Telemedicine Adoption in an NCI-Designated Cancer Center During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Report on Patient Experience of Care.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer require timely access to care so that healthcare providers can prepare an optimal treatment plan with significant implications for quality of life and mortality. The COVID-19 pandemic spurred rapid adoption of telemedicine in oncology, but study of patient experience of care with telemedicine in this population has been limited. We assessed overall patient experience of care with telemedicine at an NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center during the COVID-19 pandemic and examined changes in patient experience over time. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study of outpatient oncology patients who received treatment at Moffitt Cancer Center. Press Ganey surveys were used to assess patient experience. Data from patients with appointments between April 1, 2020, and June 30, 2021, were analyzed. Patient experience was compared between telemedicine and in-person visits, and patient experience with telemedicine over time was described. RESULTS: A total of 33,318 patients reported Press Ganey data for in-person visits, and 5,950 reported Press Ganey data for telemedicine visits. Relative to patients with in-person visits, more patients with telemedicine visits gave higher satisfaction ratings for access (62.5% vs 75.8%, respectively) and care provider concern (84.2% vs 90.7%, respectively) (P<.001). When adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, sex, insurance, and clinic type, telemedicine visits consistently outperformed in-person visits over time regarding access and care provider concern (P<.001). There were no significant changes over time in satisfaction with telemedicine visits regarding access, care provider concern, telemedicine technology, or overall assessment (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, a large oncology dataset showed that telemedicine resulted in better patient experience of care in terms of access and care provider concern compared with in-person visits. Patient experience of care with telemedicine visits did not change over time, suggesting that implementing telemedicine was effective.

Advancing Digital Health Innovation in Oncology: Priorities for High-Value Digital Transformation in Cancer Care.

Although health care delivery is becoming increasingly digitized, driven by the pursuit of improved access, equity, efficiency, and effectiveness, progress does not appear to be equally distributed across therapeutic areas. Oncology is renowned for leading innovation in research and in care; digital pathology, digital radiology, real-world data, next-generation sequencing, patient-reported outcomes, and precision approaches driven by complex data and biomarkers are hallmarks of the field. However, remote patient monitoring, decentralized approaches to care and research, "hospital at home," and machine learning techniques have yet to be broadly deployed to improve cancer care. In response, the Digital Medicine Society and Moffitt Cancer Center convened a multistakeholder roundtable discussion to bring together leading experts in cancer care and digital innovation. This viewpoint highlights the findings from these discussions, in which experts agreed that digital innovation is lagging in oncology relative to other therapeutic areas. It reports that this lag is most likely attributed to poor articulation of the challenges in cancer care and research best suited to digital solutions, lack of incentives and support, and missing standardized infrastructure to implement digital innovations. It concludes with suggestions for actions needed to bring the promise of digitization to cancer care to improve lives.

Development of a Patient Activation Toolkit for Hepatitis C Virus Testing.

We evaluated the acceptability of a patient activation toolkit for hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing amidst universal adult guidelines. We developed a patient-facing toolkit that included a letter to the patient from their healthcare provider, HCV factsheet, and question prompt list, which contained questions for their provider about HCV infection and testing. We conducted qualitative interviews with patients ages 18-78 (n = 17), using a semi-structured interview guide based on learner verification. We assessed attraction, comprehension, cultural-linguistic acceptability, self-efficacy, and persuasiveness of toolkit materials using direct content analysis. Participants reported materials were attractive, offering suggestions to improve readability. They reported some understanding of materials but requested use of less medical jargon, particularly for the factsheet. Participants discussed cultural acceptability and suggested ways to improve language inclusiveness and comfort with content, given stigma surrounding HCV risk factors. Participants reported that including a letter, factsheet, and QPL improved the persuasiveness of materials, and they conveyed their motivation to be tested for HCV. Results indicate preliminary acceptability for use of the patient activation toolkit, which will be refined based on participants' recommendations. Overall, this patient activation toolkit holds promise for increasing HCV testing rates.

