Use of a mobile health patient engagement technology improves perioperative outcomes in gynecologic oncology patients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of a mobile health patient engagement technology (PET) on postoperative outcomes in gynecologic oncology patients. METHODS: All gynecologic oncology patients undergoing laparotomy on an enhanced recovery program (ERP) were approached from July 2019 to May 2021 to enroll in a PET, which can be accessed by computer, tablet, or smart phone. This platform provides enhanced pre- and postoperative patient education and remote patient monitoring. Patients who elected to participate were provided with targeted education based on their age and comorbidities and were asked to complete daily health checks during the postoperative period. Participants in the PET were compared to patients who opted out as well as to a historical cohort from prior to PET implementation. Patient and procedure-level factors were recorded. The primary outcomes were length of stay (LOS) and 30-day readmission rate. Analysis was performed using SPSS v.26. RESULTS: 682 women met inclusion criteria during the study time; 347 in the PET group and 335 in the control group. Demographic and other factors including race, BMI (kg/m2), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), surgical complexity, and insurance status were not different between the PET and control group; however, patients in the PET cohort were slightly younger (55.0 yo vs. 57.2 yo; p = 0.04). Patients in the PET group had a significantly shorter LOS (2.9 days vs. 3.6 days; p < 0.01) and lower readmission rate (4.3% vs. 8.6%; p < 0.01) when compared with the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a PET in our gynecologic oncology patients decreased LOS by nearly one day despite an absence of differences in other demographic and surgical factors other than age. Furthermore, there was a 50% reduction in readmission rates in the PET group. The use of a PET allows for healthcare professionals to engage, evaluate, and treat patients in a way that improves perioperative care.

The MEMORY Study: MulticentEr study of Minimally invasive surgery versus Open Radical hYsterectomy in the management of early-stage cervical cancer: Survival outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer (LACC) trial found that minimally invasive radical hysterectomy compared to open radical hysterectomy compromised oncologic outcomes and was associated with worse progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in early-stage cervical carcinoma. We sought to assess oncologic outcomes at multiple centers between minimally invasive (MIS) radical hysterectomy and OPEN radical hysterectomy. METHODS: This is a multi-institutional, retrospective cohort study of patients with 2009 FIGO stage IA1 (with lymphovascular space invasion) to IB1 cervical carcinoma from 1/2007-12/2016. Patients who underwent preoperative therapy were excluded. Squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, and adenosquamous carcinomas were included. Appropriate statistical tests were used. RESULTS: We identified 1093 cases for analysis-715 MIS (558 robotic [78%]) and 378. OPEN procedures. The OPEN cohort had more patients with tumors >2 cm, residual disease in the hysterectomy specimen, and more likely to have had adjuvant therapy. Median follow-up for the MIS and OPEN cohorts were 38.5 months (range, 0.03-149.51) and 54.98 months (range, 0.03-145.20), respectively. Three-year PFS rates were 87.9% (95% CI: 84.9-90.4%) and 89% (95% CI: 84.9-92%), respectively (P = 0.6). On multivariate analysis, the adjusted HR for recurrence/death was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.47-1.03; P = 0.07). Three-year OS rates were 95.8% (95% CI: 93.6-97.2%) and 96.6% (95% CI: 93.8-98.2%), respectively (P = 0.8). On multivariate analysis, the adjusted HR for death was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.43-1.52; P = 0.5). CONCLUSION: This multi-institutional analysis showed that an MIS compared to OPEN radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer did not appear to compromise oncologic outcomes, with similar PFS and OS.

Standing on the shoulders of giants: Mentorship advice from leaders in the field.

This commentary is presenting opinions and advice on mentorship in the field of gynecologic oncology. Eleven academic gynecologic oncologists from across the country were interviewed and their thoughts about mentorship were recorded with recurring themes and ideas described in this commentary. Trust, respect, and mutual agreement on expectations were all described as vital to a functioning mentor/mentee relationship. Mentorship is critical for fellows and junior faculty to expand and uphold the standards of the field.

An enhanced recovery protocol decreases complication rates in high-risk gynecologic oncology patients undergoing non-emergent laparotomy.

