Breast Cancer Screening, Diagnosis, and Surgery during the Pre- and Peri-pandemic: Experience of Patients in a Statewide Health Information Exchange.

BACKGROUND: Measures taken to address the COVID-19 pandemic interrupted routine diagnosis and care for breast cancer. The aim of this study was to characterize the effects of the pandemic on breast cancer care in a statewide cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using data from a large health information exchange, we retrospectively analyzed the timing of breast cancer screening, and identified a cohort of newly diagnosed patients with any stage of breast cancer to further access the information available about their surgical treatments. We compared data for four subgroups: pre-lockdown (preLD) 25 March to 16 June 2019; lockdown (LD) 23 March to 3 May 2020; reopening (RO) 4 May to 14 June 2020; and post-lockdown (postLD) 22 March to 13 June 2021. RESULTS: During LD and RO, screening mammograms in the cohort decreased by 96.3% and 36.2%, respectively. The overall breast cancer diagnosis and surgery volumes decreased up to 38.7%, and the median time to surgery was prolonged from 1.5 months to 2.4 for LD and 1.8 months for RO. Interestingly, higher mean DCIS diagnosis (5.0 per week vs. 3.1 per week, p < 0.05) and surgery volume (14.8 vs. 10.5, p < 0.05) were found for postLD compared with preLD, while median time to surgery was shorter (1.2 months vs. 1.5 months, p < 0.0001). However, the postLD average weekly screening and diagnostic mammogram did not fully recover to preLD levels (2055.3 vs. 2326.2, p < 0.05; 574.2 vs. 624.1, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer diagnosis and treatment patterns were interrupted during the lockdown and still altered 1 year after. Screening in primary care should be expanded to mitigate possible longer-term effects of these interruptions.

Comparison of health information exchange data with self-report in measuring cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Efficient measurement of the receipt of cancer screening has been attempted with electronic health records (EHRs), but EHRs are commonly implemented within a single health care setting. However, health information exchange (HIE) includes EHR data from multiple health care systems and settings, thereby providing a more population-based measurement approach. In this study, we set out to understand the value of statewide HIE data in comparison to survey self-report (SR) to measure population-based cancer screening. METHODS: A statewide survey was conducted among residents in Indiana who had been seen at an ambulatory or inpatient clinical setting in the past year. Measured cancer screening tests included colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for colorectal cancer, human papilloma virus (HPV) and Pap tests for cervical cancer, and mammogram for breast cancer. For each screening test, the self-reported response for receipt of the screening (yes/no) and 'time since last screening' were compared with the corresponding information from patient HIE to evaluate the concordance between the two measures. RESULTS: Gwet's AC for HIE and self-report of screening receipt ranged from 0.24-0.73, indicating a fair to substantial concordance. For the time since receipt of last screening test, the Gwet's AC ranged from 0.21-0.90, indicating fair to almost perfect concordance. In comparison with SR data, HIE data provided relatively more additional information about laboratory-based tests: FIT (19% HIE alone vs. 4% SR alone) and HPV tests (27% HIE alone vs. 12% SR alone) and less additional information about procedures: colonoscopy (8% HIE alone vs. 23% SR alone), Pap test (13% HIE alone vs. 19% SR alone), or mammography (9% HIE alone vs. 10% SR alone). CONCLUSION: Studies that use a single data source should consider the type of cancer screening test to choose the optimal data collection method. HIE and self-report both provided unique information in measuring cancer screening, and the most robust measurement approach involves collecting screening information from both HIE and patient self-report.

Bankruptcy among insured surgical patients with breast cancer: Who is at risk?