Health Care Providers' and Professionals' Experiences With Telehealth Oncology Implementation During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Rapid implementation of telehealth for cancer care during COVID-19 required innovative and adaptive solutions among oncology health care providers and professionals (HPPs). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this qualitative study was to explore oncology HPPs' experiences with telehealth implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This study was conducted at Moffitt Cancer Center (Moffitt), an NCI (National Cancer Institute)-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. Prior to COVID-19, Moffitt piloted telehealth visits on a limited basis. After COVID-19, Moffitt rapidly expanded telehealth visits. Telehealth visits included real-time videoconferencing between HPPs and patients and virtual check-ins (ie, brief communication with an HPP by telephone only). We conducted semistructured interviews with 40 oncology HPPs who implemented telehealth during COVID-19. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed for themes using Dedoose software (version 4.12). RESULTS: Approximately half of the 40 participants were physicians (n=22, 55%), and one-quarter of the participants were advanced practice providers (n=10, 25%). Other participants included social workers (n=3, 8%), psychologists (n=2, 5%), dieticians (n=2, 5%), and a pharmacist (n=1, 3%). Five key themes were identified: (1) establishing and maintaining patient-HPP relationships, (2) coordinating care with other HPPs and informal caregivers, (3) adapting in-person assessments for telehealth, (4) developing workflows and allocating resources, and (5) future recommendations. Participants described innovative strategies for implementing telehealth, such as coordinating interdisciplinary visits with multiple HPPs and inviting informal caregivers (eg, spouse) to participate in telehealth visits. Health care workers discussed key challenges, such as workflow integration, lack of physical exam and biometric data, and overcoming the digital divide (eg, telehealth accessibility among patients with communication-related disabilities). Participants recommended policy advocacy to support telehealth (eg, medical licensure policies) and monitoring how telehealth affects patient outcomes and health care delivery. CONCLUSIONS: To support telehealth growth, implementation strategies are needed to ensure that HPPs and patients have the tools necessary to effectively engage in telehealth. At the same time, cancer care organizations will need to engage in advocacy to ensure that policies are supportive of oncology telehealth and develop systems to monitor the impact of telehealth on patient outcomes, health care quality, costs, and equity.

Patient stakeholder engagement in research: A narrative review to describe foundational principles and best practice activities.

BACKGROUND: Health research is evolving to include patient stakeholders (patients, families and caregivers) as active members of research teams. Frameworks describing the conceptual foundations underlying this engagement and strategies detailing best practice activities to facilitate engagement have been published to guide these efforts. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this narrative review are to identify, quantify and summarize (a) the conceptual foundational principles of patient stakeholder engagement in research and (b) best practice activities to support these efforts. SEARCH STRATEGY, INCLUSION CRITERIA, DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We accessed a publicly available repository of systematically identified literature related to patient engagement in research. Two reviewers independently screened articles to identify relevant articles and abstracted data. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 990 potentially relevant articles of which 935 (94.4%) were excluded and 55 (5.6%) relevant. The most commonly reported foundational principles were "respect" (n = 25, 45%) and "equitable power between all team members" (n = 21, 38%). Creating "trust between patient stakeholders and researchers" was described in 17 (31%) articles. Twenty-seven (49%) articles emphasized the importance of providing training and education for both patient stakeholder and researchers. Providing financial compensation for patient stakeholders' time and expertise was noted in 19 (35%) articles. Twenty articles (36%) emphasized regular, bidirectional dialogue between patient partners and researchers as important for successful engagement. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Engaging patient stakeholders in research as partners presents an opportunity to design, implement and disseminate patient-centred research. This review creates an overarching foundational framework for authentic and sustainable partnerships between patient stakeholders and researchers.

Patterns of multimorbidity associated with 30-day readmission: a multinational study.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity is associated with higher healthcare utilization; however, data exploring its association with readmission are scarce. We aimed to investigate which most important patterns of multimorbidity are associated with 30-day readmission. METHODS: We used a multinational retrospective cohort of 126,828 medical inpatients with multimorbidity defined as ≥2 chronic diseases. The primary and secondary outcomes were 30-day potentially avoidable readmission (PAR) and 30-day all-cause readmission (ACR), respectively. Only chronic diseases were included in the analyses. We presented the OR for readmission according to the number of diseases or body systems involved, and the combinations of diseases categories with the highest OR for readmission. RESULTS: Multimorbidity severity, assessed as number of chronic diseases or body systems involved, was strongly associated with PAR, and to a lesser extend with ACR. The strength of association steadily and linearly increased with each additional disease or body system involved. Patients with four body systems involved or nine diseases already had a more than doubled odds for PAR (OR 2.35, 95%CI 2.15-2.57, and OR 2.25, 95%CI 2.05-2.48, respectively). The combinations of diseases categories that were most strongly associated with PAR and ACR were chronic kidney disease with liver disease or chronic ulcer of skin, and hematological malignancy with esophageal disorders or mood disorders, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Readmission was associated with the number of chronic diseases or body systems involved and with specific combinations of diseases categories. The number of body systems involved may be a particularly interesting measure of the risk for readmission in multimorbid patients.