OBJECTIVE: Enhanced recovery protocols are now established as the standard of care leading to improved perioperative outcomes and associated cost-benefits. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of an enhanced recovery program on complication rates in high-risk gynecologic oncology patients undergoing surgery. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included gynecologic oncology patients with pathology-proven malignancy undergoing non-emergent laparotomy from October 2016 to December 2018 managed on an enhanced recovery protocol, and a control group from October 2015 through September 2016 prior to enhanced recovery protocol implementation. The primary outcome was complication rates in a high-risk population pre- and post-enhanced recovery protocol. High-risk patients were defined as those with obesity (body mass index >30 kg/m2) and/or age ≥65 years. Analysis was performed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) v.24. RESULTS: A total of 363 patients met the inclusion criteria: 104 in the control group and 259 in the enhanced recovery protocol group. Patient demographics, including age, body mass index, diagnosis, and performance status, were similar. Overall complication rates were less in the enhanced recovery protocol group (29% vs 53.8%; p<0.0001). The enhanced recovery protocol group had a shorter length-of-stay compared with control (3.3 vs 4.2 days; p<0.0001). The 30-day readmission rates were similar between the groups (9.6% vs 13.5%; p=0.19). In the enhanced recovery protocol group compared with control, complication rates were less in obese patients (29.4% vs 57.8%; p<0.0001), morbidly obese patients (20.9% vs 76.2%; p<0.0001), and age ≥65 (36.1% vs 57.1%; p<0.0001). The most common complications in the enhanced recovery protocol group were ileus (9.7%), pulmonary complications (2.7%), and blood transfusions (10.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol decreases complication rates and length-of-stay in morbidly obese and geriatric patients with gynecologic malignancy without an increase in readmission rates.

The financial impact of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in an academic gynecologic oncology practice.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the financial impact of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in gynecologic oncology patients. METHODS: This study identified gynecologic oncology patients who were placed on the ERAS protocol after elective laparotomy from 10/2016-6/2017. A control group was identified from the year prior to ERAS implementation. Financial experts assisted in procuring data for these patient encounters, including payer status, direct and indirect costs, contribution margin, and length of stay (LOS). SPSS Statistics v. 24 was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: 376 patients met criteria for inclusion: 179 in the ERAS group and 197 in the control group. Patient demographics were similar between the two cohorts. Payer status across the groups was not statistically significant in patients with private insurance (control 43.7% vs. ERAS 41.3%), Medicare (38.1% vs. 31.8%), or self-pay patients (12.2% vs. 15.1%). There was a significantly higher number of Medicaid patients in the ERAS group (6.1% vs. 11.7%; p = 0.05). Hospital direct costs ($5596 vs. 5346) and indirect costs ($5182 vs. $4954) per encounter were similar between groups. However, overall contribution margin per encounter decreased in the ERAS group ($11,619 vs. $8528; p = 0.01). LOS was significantly lower in the ERAS group (4.1 vs. 2.9 days; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the ERAS protocol in gynecologic oncology patients does not lead to increased costs for the patient or hospital system. The decreased contribution margin is likely due to a reduction in per diem payments caused by the reduction in LOS. On a per-patient-day basis, contribution margin was the same for both groups ($2877 vs $2857). The reduction in LOS also created capacity for additional cases, the financial impact of which was not evaluated.

Extensive financial hardship among gynecologic cancer patients starting a new line of therapy.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to evaluate the three domains of financial hardship (psychological response, material conditions, and coping behaviors) among gynecologic cancer patients receiving treatment. METHODS: We conducted a single-institution survey of gynecologic cancer patients starting a new line of therapy for primary or recurrent disease. Psychological response was measured using Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity, with score < 26 indicating financial distress. We measured material conditions by patient-reported changes in employment or spending and coping behaviors by patient-reported medication non-adherence. We performed descriptive statistics, bivariate analysis, and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 121 participants, the mean age was 59 years, 28% were African-American, 50% reported income < $40,000, 74% had private insurance, 20% had only public insurance, and 7% were uninsured. Sixty-five (54%) participants screened positive for financial distress. Age < 65 years (aOR 2.61, 95% CI 1.04-6.52) and income < $40,000 (aOR 3.41, 95% CI 1.28-9.09) were associated with increased odds of screening positive for financial distress. Participants with financial distress were significantly more likely to report material hardship, including losing wages (46% vs. 18%, p < 0.01), not paying bills on time (40% vs. 7%, p < 0.01), and borrowing money (39% vs. 4%, p < 0.01). Financial distress was not associated with coping behaviors, such as not taking (6% vs. 2%, p = 0.37) or refilling medications (5% vs. 2%, p = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: Financial distress affects over half of gynecologic cancer patients starting a new line of treatment and is associated with material hardship. Younger age and lower income can be used to identify patients at increased risk.