BACKGROUND: The rising cost of cancer treatment has been linked to higher bankruptcy rates and worse mortality among patients with cancer. The objective of this study was to identify the characteristics of insured patients with breast cancer who underwent surgery and filed for bankruptcy. METHODS: Insured patients with breast cancer who underwent surgery were identified in the Indiana State Cancer Registry (ISCR) from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2014. Patients who filed for Chapter 7 or 13 bankruptcy in the Public Access to Courts Electronic Records (PACER) database were linked to patients in the ISCR. The cohort was divided into 2 groups: no bankruptcy (NB) and bankruptcy after diagnosis (BAD). Bivariate analysis and a logistic regression model were used to identify patients who were at increased risk of filing for bankruptcy after their diagnosis. RESULTS: Of 23,012 patients, 207 (0.9%) filed for bankruptcy after diagnosis and 22,805 (99.1%) did not file for bankruptcy. The patients who filed for bankruptcy after diagnosis were younger (BAD vs NB: median age, 53 years [interquartile range (IQR), 46-61 years] vs 62 years [IQR, 52-71 years], non-White (BAD vs NB, 20.5% vs 8.5%), and lived in lower income neighborhoods (BAD vs NB: median annual income, $50,869 [IQR, $41,051-$61,150] vs $52,522 [IQR, $41,356-$64,915]). On multivariable analysis, younger age (aged ≤40 years: odds ratio [OR], 5.41; 95% CI, 2.8-12.31; aged 41-64 years: OR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.33-5.12; aged ≥65 years, reference category) and non-White race (non-White: OR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.54-3.83; White, reference category) were associated with filing for bankruptcy after diagnosis CONCLUSIONS: Younger age and non-White race are associated with an increased risk of filing for bankruptcy after diagnosis among insured patients who undergo surgery for breast cancer. Additional steps should be taken to screen and address the financial vulnerability of these patients at treatment initiation.

Financial hardship is associated with lower uptake of colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings.

PURPOSE: Cancer screening uptake differs between groups in ways that cannot be explained by socioeconomic status alone. This study examined associations between material, psychosocial, and behavioral aspects of financial hardship and cancer screening behaviors. METHODS: Surveys were mailed to 7,979 people ages 18-75 who were seen in the statewide health system in Indiana. Participants reported SES, feelings about finances, and whether they had to forgo medical care due to cost. This was compared to uptake of mammogram, colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy, and Pap testing in best-fit multivariable logistic regression analyses controlling for demographic and healthcare characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 970 surveys were returned; the majority of respondents were female (54%), non-Hispanic White (75%), and over 50 years old (76%). 15% reported forgoing medical care due to cost; this barrier was higher among Black than White participants (24% vs. 13%; p = 0.001). In a best fit regression model for colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy, those who reported they had to forgo medical care due to cost had lower odds of screening (aOR 0.41; 95% CI 0.22-0.74). Forgoing medical care due to cost was not significantly associated with Pap testing in bivariate analyses. For mammogram, forgoing medical care due to cost was significant in bivariate analyses (OR 0.44; 95% CI 0.22-0.88), but was not significant in the multivariable model. CONCLUSION: Associations between financial hardship and cancer screening suggest the need to reduce barriers to cancer screening even among patients who have access to healthcare. Future research should explore barriers related to both healthcare and personal costs.

The impact of fear of cancer recurrence on healthcare utilization among long-term breast cancer survivors recruited through ECOG-ACRIN trials.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) and healthcare utilization among long-term breast cancer survivors (BCS). METHODS: In a cross-sectional survey study, 505 younger survivors (YS: ≤45 years) and 622 older survivors (OS: 55-70 years) 3-8 years from diagnosis completed a questionnaire assessing demographics, medical history, FCR, and healthcare utilization. Healthcare utilization consisted of breast cancer (BC) and non-BC-related routine and nonroutine utilization. RESULTS: YS had significantly higher FCR than OS (p < 0.01). Independent of age, FCR was significantly associated with all three types of BC-related utilization (p < 0.05). In the multivariate models, we found a significant, positive interaction effect between FCR and increased comorbidities on nonroutine BC appointments (p = 0.01) and BC-related emergency room visits (p = 0.03). Additionally, comorbidities were associated with non-BC-related utilization (p < 0.01), and nonwhites were more likely to utilize nonroutine resources, both BC and non-BC-related (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Increased FCR has been associated with hypervigilance among survivors and may lead to increased healthcare utilization. YS are at higher risk for increased FCR and psychosocial concerns, which may lead to overutilization. Providers should be aware that higher FCR may be related to increased use of healthcare resources and that these patients might be better served with supportive resources to increase quality of life and decrease inappropriate utilization. While this study provides increased evidence of the relationship between FCR and healthcare utilization, interventions are needed for survivors at risk to address unmet needs, especially as life expectancy increases among BCS.

