Oncology patient and provider preferences regarding rapid radiology result release to online portals.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1544-1544
Author(s):  
Jonathan Bleeker ◽  
Jan Wernisch ◽  
Shawn Tronier ◽  
Shelby A. Terstriep
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
Oncology Patients ◽  
Oncology Patient ◽  
Online Portal ◽  
Rapid Release ◽  
Ongoing Work ◽  
Rapid Result ◽  
Similar Survey ◽  
Integrated Practice ◽  
Oncology Providers

1544 Background: Spurred by changes in legislation and technology, rapid patient access to medical results has never been higher. Many health systems now release results of radiology tests within 24 hours of completion, meaning patients may see results before being able to discuss them with the ordering provider. Generally, surveys have demonstrated that patients are in favor of rapid result availability, but research on rapid result release to oncology patients with distinct concerns is scant. Methods: Starting in February 2020, oncology providers throughout Sanford Health, a multi-site primarily rural integrated practice in the upper Midwest were invited to complete an online survey regarding their opinions on rapid result release. Starting in February 2020, oncology patients were invited to complete a similar survey. This survey was open until August 2020, when 100 patients had completed the survey; both surveys contained both categorical and narrative results. Results: Oncology providers had a generally more negative opinion of rapid radiology result release to online portals compared to patients. 65% of patients believed radiology results should be released within 24 hours of resulting; only 12% of providers shared this view. 66% of providers shared that they did not feel comfortable with patients’ ability to interpret radiology results and only 13% felt that “normal” results should be released immediately to an online portal; this number decreased to 3% when results were “abnormal”. Patient opinions on appropriate result release were impacted by test results as well. For “normal” radiology results, 50% of patients favored initial communication be via online portal without discussion with a provider; for “abnormal” results, this number decreased to 28%. 43% of patients had learned of an “abnormal” result via online portal before discussion with a provider; 66% of these patients felt that this was a positive which allowed them to process information prior to the visit; 33% felt that it created undue anxiety. 94% of providers reported having a patient contact them regarding a test result prior to a planned visit, with 60% providers sharing this happens at least once weekly. When asked what improvements could be made to the system currently in place at Sanford, 80% of providers suggested holding radiology results until direct communication with the provider can occur; only 8% of patients suggested the same intervention. Conclusions: Rapid result release is generally a patient satisfier, although oncology patients do distinguish abnormal from normal results in terms of rapid release. It is a dissatisfier for providers both due to concerns regarding patients’ ability to interpret results and due to excess work created by rapid release. Ongoing work should focus on ways to allow patients to access resources to make medical results more interpretable if reviewed prior to provider visits.

scholarly journals Implemented Interventionsat the Naef K. Basile Cancer Institute to Protect Patients and Medical Personnel From COVID Infections: Effectiveness and Patient Satisfaction

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean El Cheikh ◽  
Samantha El Warrak ◽  
Nohra Ghaoui ◽  
Farouk Al Chami ◽  
Maya Shahbaz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Medical Care ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Treatment Protocol ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Oncology Patients ◽  
Oncology Patient ◽  
Safety Measures ◽  
Viral Spread ◽  
First Case

BackgroundThe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic by WHO in March 2020. The first case of COVID-19 was identified in Lebanon on the 21st of February 2020, amid a national economic crisis. As the numbers of cases increased, ICU admissions and mortality rose, which led hospitals across Lebanon to take certain safety measures to contain the virus. The Naef K. Basile Cancer Institute (NKBCI) at the American University of Beirut Medical Center handles oncology outpatient visits and outpatient treatment protocol infusions. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of the safety measures put forth by the NKBCI early in the pandemic.MethodsOncology patients are amongst the immunosuppressed population, who are at greatest risk of contracting COVID-19 and consequently suffering its complications. In this manuscript, we evaluated the precautionary measures implemented at the NKBCI of AUBMC from March 1st to May 31st of 2020, by surveying oncology patients on the telephone who had live and virtual appointments in both the oncology outpatient clinics and infusion unit. We conducted a prospective study of 670 oncology patients who had appointments at the NKBCI during this period and used their answers to draw responses about patient satisfaction towards those safety measures.ResultsOur results involved 387 responses of oncology patients who visited the NKBCI during the period of March 1st to May 31st of 2020. 99% of our respondents gave a rating of good to excellent with these new measures. The option of online consultation was given to 35% in the hematology group compared to 19% in those with solid tumors (p=0.001). From the total, 15% of patients opted for the telemedicine experience as a new implemented strategy to provide patient-centered medical care. Of this group of patients, 22% faced problems with connectivity and 19% faced problems with online payment.ConclusionNKBCI was competent in following the WHO guidelines in protecting the oncology patient population. Feedback collected from the surveys will be taken into account by the committee of the NKBCI to develop new safety measures that can better control viral spread while providing patient-centered medical care.