Decreasing opioid use in postoperative gynecologic oncology patients through a restrictive opioid prescribing algorithm.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of a post-surgical restrictive opioid prescribing algorithm (ROPA) in gynecologic oncology patients. METHODS: This cohort study included gynecologic oncology patients undergoing any surgical procedure from 08/2018-7/2019 after implementation of a ROPA. Patients were compared to historical controls managed without a ROPA from 10/2016-9/2017. Patients were educated preoperatively about pain management goals, the ROPA, and opioid disposal. A 4-tiered system was developed to standardize prescriptions at discharge based on surgical complexity and inpatient opioid requirements. Patients were surveyed at their postoperative visit to assess home opioid use and satisfaction. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Statistics v.24. RESULTS: 2549 patients met inclusion criteria; 1321 in the historical control group and 1228 in the ROPA group. Demographics, including age, BMI, and performance status were similar. Compared with the control group, the average number of opioid pills prescribed was significantly lower in the ROPA group (30.5 vs 11.3; p < 0.001) along with the morphine milligram equivalents (MME) (152.5 MME vs. 83.3 MME; p < 0.001). The percentage of patients requiring opioid refill within 30 days was similar (13.0% vs. 12.6%; p = 0.71). 95.7% of patients surveyed were satisfied with their pain regimen. The total number of pills prescribed annually decreased from 34,130 in the control group to 13,888 in the ROPA group. CONCLUSIONS: A restrictive prescribing practice allows for a significantly lower number of opioids to be prescribed to postoperative patients while maintaining patient satisfaction. There was no increase in opioid refill requests using a ROPA in patients undergoing surgery.

Reducing emergency department (ED) computed tomography (CT) utilization in women treated for gynecologic cancers.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this quality improvement (QI) project was to decrease the rate of low-value computed tomography (CT) imaging in established gynecologic oncology patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). METHODS: This was a cohort study with a before and after design that evaluated implementation of a QI project designed to decrease CT utilization in established gynecologic oncology patients in the ED. The pre-intervention cohort included patients admitted through the ED from 4/1/17 to 5/31/18, while the post-intervention cohort was from 6/1/18 to 5/31/19. The intervention included gynecologic oncology consultation before CT on patients who had imaging within the prior 3 weeks. Details regarding CT, ED length of stay (LOS), and oncologic history were abstracted. The value of CT was determined by consensus from 2 reviewers. Prospective data monitoring evaluated for patient safety. RESULTS: Prior to intervention, there were 129 unique ED encounters in gynecologic oncology patients leading to admission. CT scans were performed in 101 (78.3%) encounters, 57.7% of which were deemed to be of low-value. Following implementation, the CT utilization rate decreased significantly from median monthly rate of 75.2% to 49.1% (p < 0.00001), and the ED LOS decreased from 8.1 to 6.9 h (p = 0.0102). The number of CT scans deemed to be low-value in the post-intervention group decreased to 2 (3.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an early consultation policy and imaging guidelines led to a significant decrease in unnecessary CT utilization and shorter ED LOS in gynecologic oncology patients presenting to the ED.

Differences in referral patterns based on race for women at high-risk for ovarian cancer in the southeast: Results from a Gynecologic Cancer Risk Assessment Clinic.