Dissemination of cancer survivorship care plans: who is being left out?

OBJECTIVES: The Institute of Medicine (IOM) and the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC) recommend a clear and effectively explained comprehensive survivorship care plan (SCP) be given to all cancer survivors. The objective of this study is to understand the relationship between social determinants of health (SDOH) and self-reported receipt of SCP by cancer survivors in the USA. METHODS: We analyzed an adult population of cancer survivors in the 2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System's (BRFSS) Survivorship modules. Weighted multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze the association of SDOH and reported receipt of SCP. RESULTS: There were 7061 cancer patients eligible for an SCP. The probability of reporting receipt of SCP decreased with lower educational achievement (high school/some college: AOR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.70-0.97, p = 0.02; < high school: AOR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.47-0.97, p = 0.03) compared to those with at least one college degree. Additionally, being widowed/divorced/separated (widowed/divorced/separated: AOR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.61-0.86, p < 0.01 vs. married/cohabiting) and uninsured (uninsured: AOR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.0.34-0.80, p < 0.01 vs. insured) increased the odds of not receiving an SCP. Younger patients were more likely to receive an SCP than those over 65 (18-24 years: AOR = 6.62, 95% CI: 1.87-24.49, p < 0.01 vs. 65+ years). CONCLUSION: Among cancer survivors, SDOH such as low educational achievement, widowed/divorced/separated marital status, and being uninsured were associated with a lower likelihood of receiving an SCP. Future studies should evaluate how omission of SCP in these patients influences the quality of care during the transition from oncologists to primary care.

Oncologists' perceptions of the usefulness of cancer survivorship care plan components.

PURPOSE: The Institute of Medicine recommends that cancer patients receive survivorship care plans (SCP) summarizing information important to the individual's long-term care. The various components of SCPs have varying levels of evidence supporting their impact. We surveyed medical oncologists to better understand how they perceived the relative value of different SCP components. METHODS: Medical oncologists caring for patients in diverse US practice settings were surveyed (357 respondents; participation rate 52.9%) about their perceptions of the usefulness of various components of SCPs to both patients and primary care physicians (PCPs). RESULTS: Oncologists perceived treatment summaries as "very useful" for PCPs but were less likely to perceive them as "very useful" for patients (55% vs. 40%, p < 0.001). Information about the psychological effects of cancer (41% vs. 29%; p < 0.001) and healthy behaviors (67% vs. 41%; p < 0.001) were considered more useful to patients than to PCPs. From 3 to 20% of oncologists believed that any given component of the SCP was not useful to either PCPs or patients. Oncologists who perceived SCPs to be more useful tended to be female or to practice in settings with a fully implemented electronic health record. CONCLUSIONS: Oncologists do not perceive all components of SCPs to be equally useful to both patients and PCPs. To be successfully implemented, the SCP should be efficiently tailored to the unique needs and knowledge of patients and their PCPs. A minority of oncologists appear to be late adopters, suggesting that some resistance to the adoption of SCPs remains.

Predicting COVID-19-Related Health Care Resource Utilization Across a Statewide Patient Population: Model Development Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the inability of health systems to leverage existing system infrastructure in order to rapidly develop and apply broad analytical tools that could inform state- and national-level policymaking, as well as patient care delivery in hospital settings. The COVID-19 pandemic has also led to highlighted systemic disparities in health outcomes and access to care based on race or ethnicity, gender, income-level, and urban-rural divide. Although the United States seems to be recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic owing to widespread vaccination efforts and increased public awareness, there is an urgent need to address the aforementioned challenges. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to inform the feasibility of leveraging broad, statewide datasets for population health-driven decision-making by developing robust analytical models that predict COVID-19-related health care resource utilization across patients served by Indiana's statewide Health Information Exchange. METHODS: We leveraged comprehensive datasets obtained from the Indiana Network for Patient Care to train decision forest-based models that can predict patient-level need of health care resource utilization. To assess these models for potential biases, we tested model performance against subpopulations stratified by age, race or ethnicity, gender, and residence (urban vs rural). RESULTS: For model development, we identified a cohort of 96,026 patients from across 957 zip codes in Indiana, United States. We trained the decision models that predicted health care resource utilization by using approximately 100 of the most impactful features from a total of 1172 features created. Each model and stratified subpopulation under test reported precision scores >70%, accuracy and area under the receiver operating curve scores >80%, and sensitivity scores approximately >90%. We noted statistically significant variations in model performance across stratified subpopulations identified by age, race or ethnicity, gender, and residence (urban vs rural). CONCLUSIONS: This study presents the possibility of developing decision models capable of predicting patient-level health care resource utilization across a broad, statewide region with considerable predictive performance. However, our models present statistically significant variations in performance across stratified subpopulations of interest. Further efforts are necessary to identify root causes of these biases and to rectify them.