Preventability of Early Versus Late Hospital Readmissions in a National Cohort of General Medicine Patients.

Background: Many experts believe that hospitals with more frequent readmissions provide lower-quality care, but little is known about how the preventability of readmissions might change over the postdischarge time frame. Objective: To determine whether readmissions within 7 days of discharge differ from those between 8 and 30 days after discharge with respect to preventability. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: 10 academic medical centers in the United States. Patients: 822 adults readmitted to a general medicine service. Measurements: For each readmission, 2 site-specific physician adjudicators used a structured survey instrument to determine whether it was preventable and measured other characteristics. Results: Overall, 36.2% of early readmissions versus 23.0% of late readmissions were preventable (median risk difference, 13.0 percentage points [interquartile range, 5.5 to 26.4 percentage points]). Hospitals were identified as better locations for preventing early readmissions (47.2% vs. 25.5%; median risk difference, 22.8 percentage points [interquartile range, 17.9 to 31.8 percentage points]), whereas outpatient clinics (15.2% vs. 6.6%; median risk difference, 10.0 percentage points [interquartile range, 4.6 to 12.2 percentage points]) and home (19.4% vs. 14.0%; median risk difference, 5.6 percentage points [interquartile range, -6.1 to 17.1 percentage points]) were better for preventing late readmissions. Limitation: Physician adjudicators were not blinded to readmission timing, community hospitals were not included in the study, and readmissions to nonstudy hospitals were not included in the results. Conclusion: Early readmissions were more likely to be preventable and amenable to hospital-based interventions. Late readmissions were less likely to be preventable and were more amenable to ambulatory and home-based interventions. Primary Funding Source: Association of American Medical Colleges.

Patient and Family Advisory Councils for Research: Recruiting and Supporting Members From Diverse and Hard-to-Reach Communities.

OBJECTIVE: To describe strategies to recruit and support members from hard-to-reach groups on research-focused Patient and Family Advisory Councils (PFACs). BACKGROUND: Ensuring diverse representation of members of research PFACs is challenging, and few studies have given attention to addressing this problem. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted using 8 focus groups and 19 interviews with 80 PFAC members and leaders, hospital leaders, and researchers. RESULTS: Recruitment recommendations were: 1) utilizing existing networks; 2) going out to the community; 3) accessing outpatient clinics; and 4) using social media. Strategies to support inclusion were: 1) culturally appropriate communication methods; 2) building a sense of community between PFAC members; 3) equalizing roles between community members/leaders; 4) having a diverse PFAC leadership team; and 5) setting transparent expectations for PFAC membership. CONCLUSION: Increasing the diversity of research PFACs is a priority, and it is important to determine how best to engage groups that have been traditionally underrepresented.

A Changing World Demands Care That Takes a Consumer-Centric Approach.

Consumerism is a buzzword in healthcare. Consumers expect personalized healthcare journeys, a standard consistent with their interactions in other industries. The opportunity to build consumer-focused approaches to healthcare has emboldened disruptors, investors, and innovative incumbents alike. A consumerism strategy embraces the concepts of convenience, access, and transparency. Digital tools and technologies are an important accelerant in the move to healthcare consumerism; leveraging data to create value from the customer's perspective is another critical component.In the face of increasing competition, regulatory challenges, and cost pressures, healthcare must work to engage and empower the consumer. CEOs must initiate and champion the shift to consumerism in their own organizations. The barriers to organizational transformation in this regard are similar to those associated with any other enterprise change initiative; addressing people, processes, and culture is essential to laying the groundwork for innovation. Healthcare consumers see impressive technological solutions, and they understand that these new technologies can improve both their medical experiences and their overall health.

