Developing a survivorship care plan (SCP) delivery process for patients and primary care providers serving poor, rural, and minority patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Survivorship care plans (SCPs) summarize patients' treatment and act as an education and communication tool between oncologists and primary care providers (PCPs). But creation and delivery of SCPs are challenging, labor intensive, and costly. The University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center (UNM CCC) treats a poor, rural, and minority patient population, and our purpose was to implement and evaluate a process to create and deliver SCPs to patients and PCPs. METHODS: Providers placed an electronic SCP order, basic information was imported, and staff compiled treatment details. Flagged SCPs were then ready for delivery, providers approved of and delivered the SCP at the next encounter, and the SCP was sent to the PCP. RESULTS: By April 2020, 283 SCPs were ordered, 241 (85.2%) were created by the designated staff, and 97 (34.2%) were given to patients after definitive therapy for breast cancer (59.1%), gynecological cancers (10.8%), prostate cancer (7.4%), colorectal cancer (5.1%), and lymphomas (4.8%). Of 97 SCPs eligible to be sent to PCPs, 75 (77.3%) were mailed or sent via EMR. Of the 41 (48.9%) SCPs sent via mail or fax, only 8 (8.3%) were received and 5 (5.2%) integrated. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that SCPs can be delivered to patients in a poor, rural, and minority patient population but that PCP receipt and integration of SCPs are poor. Future efforts need to ensure that an oncologist to PCP education and communication tool is able reach and be integrated by PCPs.

Improving Outpatient Infusion Clinic Wait Times at a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

PURPOSE: Many factors contribute to long wait times for patients on the day of their chemotherapy infusion appointments. Longer wait time leads to nonoptimal care, increased costs, and decreased patient satisfaction. We conducted a quality improvement project to reduce the infusion wait times at a Comprehensive Cancer Center. METHODS: A multidisciplinary working group of physicians, infusion center nurses, pharmacists, information technology analysts, the Chief Medical Officer, and patient advocates formed a working group. Wait times were analyzed, and the contributing factors to long wait time were identified. Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles were implemented and included labeling patients ready to treat earlier, loading premedications into the medication dispensing system, increasing the number of pharmacy staff, and improving communication using a secure messaging system. The outcome measure was time from patient appointment to initiation of first drug at the infusion center. The secondary outcome measure was patient wait time satisfaction on the basis of Press Ganey score. RESULTS: Postintervention, the mean time from appointment to initiation of first drug decreased 17.6 minutes (P < .001; 95% CI, 16.3 to 18.9), from 58.1 minutes to 40.5 minutes (43.5% decrease). Patient wait time satisfaction score increased 8.9 points (P < .001; 95% CI, 6.0 to 11.82), from 76.2 to 85.1 (11.7% increase). CONCLUSION: Exploring real-time data and using a classic quality improvement methodology allowed a Comprehensive Cancer Center to identify deficiencies and prevent delays in chemotherapy initiation. This significantly improved patient wait time and patient satisfaction.

Pharmacist-Driven Oral Oncolytic Medication Education and Consent.

PURPOSE: The numbers and types of oral oncolytics in oncology are expanding rapidly. Oral oncolytics have serious adverse effects, and pharmacist-driven patient education has the potential to reduce adverse events. The University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center (UNM CCC) initiated a patient education and consent process for oral oncolytics in our minority, rural, and economically disadvantaged population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The UNM CCC initiated a pharmacist-driven education and consent process from August 2016 to October 2018. The process metric measured via statistical process control charts was the percentage of patients receiving oral oncolytic therapy who were educated and consented. The balancing metric was time for benefit investigation. The intervention was pharmacy team members providing standardized education for and obtaining consent from each patient, supported by electronic medical record orders, physician education, pharmacy notifications, and hospital discharge planning. RESULTS: The initial monthly education and consent rate was 17.9%, followed by 45.5% the subsequent month. This quickly grew to an average of 87.0% (95% CI, 81.5% to 92.4%) for the subsequent 15 months in which control was achieved. Additional changes increased the education rate to 95.7% (95% CI, 93.4% to 98.1%). These 2 periods were statistically different (P = .0025). There was no change in time for benefit investigation (5.60 v 5.52 days; P = .75). CONCLUSION: A pharmacist-driven program for education and consent upon initiation of oral oncolytics is possible and can successfully educate a majority of patients. Future directions will include ensuring patient adherence and educating patients who fill oral oncolytic prescriptions outside UNM CCC.