scholarly journals Mental Health and Well-Being During the First vs. Second COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdown in Cyprus

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 40-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danae Papageorgiou ◽  
Angelos P. Kassianos ◽  
Marios Constantinou ◽  
Demetris Lamnisos ◽  
Christiana Nicolaou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Psychological Health ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Perceived Social Support ◽  
Psychological Impact ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Positive And Negative Affect ◽  
Similar Survey ◽  
Health And Well Being

Abstract. Introduction: Following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, most countries imposed strict governmental lockdowns. Research investigating the psychological impact of pandemic-induced lockdowns is accumulating, though to date no study has examined the psychological health and associated parameters of well-being in countries that underwent additional lockdowns as the pandemic continued into resurgence “waves.” Aim: The present study provides an overview of the psychological impact of COVID-19 across the two lockdowns in the Cypriot population. Methods: In total, 957 participants completed an online survey during the first lockdown, 134 of whom completed a similar survey again during the second lockdown. The outcomes assessed included stress, positive and negative affect, and well-being. Results: The results indicated no population-wide severe reactions in the participants. Repeated measures analyses showed similar mental health levels during both the first and the second lockdowns. Further inspection of participants’ scores indicated that, for all mental health variables, approximately half of the participants improved, while the other half deteriorated. Discussion: Perceived social support and psychological flexibility predicted most psychological outcomes during both lockdowns. Further research is necessary to understand the continuing effects of the pandemic and associated lockdowns on mental health.

scholarly journals Cardiovascular care of the oncology patient during COVID-19: An expert consensus document from the ACC Cardio-Oncology and Imaging Councils

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren A Baldassarre ◽  
Eric H Yang ◽  
Richard K Cheng ◽  
Jeanne M DeCara ◽  
Susan Dent ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multimodality Imaging ◽  
Cardiovascular Complications ◽  
Expert Consensus ◽  
Oncology Patients ◽  
Oncology Patient ◽  
Cancer History ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Consensus Document ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Cardiovascular Care

Abstract In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, The Cardio-Oncology and Imaging Councils of the American College of Cardiology offers recommendations to clinicians regarding the cardiovascular care of cardio-oncology patients in this expert consensus statement. Cardio-oncology patients–individuals with an active or prior cancer history, and with or at risk of cardiovascular disease–are a rapidly growing population, who are both at increased risk of infection by COVID-19 and experiencing severe and/or lethal complications. Recommendations for optimizing screening and monitoring visits to detect cardiac dysfunction are discussed. In addition, judicious use of multimodality imaging and biomarkers are proposed to identify myocardial, valvular, vascular, pericardial involvement in cancer patients. The difficulties of diagnosing the etiology of cardiovascular complications in patients with cancer and COVID-19 are outlined, along with weighing the advantages against risks of exposure, with the modification of existing cardiovascular treatments and cardiotoxicity surveillance in patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.

scholarly journals Oncologists’ Attitudes and Practice of Addressing Diet, Physical Activity, and Weight Management With Patients With Cancer: Findings of an ASCO Survey of the Oncology Workforce

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. e520-e528 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer A. Ligibel ◽  
Lee W. Jones ◽  
Abenaa M. Brewster ◽  
Steven K. Clinton ◽  
Larissa A. Korde ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Weight Management ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
The United States ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Physical Activity Programs ◽  
Oncology Providers