OBJECTIVE: To compare referral patterns, genetic testing and pathogenic variant rates in Black women (BW) and White women (WW) in a large academic Gynecologic Cancer Risk Assessment Clinic (GCRAC). METHODS: Cross sectional study of an IRB-approved prospective, cohort study from a GCRAC. Data evaluated included: age, race, referral provider specialty and indication, genetic testing frequency, as well as frequency and types of pathogenic variants. RESULTS: 588 WW and 57 BW were evaluated from 1/2010-12/2015. Although approximately one-third of BW and WW were referred for family history alone, referral indications varied. BW were more likely referred for a known pathogenic variant (20.0% vs. 6.2%) although less likely referred for a personal history of ovarian cancer (24.0% vs. 46.8%; p = 0.0023). While gynecologic oncologists referred most patients (BW 43.6% vs. WW 63.0%), BW were more likely to be referred by surgical oncologist (23.0% vs. 12.8%) or genetic counselor (12.8% vs. 5.9%) than WW (p = 0.0234). Referral from non-OBGYN primary care providers was <3% in both groups. Genetic testing rates were similar in both races (82.4% vs. 85.5%). Rates of BRCA1 mutations (12.7% vs. 11.5%) were similar; however, BW had more BRCA2 mutations (21.3% vs. 9.5%; p = 0.0194). CONCLUSIONS: Since BW are more likely to be referred by surgical oncology or genetics counselor, breast clinics might be an entry point to ensure genetic counseling and testing. Continued efforts to increase awareness regarding the importance of patient referral at the primary care level may help identify the subset of women not currently undergoing counseling and testing.

Treatment of low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma in a nulligravid woman.

A 32 year-old nulligravid woman with a uterine mass underwent exploratory laparotomy with myomectomy. Final pathology revealed a low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (ESS) with positive margins. She subsequently underwent definitive robotic hysterectomy and bilateral salpingectomy with ovarian preservation. She was diagnosed with a stage IB low-grade ESS. She is currently undergoing observation. Discussion of classification, surgical options, and adjuvant therapy is presented.

Impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol on gastrointestinal function in gynecologic oncology patients undergoing laparotomy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) on postoperative gastrointestinal function in gynecologic oncology patients. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study compared gynecology oncology patients undergoing non-emergent laparotomy from 10/2016 to 6/2017 managed on an ERAS protocol to a control cohort from the year prior to ERAS implementation. Major changes to postoperative care after ERAS implementation included multimodal analgesia, early feeding, goal-directed fluid resuscitation, and early ambulation. The primary outcome was rate of postoperative ileus, defined as nausea and vomiting requiring nothing-per-mouth status or nasogastric tube (NGT) placement. Secondary outcomes included length of stay (LOS) and 30-day readmission. RESULTS: 376 patients met inclusion criteria; 197 in the control group and 179 in the ERAS group. Patient demographics were similar between groups. Ileus rate was significantly lower in the ERAS group (2.8% vs. 15.7%; p < 0.001), and fewer patients in the ERAS group required NGT placement (2.2% vs. 7.1%; p = 0.06). ERAS remained independently associated with decreased ileus rates when controlling for other patient and surgical factors (OR 0.2; p = 0.01). Epidural use was correlated with a significant increase in ileus risk (OR 2.6; p = 0.03), as was increased Charlson Comorbidity Index (OR 1.2; p < 0.01). LOS was significantly decreased in the ERAS group (2.9 vs. 4.0 days; p = 0.04), while 30-day readmission rates were similar (10.1% vs. 10.7%; p = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an ERAS protocol significantly decreases the risk of postoperative ileus in gynecologic oncology patients undergoing laparotomy. ERAS also reduced LOS compared to pre-ERAS controls.

Characteristics of African American women at high-risk for ovarian cancer in the southeast: Results from a Gynecologic Cancer Risk Assessment Clinic.

OBJECTIVES: Describe patient characteristics in African American (AA) women seen for gynecologic cancer related genetic counseling at a large southeastern comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: We reviewed an IRB approved, prospective observational cohort of patients from a Gynecologic Cancer Risk Assessment Clinic. Data evaluated included personal cancer history, family history, frequency of genetic testing, frequency/type of genetic mutations, and frequency of surgical intervention. Standard statistical statistics were utilized. RESULTS: 1227 patients were evaluated from 2003 to 2015, of which 95 (7.7%) were AA. Sixteen patients had a personal history of ovarian cancer. 21 women (22%) underwent genetic counseling only; subsequent genetic testing was not recommended based on absence of risk factors. Of the seventy-four AA patients in whom genetic testing was recommended, sixty-six (69.5%) completed testing. Of women tested, 37 (56%) had abnormal results. Eight and 14 patients had pathogenic variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2, respectively. Two were found to have pathogenic PALB2 variants; one had a pathogenic ATM variant and one constitutional MLH1 epimutation case was identified. Eleven had BRCA variants of uncertain significance. Of the patients with abnormal testing, six of 22 women with pathogenic BRCA variants underwent risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that in a region where AAs represent 27% of the population, the proportion of AA patients referred to a Gynecologic Cancer Risk Assessment Clinic remains low. Pathogenic variant and variant of uncertain significance rates were high in patients tested, likely representing a selection bias of high-risk patients. Endeavors should continue to identify minorities at risk for ovarian cancer and institute measures to provide thorough genetic counseling and testing.

