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.

No abstract

211 Background: Patient reported outcomes (PROs) allow for systematic and more continuous capture of the patient experience. PROs have been associated with improved symptom management and quality of life in patients with advanced cancer; however how to do this in a real world setting is not thoroughly described. We sought to provide a description of the implementation and feasibility of a digital PRO application in patients with advanced cancer at one academic center. Methods: This is an ongoing randomized trial, comparing digital PRO intervention vs standard of care, in advanced cancer patients from three oncology groups (thoracic, gastrointestinal, genitourinary). Prior to trial initiation, a lead in period to test workflows was conducted, as well as key stakeholder interviews to optimize engagement with the platform. Clinical team members (e.g. nurses, advanced practice providers) were critical to the workflows developed, thus operational leadership buy-in was required. We were unable to integrate our PRO platform with our digital EHR. Regular sponsor meetings addressed technical concerns and patient/provider feedback. Processes were tailored for each disease group to handle varying degrees of symptoms (mild, moderate and severe). Patient and clinician satisfaction and qualitative feedback was collected. We defined feasibility as > 70% questionnaire completion on the platform. Results: There are 64 patients on the intervention arm and 64 on the control arm. Of eligible patients, 93% (128/138) enrolled in the study. During the study period, 447 digital symptom questionnaires were sent by the platform, of which 333 were completed (74%). The majority of clinicians (82%, n = 18) and patients (85%, n = 64) felt neutral or positive when asked if the tool was easy to use. Approximately half of clinicians (45%, n = 10) and patients (46%, n = 36) would probably or definitely recommend the platform. Conclusions: Web-based PRO reporting for patients with advanced cancer is feasible. Clinicians and patients found the platform both acceptable and easy to use. Future directions include integration with our EHR, expansion across disease groups and other centers, and creation of workflows that are integrated into routine clinical practice.

No abstract