PURPOSE: Obesity and related factors have been linked to cancer risk and outcomes, but little information exists with regard to oncologists’ attention to these issues as a part of clinical care. METHODS: Oncology providers actively caring for patients with cancer in the United States and internationally were asked to complete an online survey about practice patterns and perceptions with regard to obesity and weight management during and after active cancer treatment. RESULTS: Nine hundred seventy-one practicing oncology providers completed the survey. The majority of respondents indicated a belief that the evidence linking obesity to cancer outcomes was strong and that weight and related factors should be addressed as a part of cancer treatment. The majority of respondents also reported that they frequently assessed body weight and related factors as well as counsel their patients to exercise, consume a healthy diet, and lose weight, if applicable. However, referral to providers and programs to support weight loss and increased physical activity occurred less frequently, and a number of barriers were identified for the incorporation of weight management and physical activity programs in the treatment of patients with cancer. CONCLUSION: In a survey of oncology providers, attention to weight management, physical activity, and diet in patients with cancer was high during and after cancer treatment but often did not result in referrals to support lifestyle change. Future work is needed to support education and training of oncology providers to facilitate referrals and overcome barriers to implementation of weight management and physical activity programs for patients with cancer.

scholarly journals Importance of Skeletal Staging in Chondrosarcoma of Bone: Results of Survey on Current Practices Among Musculoskeletal Oncologists

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashish Gulia ◽  
Srinath Gupta ◽  
Vineet Kurisunkal ◽  
Ajay Puri
Keyword(s):  
Bone Scan ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Large Data ◽  
Skeletal Metastasis ◽  
Large Data Sets ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Data Sets ◽  
Online Portal ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Current Practices

Abstract Purpose There are no clear guidelines for staging of conventional chondrosarcoma. We conducted an online survey to determine the current practices for skeletal staging for conventional chondrosarcoma among practicing oncologists and to assess any discrepancy in practices and with the published literature. Methodology A simple ten-question online survey (e-mails and WhatsApp) was conducted among practicing oncologists over a period of 3 weeks using online portal (surveymonkey.com). It was followed by analysis based on each question to find current practices. Results 139 members participated in the survey (84% surgeons, 9% radiologists, 3% medical and 3% radiation oncologists and 1% nuclear medicine). 65% have been treating chondrosarcoma for more than 5 years. 88% opined that biopsy is mandatory even if the radiology is suggestive of a chondrosarcoma. 66% said that solitary skeletal metastasis is seen in less than 2% of the cases but 84% of participants were in favour of performing an investigation (bone scan/PET scan) for skeletal survey. While 43% opined skeletal metastasis is more common in recurrent chondrosarcoma, 26% said that performing a bone scan was likely to impact management, 28% said it will not impact management and 46% were unsure. Of the group who thought that a bone scan would impact management or were unsure, the majority (56%) opined that this was relevant only in grade 2 and grade 3 chondrosarcoma. Conclusion There was lack of consensus regarding staging for chondrosarcoma. Only 26% of respondents were convinced that performing a bone scan was likely to impact management of chondrosarcoma. There is a need to analyze large data sets (retrospective/prospective) to arrive at an evidence-based staging algorithm for chondrosarcoma.

The Ontario oncology electronic medical record (EMR): The integration of end user and provincial needs.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 248-248
Author(s):  
Vishal Kukreti ◽  
Sara Lankshear ◽  
Arthur G. Manzon ◽  
Nancy Wolf ◽  
Shafiq Habib ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Record ◽  
Electronic Medical Record ◽  
Quality Indicators ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Functional Requirements ◽  
End User ◽  
Oncology Patient ◽  
Full Spectrum ◽  
Patient Profile

248 Background: The use of ambulatory electronic medical record (EMR) systems within oncology provides an opportunity for aligning provincial, local and end-user patient-centred quality indicators in the design, delivery and evaluation of clinical care and resource utilization. The aim of this provincial initiative is to define the “meaningful use” for the Oncology EMR by identifying the essential data elements and functional requirements required to facilitate integrated care, information standards (both local and provincial), and system integration needs. This paper presents the results of a provincial field study designed to determine end-user needs for information and quality metrics. Methods: Data collection included two separate onsite focus groups at each of the 13 regional cancer programs, with a focus on Clinical and Operational requirements. A total of 141 participants, representing physicians, interprofessional clinical team members, administrators and health information specialists were involved. An additional online survey was used for optimal engagement, with a total of 194 respondents, primarily nurses and physicians. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed to assist in coding and distillation of concepts generated. Results: A total of 1,598 ideas were generated (Clinical = 997, Operational = 601). Multiple rounds of content analysis were used to eliminate duplicates, identify common themes and distill the wealth of information down to the “vital few” discrete information requirements that should be included in the oncology EMR. At this time, 63 clinical and 55 operational concepts have been identified to support clinical care as well as operational planning and system evaluation. The online survey has helped define the data required for a Provincial Oncology Patient Profile within the EMR. Conclusions: The study employed significant consultation to merge end user and existing provincial quality measurement needs in order to define the Ontario Oncology EMR. A full spectrum of quality indicators identified through these processes will inform the future provincial priorities for information standards and quality monitoring that will be facilitated by a standardized EMR.