Quality corner: Safely using cephalosporins in almost all patients with penicillin allergies: Mini-review and suggested protocol to improve efficacy and surgical outcomes.

Surgical site infections (SSI) are one of the most common gynecologic oncology postoperative complications and they have a significant deleterious impact on the healthcare system and in patients' outcomes. Cefazolin is the recommended antibiotic in women undergoing gynecologic surgical procedures that require that require prophylaxis. However, 10-20% of patients may report a penicillin allergy which can result in administration of a less effective antibiotic. This quality review evaluated the literature around this common perioperative issue and demonstrated that healthcare teams should consider the implementation of a protocol to safely use cefazolin in most patients with a penicillin allergy. Overall, literature shows this is a safe adjustment and would improve antimicrobial stewardship, decrease SSI rates, avoid acute kidney injury, and increase cost savings.

Impact of steroid use and glycemic control on postoperative complications in diabetic gynecologic oncology patients undergoing laparotomy.

Objective: We aimed to assess the impact of preoperative steroid administration and perioperative glycemic control on postoperative complications in diabetic gynecologic oncology patients undergoing laparotomy. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included gynecologic oncology patients with Type I and Type II diabetes (DM) undergoing laparotomy for any gynecologic indication at a single academic center from 10/2017 to 09/2020. The primary outcome was the rate of postoperative complications. Preoperative steroid administration and 24-hour postoperative average serum blood glucose (BG) ≥ 180 mg/dL were the studied exposures. Data was analyzed with SPSS Statistics v.28. Results: 225 patients met inclusion criteria; 47.6 % had postoperative complications. Patient demographics were similar between patients with and without postoperative complications. Patients with complications had higher BMIs (36.8 vs. 34.0; p = 0.03), bowel surgery (33.0 % vs. 17.1 %; p = 0.008), operative time ≥ 240 min (14.2 % vs. 5.1 %; p = 0.02) and average BG ≥ 180 (63.6 % vs. 40.2 %; p < 0.01). On multivariate analysis, bowel surgery (OR 2.4 (1.2-4.8); p = 0.01) and average BG ≥ 180 (OR 2.8 (1.6-4.9); p < 0.01) remained significant predictors of postoperative complications. There were no differences in complication rates (42.3 % vs. 42.6 %; p = 1.0) between patients who received preoperative steroids and those who did not. When stratified by average postoperative BG < 180 mg/dL vs. BG ≥ 180 mg/dL, there was no difference in Clavien-Dindo classification, 30-day readmission rate (28.2 % vs. 22.1 %; p = 0.49) or 30-day mortality rate (2.9 % vs. 0.0 %; p = 0.53). Conclusion: The administration of preoperative steroids did not increase complication rates. Perioperative hyperglycemia was associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications. Optimizing perioperative glycemic control is imperative to decrease postoperative complications.

New Paradigms in the Treatment of Cervical Cancer.

Despite effective screening strategies and the development and implementation of prophylactic high-risk human papillomavirus vaccination, cervical cancer remains a significant public health burden. This burden is most pronounced in under-resourced countries without fully developed screening and vaccination programs, although the disease remains present worldwide, including in industrialized countries. To that end, the World Health Organization (WHO) has an active focus on the elimination of cervical cancer, with objective metrics to be achieved by countries by the year 2030. Although increased vaccination and screening will be needed to approach potential eradication of cervical cancer, as recognized by the WHO initiative, treatment will need to continue to not only be effective in the near term, but to improve outcomes as well. Accordingly, assessments to improve primary treatment options, including surgery for women with early-stage disease, modification of chemoradiation for those with locally advanced cervical cancer, and systemic therapy for those with recurrent or metastatic presentations, are ongoing. Accordingly, we highlight important areas of both recent and ongoing focus as they relate to improving cervical cancer outcomes.