Breast Cancer Presentation, Surgical Management and Mortality Across the Rural-Urban Continuum in the National Cancer Database.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine differences in presentation, surgical management, and mortality among breast cancer patients in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) based on area of residence. METHODS: The NCDB was queried for women with a diagnosis of breast cancer from 1 January 2004-31 December 2015. The data were divided by metropolitan (large, medium, small) and non-metropolitan (urban, rural) status. RESULTS: Cancer stage increased with rurality (p < 0.0001). Residency in a large metropolitan area was associated with increased breast reconstruction rates (odds ratio [OR] 1.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.19-1.30) and reduced overall mortality (hazard ratio 0.92, 95% CI 0.89-0.95) compared with rural areas. There was no difference in mastectomy use among small metropolitan (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.04), urban (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98-1), and rural areas (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01-1.07) compared with large metropolitan areas. CONCLUSIONS: Across the rural-urban continuum in the NCDB, stage of cancer presentation increased with rurality. Conversely, residency in a large metropolitan area was associated with higher reconstruction rates and a reduction in overall mortality. Future studies should evaluate factors contributing to advanced disease presentation and lower reconstruction rates among rural breast cancer patients.

Communication About Health Information Technology Use Between Patients and Providers.

BACKGROUND: Although growing, the prevalence of the use of health information technology (HIT) by patients to communicate with their providers is not well understood on the population level, nor whether patients are communicating with their providers about their use of HIT. OBJECTIVE: To understand whether patients are communicating with their providers about HIT use and the patient characteristics associated with the communication. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, self-administered survey of a sample of patients across the state of Indiana. PARTICIPANTS: Nine hundred seventy adult participants from across Indiana, 54% female and 79.5% white. MAIN MEASURES: The survey included sections assessing health information-seeking behavior, use of health information technology, and discussions with doctors about the use of HIT. KEY RESULTS: The survey had a 12% response rate. Sixty-three percent of respondent reported going to the Internet as the first source when seeking health information, while only 19% of respondent reported their doctor was their first source. When communicating with doctors electronically, 31% reported using an electronic health record messaging system, 24% used email, and 18% used text messaging. Only 39% of respondents reported having had any conversation about HIT use with their providers. CONCLUSIONS: There remain many unmet opportunities for patients and providers to communicate about HIT use. More guidance for patients and care teams may both help facilitate these conversations and promote optimal use, such as recommendations to ask simple clarification questions and minimize inefficient, synchronous communication when unnecessary.

Incorporating Theory into Practice: Reconceptualizing Exemplary Care Coordination Initiatives from the US Veterans Health Delivery System.

This perspective paper seeks to lay out an efficient approach for health care providers, researchers, and other stakeholders involved in interventions aimed at improving care coordination to partner in locating and using applicable care coordination theory. The objective is to learn from relevant theory-based literature about fit between intervention options and coordination needs, thereby bringing insights from theory to enhance intervention design, implementation, and troubleshooting. To take this idea from an abstract notion to tangible application, our workgroup on models and measures from the Veterans Health Administration (VA) State of the Art (SOTA) conference on care coordination first summarizes our distillation of care coordination theoretical frameworks (models) into three common conceptual domains-context of an intervention, locus in which an intervention is applied, and specific design features of the intervention. Then we apply these three conceptual domains to four cases of care coordination interventions ("use cases") chosen to represent various scopes and stages of interventions to improve care coordination for veterans. Taken together, these examples make theory more accessible and practical by demonstrating how it can be applied to specific cases. Drawing from theory offers one method to anticipate which intervention options match a particular coordination situation.

