PURPOSE: Oncology patients are vulnerable to adverse outcomes associated with COVID-19, and clinical deterioration must be identified early. Several institutions launched remote patient monitoring programs (RPMPs) to care for patients with COVID-19. We describe patients' perspectives on a COVID-19 RPMP at a National Comprehensive Cancer Center. METHODS: Patients who tested positive for COVID-19 were eligible. Enrolled patients received a daily electronic COVID-19 symptom assessment, and a subset of high-risk patients also received a pulse oximeter. Monitoring was provided by a centralized team and was discontinued 14 days after a patient's positive test result and following 3 days without worsening symptoms. Patients who completed at least one assessment and exited the program were sent a patient engagement survey to evaluate the patient's experience with digital monitoring for COVID-19. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 491 patients, and 257 responded (52% completion rate). The net promoter score was 85%. Most patients agreed that the RPMP was worthwhile, enabled better management of their COVID-19 symptoms, made them feel more connected to their healthcare team, and helped prevent emergency room visits. Identified themes regarding patient-perceived value of a RPMP included (1) security: a clinical safety net; (2) connection: a link to their clinical team during a period of isolation; and (3) empowerment: an education on the virus and symptom management. CONCLUSION: RPMPs are perceived to be of value to oncology patients with COVID-19. Policymakers should consider how these programs can be reimbursed to keep vulnerable patients at home and out of the acute care setting.
PURPOSE: Oncology patients are vulnerable to adverse outcomes associated with COVID-19, and clinical deterioration must be identified early. Several institutions launched remote patient monitoring programs (RPMPs) to care for patients with COVID-19. We describe patients' perspectives on a COVID-19 RPMP at a National Comprehensive Cancer Center. METHODS: Patients who tested positive for COVID-19 were eligible. Enrolled patients received a daily electronic COVID-19 symptom assessment, and a subset of high-risk patients also received a pulse oximeter. Monitoring was provided by a centralized team and was discontinued 14 days after a patient's positive test result and following 3 days without worsening symptoms. Patients who completed at least one assessment and exited the program were sent a patient engagement survey to evaluate the patient's experience with digital monitoring for COVID-19. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 491 patients, and 257 responded (52% completion rate). The net promoter score was 85%. Most patients agreed that the RPMP was worthwhile, enabled better management of their COVID-19 symptoms, made them feel more connected to their healthcare team, and helped prevent emergency room visits. Identified themes regarding patient-perceived value of a RPMP included (1) security: a clinical safety net; (2) connection: a link to their clinical team during a period of isolation; and (3) empowerment: an education on the virus and symptom management. CONCLUSION: RPMPs are perceived to be of value to oncology patients with COVID-19. Policymakers should consider how these programs can be reimbursed to keep vulnerable patients at home and out of the acute care setting.
Authors: Frank J Penedo; Laura B Oswald; Joshua P Kronenfeld; Sofia F Garcia; David Cella; Betina Yanez Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2020-05 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Ethan Basch; Allison M Deal; Amylou C Dueck; Howard I Scher; Mark G Kris; Clifford Hudis; Deborah Schrag Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-07-11 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Bobby Daly; Gilad Kuperman; Alice Zervoudakis; Abigail Baldwin Medsker; Ankita Roy; Alice S Ro; Javiera Arenas; Hrudaya Veena Yanamandala; Raj Kottamasu; Rori Salvaggio; Jessie Holland; Stephanie Hirsch; Chasity B Walters; Tara Lauria; Kim Chow; Aaron Begue; Margarita Rozenshteyn; Melissa Zablocki; Amandeep K Dhami; Nicholas Silva; Emily Brown; Lauren L Katzen; Yeneat O Chiu; Claire Perry; Stefania Sokolowski; Isaac Wagner; Stephen R Veach; Rachel N Grisham; Chau T Dang; Diane L Reidy-Lagunes; Brett A Simon; Wendy Perchick Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2020-05-29
Authors: William J Gordon; Daniel Henderson; Avital DeSharone; Herrick N Fisher; Jessica Judge; David M Levine; Laura MacLean; Diane Sousa; Mack Y Su; Robert Boxer Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2020-11-25 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Cara Stabile; Larissa K Temple; Jessica S Ancker; Ethan Basch; Jeanne Carter; Magen Miranda; Daniel Stein; Peter D Stetson; Andrew Vickers; Brett A Simon; Andrea L Pusic Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-09-17 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Ann-Chatrin Linqvist Leonardsen; Ann Karin Helgesen; Andreas Stensvold; Jannik Magnussen; Vigdis A Grøndahl Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-04-06 Impact factor: 2.655