong data visualization and ease of use as facilitators. Contextual drivers of oncologist adoption include identifying target early adopters, incentivizing uptake through use of ePRO data to support billing and documentation, and emphasizing benefits for patient care and efficiency. Respondents also indicated the need to focus on patient-facing issues, such as patient response rate, timing of survey distribution, and validity and reliability of responses. DISCUSSION: Respondents identified several barriers and facilitators to successful uptake of ePROs. Understanding oncologists’ perspectives is essential to inform both practice-level implementation strategies and policy-level decisions to include ePROs in alternative payment models for cancer care.

scholarly journals Using FastTrack to implement an academic medical center and community health center collaborative for cancer care delivery

Healthcare ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 130-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Tesler Waldman ◽  
William Bean ◽  
Anne L. Levine ◽  
Adena Cohen-Bearak ◽  
Fawn A. Phelps ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Community Health ◽  
Health Center ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Community Health Center ◽  
Academic Medical

scholarly journals A Systematic Review of Clinical Decision Support Systems for Clinical Oncology Practice

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 331-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamala A. Pawloski ◽  
Gabriel A. Brooks ◽  
Matthew E. Nielsen ◽  
Barbara A. Olson-Bullis
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Oncology ◽  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Patient Reported

Background: Electronic health records are central to cancer care delivery. Electronic clinical decision support (CDS) systems can potentially improve cancer care quality and safety. However, little is known regarding the use of CDS systems in clinical oncology and their impact on patient outcomes. Methods: A systematic review of peer-reviewed studies was performed to evaluate clinically relevant outcomes related to the use of CDS tools for the diagnosis, treatment, and supportive care of patients with cancer. Peer-reviewed studies published from 1995 through 2016 were included if they assessed clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), costs, or care delivery process measures. Results: Electronic database searches yielded 2,439 potentially eligible papers, with 24 studies included after final review. Most studies used an uncontrolled, pre-post intervention design. A total of 23 studies reported improvement in key study outcomes with use of oncology CDS systems, and 12 studies assessing the systems for computerized chemotherapy order entry demonstrated reductions in prescribing error rates, medication-related safety events, and workflow interruptions. The remaining studies examined oncology clinical pathways, guideline adherence, systems for collection and communication of PROs, and prescriber alerts. Conclusions: There is a paucity of data evaluating clinically relevant outcomes of CDS system implementation in oncology care. Currently available data suggest that these systems can have a positive impact on the quality of cancer care delivery. However, there is a critical need to rigorously evaluate CDS systems in oncology to better understand how they can be implemented to improve patient outcomes.

scholarly journals Models of Outpatient Palliative Care Clinics for Patients With Cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 187-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esme Finlay ◽  
Kristina Newport ◽  
Shanthi Sivendran ◽  
Laurel Kilpatrick ◽  
Michelle Owens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Safety Net Hospital

PURPOSE: Early integration of outpatient palliative care (OPC) benefits patients with advanced cancer and also the health care systems in which these patients are seen. Successful development and implementation of models of OPC require attention to the needs and values of both the patients being served and the institution providing service. SUMMARY: In the 2016 clinical guideline, ASCO recommended integrating palliative care early in the disease trajectory alongside cancer-directed treatment. Despite strong endorsement and robust evidence of benefit, many patients with cancer lack access to OPC. Here we define different models of care delivery in four successful palliative care clinics in four distinct health care settings: an academic medical center, a safety net hospital, a community health system, and a hospice-staffed clinic embedded in a community cancer center. The description of each clinic includes details on setting, staffing, volume, policies, and processes. CONCLUSION: The development of robust and capable OPC clinics is necessary to meet the growing demand for these services among patients with advanced cancer. This summary of key aspects of functional OPC clinics will enable health care institutions to evaluate their specific needs and develop programs that will be successful within the environment of an individual institution.