The Use of Cancer-Specific Patient-Centered Technologies Among Underserved Populations in the United States: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, more than 1.6 million new cases of cancer are estimated to be diagnosed each year. However, the burden of cancer among the US population is not shared equally, with racial and ethnic minorities and lower-income populations having a higher cancer burden compared with their counterparts. For example, African Americans have the highest mortality rates and shortest survival rates for most cancers compared with other racial or ethnic groups in the United States. A wide range of technologies (eg, internet-based [electronic health, eHealth] technologies, mobile [mobile health, mHealth] apps, and telemedicine) available to patients are designed to improve their access to care and empower them to participate actively in their care, providing a means to reduce health care disparities; however, little is known of their use among underserved populations. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to systematically review the current evidence on the use of cancer-specific patient-centered technologies among various underserved populations. METHODS: Computer-based search was conducted in the following academic databases: (1) PubMed (cancer subset), (2) MEDLINE, (3) PsycINFO, and (4) CINAHL. We included studies that were peer-reviewed, published in the English language, and conducted in the United States. Each study was individually assessed for relevance, with any disagreements being reconciled by consensus. We used a 3-step inclusion process in which we examined study titles, abstracts, and full-text papers for assessment of inclusion criteria. We systematically extracted information from each paper meeting our inclusion criteria. RESULTS: This review includes 71 papers that use patient-centered technologies that primarily targeted African Americans (n=31), rural populations (n=14), and Hispanics (n=12). A majority of studies used eHealth technologies (n=41) finding them to be leading sources of cancer-related health information and significantly improving outcomes such as screening among nonadherent individuals and increasing knowledge about cancer and cancer screening. Studies on mHealth found that participants reported overall favorable responses to receiving health information via short message service (SMS) text message; however, challenges were experienced with respect to lack of knowledge of how to text among some participants. More complex mobile technologies (eg, a tablet-based risk assessment tool) were also found favorable to use and acceptable among underserved populations; however, they also resulted in more significant barriers, for example, participants expressed concerns regarding security and unfamiliarity with the technology and preferred further instruction and assistance in its use. CONCLUSIONS: There is a growing body of literature exploring patient-centered technology and its influence on care of underserved populations. In this review, we find that these technologies seem to be effective, especially when tailored, in improving patient and care-related outcomes. Despite the potential of patient-centered technologies and the receptivity of underserved populations, challenges still exist with respect to their effective use and usability.

Utilizing a user-centered approach to develop and assess pharmacogenomic clinical decision support for thiopurine methyltransferase.

BACKGROUND: A pharmacogenomic clinical decision support tool (PGx-CDS) for thiopurine medications can help physicians incorporate pharmacogenomic results into prescribing decisions by providing up-to-date, real-time decision support. However, the PGx-CDS user interface may introduce errors and promote alert fatigue. The objective of this study was to develop and evaluate a prototype of a PGx-CDS user interface for thiopurine medications with user-centered design methods. METHODS: This study had two phases: In phase I, we conducted qualitative interviews to assess providers' information needs. Interview transcripts were analyzed through a combination of inductive and deductive qualitative analysis to develop design requirements for a PGx-CDS user interface. Using these requirements, we developed a user interface prototype and evaluated its usability (phase II). RESULTS: In total, 14 providers participated: 10 were interviewed in phase I, and seven providers completed usability testing in phase II (3 providers participated in both phases). Most (90%) participants were interested in PGx-CDS systems to help improve medication efficacy and patient safety. Interviews yielded 11 themes sorted into two main categories: 1) health care providers' views on PGx-CDS and 2) important design features for PGx-CDS. We organized these findings into guidance for PGx-CDS content and display. Usability testing of the PGx-CDS prototype showed high provider satisfaction. CONCLUSION: This is one of the first studies to utilize a user-centered design approach to develop and assess a PGx-CDS interface prototype for Thiopurine Methyltransferase (TPMT). This study provides guidance for the development of a PGx-CDS, and particularly for biomarkers such as TPMT.