ED utilization trends for medical oncology patients at Thomas Jefferson University during COVID-19.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (29_suppl) ◽  
pp. 238-238
Author(s):  
Zachary L. Quinn ◽  
Adam Binder ◽  
Valerie Pracilio Csik ◽  
Helen Evers-Hunt ◽  
Nathan Handley
Keyword(s):  
Acute Care ◽  
Active Treatment ◽  
Medical Oncology ◽  
Healthcare Delivery ◽  
Thomas Jefferson ◽  
Care Utilization ◽  
Oncology Patients ◽  
Oncology Patient ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Ed Visits

238 Background: For patients receiving cancer care, utilization of acute care resources can be frequent and, in many instances, is avoidable. At Thomas Jefferson University (TJU), up to 50% of emergency department (ED) visits for medical oncology patients on active treatment (receiving intravenous or oral chemotherapy within 30 days) may be preventable based on OP-35 criteria. The COVID-19 pandemic drastically altered healthcare delivery, prompting providers and patients to re-evaluate the safety and necessity of acute care. We aimed to evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on ED utilization for medical oncology patients at TJU. Methods: We reviewed the total number of visits to the TJU ED for all patients and for medical oncology patients from January 1, to May 31, 2020. We defined the months of January and February as “Pre-COVID” and the months of April and May as “COVID”. We excluded data from March in our analysis. For medical oncology patients, we tallied both the number of patients with an ED visit and total ED visits for each month. We stratified patients by whether or not they were on active treatment. We reviewed the outcome of each ED visit and categorized results as admission (inpatient admission or observation) or discharge. We classified each ED visit as avoidable or unavoidable using OP-35 criteria. Results: In the Pre-COVID months there were 489 total visits by 432 oncology patients; 41% (179) of these patients were on active treatment. During COVID months there were 313 visits by 284 oncology patients; 48% (137) were on active treatment at the time of visit. During COVID, total ED visits decreased by 37%. Visits by medical oncology patients decreased by 35%. For medical oncology patients on active treatment, we observed a 21% reduction in ED visits. In the Pre-COVID months, 38% of oncology patient visits were considerable potentially avoidable and 41% of visits ended with a discharge to home. In comparison, during COVID, 31% of visits were considered potentially avoidable and 35% of visits ended with a discharge to home. Conclusions: We observed a decrease in ED utilization by oncology patients that mirrored decrease in total ED utilization following the COVID-19 outbreak. The decrease was less prominent for patients on active treatment. The percent of visits that were potentially avoidable and the percentage of patients discharged to home from the ED decreased slightly during the COVID period. Further analysis is ongoing to understand factors driving reduction in ED utilization observed immediately following the COVID-19 outbreak.

Potential for drug–drug interactions in treating cancer-related nausea and distress

2010 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 403-408 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew S Saylor ◽  
Ronald F Smetana
Keyword(s):  
Drug Interaction ◽  
Drug Interactions ◽  
Psychosocial Distress ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Oncology Patients ◽  
Oncology Patient ◽  
Primary Literature

Purpose. To determine the extent and severity of drug–drug interactions between anti-emetics and antipsychotics or antidepressants. Summary. Oncology patients are often required to deal with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting at the same time as psychosocial distress. A review of primary literature, as well as several drug interaction databases, was performed with anti-emetics used in The NCCN® 1.2010 Anti-emesis Guidelines ( n = 11) and all currently US-marketed antidepressants or antipsychotics ( n = 40).1 The results from these databases were compiled into a single easy-to-use chart that portrays the severity of the interaction and brief recommendation.2,3,4 In total, 197 drug–drug interactions out of a total of 440 possible combinations (44.8%) were discovered during the analysis. Conclusions. Although most anti-emetics had several serious interactions with antidepressants or antipsychotics, palonosetron, and granisetron were found to have no significant interactions. The results can be used to avoid or limit drug interactions in the prescribing of new medications for the oncology patient.1,2,3,4

scholarly journals #30: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Incidence in Pediatric Oncology Patient: Does Routine Screening Affect the Risk for the Transmission in the Hospital