The HOSPITAL Score Predicts Potentially Preventable 30-Day Readmissions in Conditions Targeted by the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: New tools to accurately identify potentially preventable 30-day readmissions are needed. The HOSPITAL score has been internationally validated for medical inpatients, but its performance in select conditions targeted by the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) is unknown. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Six geographically diverse medical centers. PARTICIPANTS/EXPOSURES: All consecutive adult medical patients discharged alive in 2011 with 1 of the 4 medical conditions targeted by the HRRP (acute myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia, and heart failure) were included. Potentially preventable 30-day readmissions were identified using the SQLape algorithm. The HOSPITAL score was calculated for all patients. MEASUREMENTS: A multivariable logistic regression model accounting for hospital effects was used to evaluate the accuracy (Brier score), discrimination (c-statistic), and calibration (Pearson goodness-of-fit) of the HOSPITAL score for each 4 medical conditions. RESULTS: Among the 9181 patients included, the overall 30-day potentially preventable readmission rate was 13.6%. Across all 4 diagnoses, the HOSPITAL score had very good accuracy (Brier score of 0.11), good discrimination (c-statistic of 0.68), and excellent calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test, P=0.77). Within each diagnosis, performance was similar. In sensitivity analyses, performance was similar for all readmissions (not just potentially preventable) and when restricted to patients age 65 and above. CONCLUSIONS: The HOSPITAL score identifies a high-risk cohort for potentially preventable readmissions in a variety of practice settings, including conditions targeted by the HRRP. It may be a valuable tool when included in interventions to reduce readmissions within or across these conditions.

The Impact of an Electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR) and Computerized Physician Order Entry (CPOE) on Nurse Extender and Unit Clerk Staffing.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to describe the impact of the introduction of health information technology (HIT) on the utilization and payroll costs of nurse extenders and unit clerks in medicine and surgery units in a large regional health system. BACKGROUND: Long-term policy goals of HIT implementation are reported to include system-level reductions in labor costs, achieved through improved efficiency. METHODS: Using a retrospective cohort model, we analyzed how hours worked per patient day and staffing costs per patient day varied with the implementation of HIT over time at 2 different hospitals within a health system. RESULTS: Implementation of electronic medication administration records was not associated with significant changes in staffing or labor costs. Both labor hours and costs associated with nurse extenders and unit clerks were significantly reduced after the subsequent addition of computerized provider order entry. Simultaneously, units that did not implement any HIT experienced a significant increase in both labor hours and costs. CONCLUSION: Health information technology implementation in the inpatient setting is associated with significant savings in labor hours and costs in non-registered nursing roles.

Physician Perspectives on Factors Contributing to Readmissions and Potential Prevention Strategies: A Multicenter Survey.

BACKGROUND: The transition out of the hospital is a vulnerable time for patients, relying heavily on communication and coordination of resources across care settings. Understanding the perspectives of inpatient and outpatient physicians regarding factors contributing to readmission and potential preventive strategies is crucial in designing appropriately targeted readmission prevention efforts. OBJECTIVE: To examine and compare inpatient and outpatient physician opinions regarding reasons for readmission and interventions that might have prevented readmission. DESIGN: Cross-sectional multicenter study. PARTICIPANTS: We identified patients readmitted to general medicine services within 30 days of discharge at 12 US academic medical centers, and surveyed the primary care physician (PCP), discharging physician from the index admission, and admitting physician from the readmission regarding their endorsement of pre-specified factors contributing to the readmission and potential preventive strategies. MAIN MEASURES: We calculated kappa statistics to gauge agreement between physician dyads (PCP-discharging physician, PCP-admitting physician, and admitting-discharging physician). KEY RESULTS: We evaluated 993 readmission events, which generated responses from 356 PCPs (36 % of readmissions), 675 discharging physicians (68 % of readmissions), and 737 admitting physicians (74 % of readmissions). The most commonly endorsed contributing factors by both PCPs and inpatient physicians related to patient understanding and ability to self-manage. The most commonly endorsed preventive strategies involved providing patients with enhanced post-discharge instructions and/or support. Although PCPs and inpatient physicians endorsed contributing factors and potential preventive strategies with similar frequencies, agreement among the three physicians on the specific factors and/or strategies that applied to individual readmission events was poor (maximum kappa 0.30). CONCLUSIONS: Differing opinions among physicians on factors contributing to individual readmissions highlights the importance of communication between inpatient and outpatient providers at discharge to share their different perspectives, and suggests that multi-faceted, broadly applied interventions may be more successful than those that rely on individual providers choosing specific services based on perceived risk factors.