Polypharmacy and patterns of prescription medication use among cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: The population of cancer survivors is rapidly growing in the United States. Long-term and late effects of cancer, combined with the ongoing management of other chronic conditions, make survivors particularly vulnerable to polypharmacy and its adverse effects. In the current study, the authors examined patterns of prescription medication use and polypharmacy in a population-based sample of cancer survivors. METHODS: Using data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), the authors matched cancer survivors (5216 survivors) with noncancer controls (19,588 controls) by age, sex, and survey year. Polypharmacy was defined as ≥5 unique medications. The authors estimated the percentage of respondents prescribed medications within therapeutic classes and total prescription expenditures. RESULTS: A higher percentage of cancer survivors were prescribed ≥5 unique medications (64.0%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 62.3%-65.8%) compared with noncancer controls (51.5%; 95% CI, 50.4%-52.6%), including drugs with abuse potential. Across all therapeutic classes, a higher percentage of newly (≤1 year since diagnosis) and previously (>1 years since diagnosis) diagnosed survivors were prescribed medications compared with controls, with large differences observed with regard to central nervous system agents (65.8% [95% CI, 62.3%-69.3%] vs 57.4% [95% CI, 55.3%-59.5%] vs 46.0% [95% CI, 45.0%-46.9%]). Specifically, nearly 10% of survivors were prescribed benzodiazepines and/or opioids compared with approximately 5% of controls. Survivors had more than double the prescription expenditures (median of $1633 vs $784 among controls). Findings persisted across age and comorbidity categories. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors were prescribed a higher number of unique medications, including drugs with abuse potential, thereby increasing their risk of adverse drug events, financial toxicity, poor adherence, and drug-drug interactions. Cancer 2018;124:2850-2857. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Incorporating PROMIS Symptom Measures into Primary Care Practice-a Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Symptoms account for more than 400 million clinic visits annually in the USA. The SPADE symptoms (sleep, pain, anxiety, depression, and low energy/fatigue) are particularly prevalent and undertreated. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of providing PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Information System) symptom scores to clinicians on symptom outcomes. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial conducted from March 2015 through May 2016 in general internal medicine and family practice clinics in an academic healthcare system. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care patients who screened positive for at least one SPADE symptom. INTERVENTIONS: After completing the PROMIS symptom measures electronically immediately prior to their visit, the 300 study participants were randomized to a feedback group in which their clinician received a visual display of symptom scores or a control group in which scores were not provided to clinicians. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was the 3-month change in composite SPADE score. Secondary outcomes were individual symptom scores, symptom documentation in the clinic note, symptom-specific clinician actions, and patient satisfaction. KEY RESULTS: Most patients (84%) had multiple clinically significant (T-score ≥ 55) SPADE symptoms. Both groups demonstrated moderate symptom improvement with a non-significant trend favoring the feedback compared to control group (between-group difference in composite T-score improvement, 1.1; P = 0.17). Symptoms present at baseline resolved at 3-month follow-up only one third of the time, and patients frequently still desired treatment. Except for pain, clinically significant symptoms were documented less than half the time. Neither symptom documentation, symptom-specific clinician actions, nor patient satisfaction differed between treatment arms. Predictors of greater symptom improvement included female sex, black race, fewer medical conditions, and receiving care in a family medicine clinic. CONCLUSIONS: Simple feedback of symptom scores to primary care clinicians in the absence of additional systems support or incentives is not superior to usual care in improving symptom outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02383862.

A qualitative study of patients' perceptions of the utility of patient-reported outcome measures of symptoms in primary care clinics.

PURPOSE: Sleep, pain, anxiety, depression, and low energy/fatigue (SPADE pentad) symptoms are common, but often unrecognized and undertreated in primary care. In an effort to improve symptom outcomes, primary care clinics are integrating patient-reported outcome measures (PROs), such as the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS), into practice. Whether patients with SPADE symptoms perceive these measures as useful is unknown. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore patients' perceptions of the utility of symptom-based PROs in primary care. METHODS: As part of a mixed-methods study, 23 patients (age 24-77 years) with one or more SPADE symptoms participated in one-on-one interviews about the use, implementation and visual display of PROMIS. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Five themes emerged: (1) PROs may foster communication about symptoms; (2) data from PROs may prompt clinical actions; (3) the visual display of symptom scores could be useful for patients and providers, though modifications may enhance interpretation; (4) implementation may vary according to patients' perception of PRO features (e.g., length); and (5) PROs may be useful, but only to the extent that they are valued, prioritized, and used. CONCLUSIONS: According to patients, the use of PROs to measure symptoms in primary care clinics has the potential to be useful. However, patients are reluctant to complete PROs if they perceive that clinicians do not use the measures to improve care. Barriers to implementation in primary care (e.g., duration of visit) should be addressed to enhance the utility of PROs. Clinical trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02383862.