Application of a Computer Vision Tool for Automated Glottic Tracking to Vocal Fold Paralysis Patients

2021 ◽  
pp. 019459982198960
Author(s):  
Tiffany V. Wang ◽  
Nat Adamian ◽  
Phillip C. Song ◽  
Ramon A. Franco ◽  
Molly N. Huston ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Vocal Fold ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Characteristic Curve ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Vocal Fold Paralysis ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Large Patient ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Before And After

Objectives (1) Demonstrate true vocal fold (TVF) tracking software (AGATI [Automated Glottic Action Tracking by artificial Intelligence]) as a quantitative assessment of unilateral vocal fold paralysis (UVFP) in a large patient cohort. (2) Correlate patient-reported metrics with AGATI measurements of TVF anterior glottic angles, before and after procedural intervention. Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting Academic medical center. Methods AGATI was used to analyze videolaryngoscopy from healthy adults (n = 72) and patients with UVFP (n = 70). Minimum, 3rd percentile, 97th percentile, and maximum anterior glottic angles (AGAs) were computed for each patient. In patients with UVFP, patient-reported outcomes (Voice Handicap Index 10, Dyspnea Index, and Eating Assessment Tool 10) were assessed, before and after procedural intervention (injection or medialization laryngoplasty). A receiver operating characteristic curve for the logistic fit of paralysis vs control group was used to determine AGA cutoff values for defining UVFP. Results Mean (SD) 3rd percentile AGA (in degrees) was 2.67 (3.21) in control and 5.64 (5.42) in patients with UVFP ( P < .001); mean (SD) 97th percentile AGA was 57.08 (11.14) in control and 42.59 (12.37) in patients with UVFP ( P < .001). For patients with UVFP who underwent procedural intervention, the mean 97th percentile AGA decreased by 5 degrees from pre- to postprocedure ( P = .026). The difference between the 97th and 3rd percentile AGA predicted UVFP with 77% sensitivity and 92% specificity ( P < .0001). There was no correlation between AGA measurements and patient-reported outcome scores. Conclusions AGATI demonstrated a difference in AGA measurements between paralysis and control patients. AGATI can predict UVFP with 77% sensitivity and 92% specificity.

scholarly journals 164. Avoiding Complacency: Assessing the Perceived Impact and Value of Antimicrobial Stewardship at a Academic Medical Center

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S90-S91
Author(s):  
Matthew S Lee ◽  
Christopher McCoy
Keyword(s):  
Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Support Tools ◽  
Educational Engagement ◽  
Similar Survey ◽  
Perceived Impact

Abstract Background Multi-disciplinary engagement and education remain key measures for Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs). Over 3 years, our ASP has undergone key changes to pre-authorization review, post-prescriptive activities, and core team members, coinciding with a 30% increase in stewardship interventions. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the familiarity of Nursing, Pharmacy and Prescribers at our academic medical center regarding ASP activities and services, as well as perceived impact on patient care and value. Secondary objectives were to determine what resources are currently utilized and areas for improvement. Methods Distinct surveys were distributed to three participant groups: Nurses, Pharmacists, and Prescribers (Housestaff, Advanced Practice Providers, and staff physicians). Questions were developed to assess familiarity, perceived value, and overall satisfaction with the ASP. Additional items included questions on the current use of ASP resources and educational engagement. Survey results were compared to a similar survey conducted 3 years amongst the same participant groups. Results The survey was delivered electronically to 3367 Prescribers, Nurses and Pharmacists. 403 responders completed the survey (208 Nurses, 181 Prescribers, and 18 Pharmacists). Familiarity was lowest amongst Nurses, but almost doubled compared to 2016 (Figure). Prescribers cited “restricted antibiotic approval”, “de-escalation”, and “alternative therapies relative to allergies” as the three most common interaction types, similar to 2016. ASP interactions continued to be rated “moderate” or “high” value (88.4% vs 89.15% in 2016), however, face-to-face interactions were preferred by only 4% of responders (unchanged compared to 2016). Prescribers also responded uncommon use of ASP online resources (20%) and clinical decision support tools (34%). 78% of responders expressed desire for increased ASP-related education. Conclusion As ASPs evolve, it is important to constantly evaluate impact and value, and identify areas for growth. Despite ASP familiarity being high and interactions valued, we need to further optimize ASP provided resources, clinical support tools, and educational offerings. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document