Complete Compared With Partial Salpingectomy for Postpartum Sterilization.

In this narrative review, we describe evidence regarding the associated risks, benefits, and cost effectiveness of postpartum complete salpingectomy compared with partial salpingectomy. Permanent contraception can be performed via several methods, but complete salpingectomy is becoming more common secondary to its coincident benefit of ovarian cancer risk reduction. Small prospective studies and larger retrospective cohort studies have demonstrated the feasibility and safety of complete salpingectomy in the postpartum period. Additionally, multiple cost-effectiveness analyses have demonstrated the cost effectiveness of this method secondary to ovarian cancer reduction over the life span. Although future larger cohort studies will allow for more precise estimates of the effect of complete salpingectomy on ovarian cancer risk and incidence of rare complications, current data suggest that complete salpingectomy should be offered to patients as a method of permanent contraception in the postpartum period.

An Update on Human Papillomavirus Vaccination in the United States.

Cervical cancer remains a significant disease in the United States. Although the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has been approved for those aged 9-26 years and for some individuals up to age 45 years, there are many circumstances in which health care professionals may not know whether the vaccine should be recommended, such as for patients with previous infection, health care workers, and those older than age 26 years. This article highlights the evidence that the HPV vaccine is a safe and highly effective way to prevent cervical cancer, with the strongest predictor of vaccine uptake being practitioner recommendation.

Barriers and facilitators affecting presentation in women with early versus advanced stage cervical cancer.

Background: This study was performed to evaluate the barriers and facilitators associated with patient presentation for early stage (ES) versus advanced stage (AS) cervical cancer (CC). Methods: A mixed-method approach was used to collect quantitative (i.e., demographics and medical/screening histories) and qualitative data (individual interviews assessing patients' perceptions regarding their general health, HPV and CC screening, and barriers and facilitators to CC care). Two separate investigators coded the interviews for major themes that occurred with an agreement that 50% or more of the themes would be included. Results: Twenty-five women agreed to participate in the study with 80% completing the interview. Patients with ES disease were classified as Stage IA1-Stage IB3; patients with Stage IIA-IVB disease were classified with AS disease. Frequent barriers in the ES group were lack of knowledge, competing priorities, feeling healthy, lack of time or health insurance, and being embarrassed/uncomfortable. Frequent barriers in the AS group were lack of knowledge, competing priorities, avoidance/procrastination, fear of the healthcare system or finding something wrong, and lack of perceived risk to CC. Facilitators for ES included understanding the importance of the Pap test, having an abnormal Pap test, and knowing someone with CC. Having abnormal symptoms was the only facilitator for AS patients. Conclusions: Structural and intrapersonal barriers to CC care persist but differ between ES and AS patients. Multi-level interventions are needed to address the wide array of issues that women highlighted in this study including potential innovative methods to increase access to care and engagement with the healthcare system.

Piloting use of an out-of-pocket cost tracker among gynecologic cancer patients.

Objective: Our objective was to evaluate uptake and satisfaction with an out-of-pocket (OOP) cost tracker as a means for cancer patients to manage their personalized costs of care and to identify characteristics associated with usage. Methods: Within a longitudinal survey evaluating financial toxicity among gynecologic cancer patients on active systemic therapy over a 6-month period, we provided paper worksheets for participants to voluntarily track expenses. We assessed usage and satisfaction at 3 and 6 months using frequency and percentage. We used Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon rank sum analysis to evaluate patient characteristics based upon usage. Participants were encouraged to submit their completed cost tracker worksheets. Results: Fifty-three of 121 (44%) participants reported ever using the OOP cost tracker. Most users reported it was easy to use (97%, 100%) and helpful (86%, 72%); however, fewer users rated it as useful for budgeting (42%, 26%) at 3 and 6 months, respectively. More patients who knew their insurance premium were users compared to non-users (74.4% vs. 54.4%, p = 0.04). Among thirteen users who submitted their completed cost tracker worksheets, non-medical costs (i.e., transportation) had the highest monthly out of pocket costs (mean $213, range $0-587). User feedback included suggestions to enhance the cost tracker with educational tutorials or a reminder system. Conclusions: Future studies should explore if cost tracker uptake and satisfaction are enhanced with the addition of reminders and whether usage decreases financial toxicity or increases patient self-efficacy in managing the costs of cancer care.