Literature DB >> 30985602

Using Stakeholder Engagement to Overcome Barriers to Implementing Patient-reported Outcomes (PROs) in Cancer Care Delivery: Approaches From 3 Prospective Studies.

Angela M Stover1,2, Carrie Tompkins Stricker3, Karen Hammelef3, Sydney Henson2, Philip Carr2, Jennifer Jansen2, Allison M Deal2, Antonia V Bennett1,2, Ethan M Basch1,2,4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures used during cancer care delivery improve communication about symptoms between patients and clinicians and reduce service utilization for uncontrolled symptoms. However, uptake of PROs in routine cancer care has been slow. In this paper, we describe stakeholder engagement activities used to overcome barriers to implementing PROs. Implementation occurred in 2 study settings: PROs completed in the waiting room and reviewed during clinical visits to guide symptom management for multiple myeloma (visit-based PROs); and weekly PROs completed by cancer patients between chemotherapy visits to monitor symptoms at home (remote PROs).
METHODS: PRO implementation steps across studies included: (1) clinician and patient input on key symptoms, PRO measures, and identifying which PRO responses are clinically concerning to better target nursing actions; (2) developing PRO-based clinical decision support (CDS) for responding to concerning PROs; (3) training clinicians and clinical research assistants to interpret PROs and use software; and (4) describing implementation impact (frequency of concerning PRO responses and nursing actions). DISCUSSION: Clinician and patient input was critical for identifying key symptoms, PRO measures, and clinically concerning response options. For the visit-based PRO observational study, all symptom scores appeared on a clinician dashboard, and those rated ≥1 by patients (on a 0-4 or 0-10 scale) had PRO-based CDS available for access. For the 2 remote PROs trials, stakeholders recommended that the 2 "worst" response options (eg, PRO responses of "often"/"always" or "severe"/"very severe") would trigger an automated email alert to a nurse along with PRO-based CDS. In each study, PRO-based CDS was tailored based on clinician input. Across studies, the most common nursing response to concerning PROs was counseling patients on (or providing care plans for) self-management of symptoms. In the trials, the percentage of weekly remote PROs generating an alert to a nurse ranged from 13% at an academic center to 36% in community oncology practices. KEY POINTS: Across 3 prospective studies, PROs implemented into cancer care enabled tailored care based on issues identified on PROs. Stakeholder engagement was critical for successful implementation. This paper assists in addressing important PRO implementation challenges by describing a stakeholder-driven approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30985602     DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001103

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  18 in total

1.  Performance Measures Based on How Adults With Cancer Feel and Function: Stakeholder Recommendations and Feasibility Testing in Six Cancer Centers.

Authors:  Angela M Stover; Benjamin Y Urick; Allison M Deal; Randall Teal; Maihan B Vu; Jessica Carda-Auten; Jennifer Jansen; Arlene E Chung; Antonia V Bennett; Anne Chiang; Charles Cleeland; Yehuda Deutsch; Edmund Tai; Dylan Zylla; Loretta A Williams; Collette Pitzen; Claire Snyder; Bryce Reeve; Tenbroeck Smith; Kristen McNiff; David Cella; Michael N Neuss; Robert Miller; Thomas M Atkinson; Patricia A Spears; Mary Lou Smith; Cindy Geoghegan; Ethan M Basch
Journal:  JCO Oncol Pract       Date:  2020-02-19

Review 2.  Innovations in research and clinical care using patient-generated health data.

Authors:  Heather S L Jim; Aasha I Hoogland; Naomi C Brownstein; Anna Barata; Adam P Dicker; Hans Knoop; Brian D Gonzalez; Randa Perkins; Dana Rollison; Scott M Gilbert; Ronica Nanda; Anders Berglund; Ross Mitchell; Peter A S Johnstone
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2020-04-20       Impact factor: 508.702

3.  Stepping into the real world: a mixed-methods evaluation of the implementation of electronic patient reported outcomes in routine lung cancer care.

Authors:  Afaf Girgis; Adeola Bamgboje-Ayodele; Orlando Rincones; Shalini K Vinod; Sandra Avery; Joseph Descallar; Allan 'Ben' Smith; Belinda Arnold; Anthony Arnold; Victoria Bray; Ivana Durcinoska; Nicole M Rankin; Geoff P Delaney
Journal:  J Patient Rep Outcomes       Date:  2022-06-20

Review 4.  Mapping the role of patient and public involvement during the different stages of healthcare innovation: A scoping review.

Authors:  Victoria Cluley; Alexandra Ziemann; Claire Feeley; Ellinor K Olander; Shani Shamah; Charitini Stavropoulou
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2022-02-17       Impact factor: 3.318

5.  Clinical Utility and User Perceptions of a Digital System for Electronic Patient-Reported Symptom Monitoring During Routine Cancer Care: Findings From the PRO-TECT Trial.

Authors:  Ethan Basch; Angela M Stover; Deborah Schrag; Arlene Chung; Jennifer Jansen; Sydney Henson; Philip Carr; Brenda Ginos; Allison Deal; Patricia A Spears; Mattias Jonsson; Antonia V Bennett; Gita Mody; Gita Thanarajasingam; Lauren J Rogak; Bryce B Reeve; Claire Snyder; Lisa A Kottschade; Marjory Charlot; Anna Weiss; Deborah Bruner; Amylou C Dueck
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2020-10

6.  Do reminder emails and past due notifications improve patient completion and institutional data submission for patient-reported outcome measures?

Authors:  Stephanie L Pugh; Joseph P Rodgers; Jennifer Moughan; Roseann Bonanni; Jaskaran Boparai; Ronald C Chen; James J Dignam; Deborah W Bruner
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2020-09-07       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  A narrative review of current evidence supporting the implementation of electronic patient-reported outcome measures in the management of chronic diseases.

Authors:  Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi; Devika Nair; John Devin Peipert; Kara Schick-Makaroff; Istvan Mucsi
Journal:  Ther Adv Chronic Dis       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 5.091

8.  Could existing infrastructure for using patient-reported outcomes as quality measures also be used for individual care in patients with colorectal cancer?

Authors:  Clara Breidenbach; Christoph Kowalski; Simone Wesselmann; Nora Tabea Sibert
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-05-11       Impact factor: 2.655

9.  Options for Meaningful Engagement in Clinical Research for Busy Frontline Clinicians.

Authors:  Karen M Goldstein; Jennifer M Gierisch; Matthew Tucker; John W Williams; Rowena J Dolor; Wendy Henderson
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2021-02-02       Impact factor: 6.473

10.  Case study of the integration of electronic patient-reported outcomes as standard of care in a head and neck oncology practice: Obstacles and opportunities.

Authors:  Olga Strachna; Marc A Cohen; Monica M Allison; David G Pfister; Nancy Y Lee; Richard J Wong; Sean M McBride; Raia R Mohammed; Elizabeth Kemeny; Fernanda C G Polubriaginof; Alyse Kassa; Michael Hannon; Jennifer R Cracchiolo
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2020-10-27       Impact factor: 6.860

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.