The impact of health information technology on staffing.

Hospitals nationwide must demonstrate meaningful use by 2015 or face fines. For over 20 years, researchers have attempted to assess the impact of electronic record keeping technologies on the quality, safety, and efficiency of care, but results are inconclusive and hospital managers have little evidence on which to base staffing decisions as we hurtle toward the era of the paperless hospital.

Novel Virtual Reality App for Training Patients on MRI-guided Radiation Therapy.

Purpose: Patients receiving respiratory gated magnetic resonance imaging-guided radiation therapy (MRIgRT) for abdominal targets must hold their breath for ≥25 seconds at a time. Virtual reality (VR) has shown promise for improving patient education and experience for diagnostic MRI scan acquisition. We aimed to develop and pilot-test the first VR app to educate, train, and reduce anxiety and discomfort in patients preparing to receive MRIgRT. Methods and Materials: A multidisciplinary team iteratively developed a new VR app with patient input. The app begins with minigames to help orient patients to using the VR device and to train patients on breath-holding. Next, app users are introduced to the MRI linear accelerator vault and practice breath-holding during MRIgRT. In this quality improvement project, clinic personnel and MRIgRT-eligible patients with pancreatic cancer tested the VR app for feasibility, acceptability, and potential efficacy for training patients on using breath-holding during MRIgRT. Results: The new VR app experience was tested by 19 patients and 67 clinic personnel. The experience was completed on average in 18.6 minutes (SD = 5.4) by patients and in 14.9 (SD = 3.5) minutes by clinic personnel. Patients reported the app was "extremely helpful" (58%) or "very helpful" (32%) for learning breath-holding used in MRIgRT and "extremely helpful" (28%) or "very helpful (50%) for reducing anxiety. Patients and clinic personnel also provided qualitative feedback on improving future versions of the VR app. Conclusion: The VR app was feasible and acceptable for training patients on breath-holding for MRIgRT. Patients eligible for MRIgRT for pancreatic cancer and clinic personnel reported on future improvements to the app to enhance its usability and efficacy.

Support Through Remote Observation and Nutrition Guidance (STRONG), a digital health intervention to reduce malnutrition among pancreatic cancer patients: A study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial.

Background: Malnutrition is a common and distressing condition among pancreatic cancer patients. Fewer than a quarter of pancreatic cancer patients receive medical nutrition therapy (MNT), important for improving nutritional status, weight maintenance, quality of life and survival. System, provider, and patient level barriers limit access to MNT. We propose to examine the feasibility of a 12-week multi-level, digital health intervention designed to expand MNT access among pancreatic cancer patients. Methods: Individuals with advanced pancreatic cancer starting chemotherapy (N = 80) will be 1:1 randomized to the intervention or usual care. The Support Through Remote Observation and Nutrition Guidance (STRONG) intervention includes system-level (e.g., routine malnutrition and screening), provider-level (e.g., dietitian training and web-based dashboard), and patient-level strategies (e.g., individualized nutrition plan, self-monitoring of dietary intake via Fitbit, ongoing goal monitoring and feedback). Individuals receiving usual care will be referred to dietitians based on their oncologists' discretion. Study assessments will be completed at baseline, 4-, 8-, 12-, and 16-weeks. Results: Primary outcomes will be feasibility (e.g., recruitment, retention, assessment completion) and acceptability. We will collect additional implementation outcomes, such as intervention adherence, perceived usability, and feedback on intervention quality via an exit interview. We will collect preliminary data on outcomes that may be associated with the intervention including malnutrition, quality of life, treatment outcomes, and survival. Conclusion: This study will advance our knowledge on the feasibility of a digital health intervention to reduce malnutrition among individuals with advanced pancreatic cancer. Trial registration: NCT05675059, registered on December 9, 2022.

Estimated Carbon Emissions Savings With Shifts From In-Person Visits to Telemedicine for Patients With Cancer.