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S18-S18
Author(s):  
Riyadi Adrizain ◽  
Nurmelani Sari
Keyword(s):  
Pediatric Oncology ◽  
Routine Screening ◽  
Oncology Patients ◽  
Oncology Patient ◽  
Pediatric Oncology Patient ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Oncologic Patients ◽  
Boarding House ◽  
Second Period ◽  
Positive Results

Abstract Background Cancer patients are at higher risk of COVID-19 infection and more likely they have higher morbidity and mortality than the general population. On the other hand, the oncology patient sometimes can show asymptomatic COVID-19 disease with a risk of longer viral shedding and spreading the infection to others immunosuppressed individuals. Oncology patients also regularly travel between hospital and sometimes lodge in boarding house for routine chemotherapy. As we known, prevention strategy for COVID-19 among pediatric oncology patients can be implemented by minimizing these risks factors for transmission by identifying all patients infected with COVID-19. Here, we report our experience before and after implementing COVID-19 testing policy of patients with hematology and oncology diseases in our center. Method We collected data of pediatric oncology patients admitted to Hasan Sadikin General hospital between July 1st, 2020 to January 8th, 2021. The data consisted of the total number of patients and COVID-19 status by using SARS-CoV-2 Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (NAAT) performed in the patient during two periods. In the first period, we performed NAAT if the patient was suspected of COVID-19. In the second period, after the policy was changed, NAAT was performed routinely as screening for all oncologic patients admitted to the hospital. Results Between July 1st to December 2nd, 2020, the first period, there was 3 positive results from 36 suspected COVID-19 patients among 181 total pediatric oncology patients. In the second period, we found 8 positive results from 121 hospitalized patients, none of them had signs and symptoms of COVID-19; and 4 of them came from boarding house. Conclusion Routine screening for COVID-19 should be considered as a policy for hospitalization of a pediatric oncology patient because of the high risk that asymptomatic COVID-19 patients can transmit the infection to other patient and to health care workers in the hospital.

Preferences and motivational factors for the use of digital technology in real world oncology studies.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14119-e14119
Author(s):  
Nadeeka Dias ◽  
Rinah Yamamoto ◽  
Kenneth G Faulkner
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Study ◽  
Real World ◽  
Patient Engagement ◽  
Digital Technology ◽  
Technology Use ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Global Market ◽  
Motivational Factors ◽  
Quality Data ◽  
Oncology Patients

e14119 Background: Patient engagement and motivation during real world oncology studies can be challenging. Digital tools have proven to be effective in reducing patient burden and improving data collection and accuracy. Given the rapid advances in health technology, patient preferences and motivations for these tools are continually evolving. This study investigates preferences for digital technology use with smartphones and wearables, telehealth, and identifies motivational factors that would drive real world study compliance for daily symptom reporting. Methods: Patients (n = 50; 68% male) diagnosed with cancer answered questions via an anonymous online survey about their technology preferences. Results: Although the majority of the population uses smartphones (99%), few oncology patients use wearable technology such as a fitness watch (18%). Of those who do not own a fitness watch, 90% were willing to use the technology in a clinical study and share their data if a watch were provided to them. However, the majority of patients (74%) would prefer to use their own smartphone during a clinical study to answer questions and conduct video calls with the study doctor. For patients who currently visit their doctor in person (98%), almost half (48%) would prefer a remote alternative such as a video call for convenience, especially when in pain. Patients reported several factors that would encourage consistent daily reporting of study data. Out of 10 options, the most motivating factor was access to health information that would help manage their symptoms on a daily basis (92%). Subsequent factors of interest included in-app reminders (88%) and assurance that a doctor would review the reported data and contact them to discuss reported symptoms (94%). Conclusions: The global market for digital health is growing rapidly, and there is a strong preference from oncology patients to shift in-person engagement and reporting to digital platforms. Patients are also highly motivated by information about their own health. Designing real world studies to incorporate these preferences may result in enhanced patient engagement, improved compliance, and higher quality data.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document