Patients With Temporary Ostomies: Veterans Administration Hospitals Multi-institutional Retrospective Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe clinical outcomes of patients with temporary ostomies in 3 Veterans Health Administration hospitals. DESIGN: Retrospective descriptive study, secondary analysis. SAMPLE AND SETTING: Veterans with temporary ostomies from 3 Veterans Health Administration hospitals who were enrolled in a previous study. The sample comprised 36 participants all were male. Their mean age was 67.05 ± 9.8 years (mean ± standard deviation). Twenty patients (55.6%) had ileostomies and 16 patients (44.4%) had colostomies. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of data collected using medical record data. Variables examined included etiology for creation and type of ostomy, health-related quality of life, time to reversal, reasons for nonreversal, postoperative complications after reversal, and mortality in the follow-up period. RESULTS: Colorectal cancer and diverticular disease were the main reasons for temporary stoma formation. The reversal rate was 50%; the median time to reversal was 9 months in our sample; temporary ileostomies were reversed more often than temporary colostomies (P = .18). Comorbid conditions were identified as the main reason for nonreversal. Mortality was not significantly different between the reversal and nonreversal groups. No significant differences were reported with health-related quality-of-life parameters between reversal and nonreversal groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified that the proportion of temporary ostomies was limited to 50%. Complications during the index operation, medical comorbidities, and progression of cancer are the main reasons for nonreversal of temporary stomas. Study findings should be included in the counseling of patients who are likely to get intestinal stomas with temporary intention, and during consideration for later reversal of a stoma.

Patterns of computed tomography surveillance in survivors of colorectal cancer at Veterans Health Administration facilities.

BACKGROUND: Annual computed tomography (CT) scans are a component of the current standard of care for the posttreatment surveillance of survivors of colorectal cancer (CRC) after curative-intent resection. The authors conducted a retrospective study with the primary aim of assessing patient, physician, and organizational characteristics associated with the receipt of CT surveillance among veterans. METHODS: The Department of Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry was used to identify patients diagnosed with AJCC collaborative stage I to III CRC between 2001 and 2009. Patient sociodemographic and clinical (ie, CRC stage and comorbidity) characteristics, provider specialty, and organizational characteristics were measured. Hierarchical multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the association between patient, provider, and organizational characteristics on receipt of 1) consistently guideline-concordant care (at least 1 CT every 12 months for both of the first 2 years of CRC surveillance) versus no CT receipt and 2) potential overuse (>1 CT every 12 months during the first 2 years of CRC surveillance) of CRC surveillance using CT. The authors also analyzed the impact of the 2005 American Society of Clinical Oncology update in CRC surveillance guidelines on care received over time. RESULTS: For 2263 survivors of stage II/III CRC who were diagnosed after 2005, 19.4% of patients received no surveillance CT, whereas potential overuse occurred in both surveillance years for 14.9% of patients. Guideline-concordant care was associated with younger age, higher stage of disease (stage III vs stage II), and geographic region. In adjusted analyses, younger age and higher stage of disease (stage III vs stage II) were found to be associated with overuse. There was no significant difference in the annual rate of CT scanning noted across time periods (year ≤ 2005 vs year > 2005). CONCLUSIONS: Among a minority of veteran survivors of CRC, both underuse and potential overuse of CT surveillance were present. Patient factors, but no provider or organizational characteristics, were found to be significantly associated with patterns of care. The 2005 change in American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines did not appear to have an impact on rates of surveillance CT. Cancer 2017;123:2338-2351. © 2017 American Cancer Society.