Importance: While the health care community advocates broadly for climate change policy, medical professionals can look within care practices to assess their contribution to carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, and provide solutions wherever possible. Telemedicine can help in mitigating climate change by providing care from a distance. Objective: To assess the carbon savings achieved from telemedicine visits. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study of telemedicine visits was conducted at a single-institution National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated comprehensive cancer center. Eligible patients were aged 18 years and above, completed telemedicine visits from April 1, 2020, to June 20, 2021, and had a Florida mailing address documented in their electronic medical record. Groups were divided between those within driving time of 60 minutes (1-way) to the cancer center vs those living beyond 60 minutes of drive time. Data were analyzed between April 2020 and June 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Carbon emission savings from telemedicine, measured in total and average per-visit savings. Results: A total 49 329 telemedicine visits with 23 228 patients were conducted from April 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021. A total 21 489 visits were for patients with driving time of 60 minutes or less (median [IQR] age, 62.0 [52.0-71.0] years; 12 334 [57.4%] female; 1685 [7.8%] Black, 1500 [7.0%] Hispanic, 16 010 [74.5%] non-Hispanic White), while 27 840 visits were for patients with driving time greater than 60 minutes (median [IQR] age, 67.0 [57.0-74.0] years; 14 372 [51.6%] female; 1056 [3.8%] Black, 1364 [5.0%] Hispanic, 22 457 [80.7%] non-Hispanic White). For patients living within a driving time of 60 minutes from the cancer center, 424 471 kg CO2 emissions were saved (mean [SD] emissions savings, 19.8 [9.4] kg CO2 per visit) due to telemedicine-equivalent to 91.5 passenger vehicles driven for 1 year. For patients whose driving distance was greater than 60 minutes, 2 744 248 kg CO2 emissions were saved (mean emissions savings, 98.6 [54.8] kg CO2 per visit)-equivalent to 591 passenger vehicles driven for 1 year. Conclusions and Relevance: Using a large data set, this cross-sectional analysis highlighted the carbon emissions savings due to telemedicine in oncology. This has important implications in reducing health care-related carbon footprint.

Estimated Indirect Cost Savings of Using Telehealth Among Nonelderly Patients With Cancer.

Importance: Patients with cancer typically have greater financial hardships and time costs than individuals without cancer. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated this, while posing substantial challenges to delivering cancer care and resulting in important changes in care-delivery models, including the rapid adoption of telehealth. Objective: To estimate patient travel, time, and cost savings associated with telehealth for cancer care delivery. Design, Setting, and Participants: An economic evaluation of cost savings from completed telehealth visits from April 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021, in a single-institution National Cancer Institute-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. All patients aged 18 to 65 years who completed telehealth visits within the designated time frame and had a Florida mailing address documented in their electronic medical record were included in the study cohort. Data were analyzed from April 2020 to June 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was estimated patient cost savings from telehealth, which included 2 components: costs of travel (defined as roundtrip distance saved from car travel) and potential loss of productivity due to the medical visit (defined as loss of income from roundtrip travel plus loss of income from in-person clinic visits). Two different models with a combination of 2 different mileage rates ($0.56 and $0.82 per mile) and census tract-level median hourly wages were used. Results: The study included 25 496 telehealth visits with 11 688 patients. There were 4525 (3795 patients) new or established visits and 20 971 (10 049 patients) follow-up visits. Median (IQR) age was 55.0 (46.0-61.0) years among the telehealth visits, with 15 663 visits (61.4%) by women and 18 360 visits (72.0%) by Hispanic non-White patients. According to cost models, the estimated mean (SD) total cost savings ranged from $147.4 ($120.1) at $0.56/mile to $186.1 ($156.9) at $0.82/mile. For new or established visits, the mean (SD) total cost savings per visit ranged from $176.6 ($136.3) at $0.56/mile to $222.8 ($177.4) at $0.82/mile, and for follow-up visits, the mean (SD) total cost savings per visit was $141.1 ($115.3) at $0.56/mile to $178.1 ($150.9) at $0.82/mile. Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation, telehealth was associated with savings in patients time and travel costs, which may reduce the financial toxicity of cancer care. Expansion of telehealth oncology services may be an effective strategy to reduce the financial burden among patients with cancer.

Examining disparities in large-scale patient-reported data capture using digital tools among cancer patients at clinical intake.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported data can improve quality of healthcare delivery and patient outcomes. Moffitt Cancer Center ("Moffitt") administers the Electronic Patient Questionnaire (EPQ) to collect data on demographics, including sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI), medical history, cancer risk factors, and quality of life. Here we investigated differences in EPQ completion by demographic and cancer characteristics. METHODS: An analysis including 146,142 new adult patients at Moffitt in 2009-2020 was conducted using scheduling, EPQ and cancer registry data. EPQ completion was described by calendar year and demographics. Logistic regression was used to estimate associations between demographic/cancer characteristics and EPQ completion. More recently collected information on SOGI were described. RESULTS: Patient portal usage (81%) and EPQ completion rates (79%) were consistently high since 2014. Among patients in the cancer registry, females were more likely to complete the EPQ than males (odds ratio [OR] = 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.14-1.20). Patients ages 18-64 years were more likely to complete the EPQ than patients aged ≥65. Lower EPQ completion rates were observed among Black or African American patients (OR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.56-0.63) as compared to Whites and among patients whose preferred language was Spanish (OR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.36-0.44) or another language as compared to English. Furthermore, patients with localized (OR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.12-1.19) or regional (OR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.12-1.20) cancer were more likely to complete the EPQ compared to those with metastatic disease. Less than 3% of patients self-identified as being lesbian, gay, or bisexual and <0.1% self-identified as transgender, genderqueer, or other. CONCLUSIONS: EPQ completion rates differed across demographics highlighting opportunities for targeted process improvement. Healthcare organizations should evaluate data acquisition methods to identify potential disparities in data completeness that can impact quality of clinical care and generalizability of self-reported data.

Oncology Providers' and Professionals' Experiences With Suicide Risk Screening Among Patients With Head and Neck Cancer: A Qualitative Study.

PURPOSE: There has been limited study of the implementation of suicide risk screening for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) as a part of routine care. To address this gap, this study assessed oncology providers' and professionals' perspectives about barriers and facilitators of implementing a suicide risk screening among patients with HNC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients with HNC with an in-person visit completed a suicide risk screening on an electronic tablet. Patients reporting passive death wish were then screened for active suicidal ideation and referred for appropriate intervention. Interviews were conducted with 25 oncology providers and professionals who played a key role in implementation including nurses, medical assistants, patient access representatives, advanced practice providers, physicians, social workers, and informatics staff. The interview guide was based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed for themes. RESULTS: Participants identified multilevel implementation barriers, such as intervention level (eg, patient difficulty with using a tablet), process level (eg, limited nursing engagement), organizational level (eg, limited clinic Wi-Fi connectivity), and individual level (eg, low clinician self-efficacy for interpreting and acting upon patient-reported outcome scores). Participants noted facilitators, such as effective care coordination across nursing and social work staff and the opportunity for patients to be screened multiple times. Participants recommended strengthening patient and clinician education and providing patients with other modalities for data entry (eg, desktop computer in the waiting room). CONCLUSION: Participants identified important intervention modifications that may be needed to optimize suicide risk screening in cancer care settings.

Longitudinal Collection of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Activity Data during CAR-T Therapy: Feasibility, Acceptability, and Data Visualization.

Background: Clinicians must closely monitor patients for toxicities after chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) (e.g., toxicities, quality of life) and activity data (e.g., steps, sleep) may complement clinicians' observations. This study tested the feasibility and acceptability of collecting PROs and activity data from patients with hematologic malignancies during CAR-T and explored preliminary data patterns. Methods: Participants wore a Fitbit tracker and completed PROs at several timepoints through 90-days post-infusion. Feasibility was assessed with a priori benchmarks for recruitment (≥50%), retention (≥70%), PRO completion (≥70%), and days wearing the Fitbit (≥50%). Acceptability was assessed with participant satisfaction (a priori benchmark > 2 on a 0−4 scale). Results: Participants (N = 12) were M = 66 years old (SD = 7). Rates of recruitment (68%), retention (83%), PRO completion (85%), and days wearing the Fitbit (85%) indicated feasibility. Satisfaction with completing the PROs (M = 3.2, SD = 0.5) and wearing the Fitbit (M = 2.9, SD = 0.5) indicated acceptability. Preliminary data patterns suggested that participants with better treatment response (vs. progressive disease) had a higher toxicity burden. Conclusions: Longitudinal PRO and activity data collection was feasible and acceptable. Data collected on a larger scale may be used to specify risk prediction models to identify predictors of severe CAR-T-related toxicities and inform early interventions.