Aromatase Inhibitor Symptom Management Practices: A Retrospective Study.

PURPOSE: Aromatase inhibitor (AI)-associated symptoms contribute to early therapy discontinuation. Although guidelines exist for management of these symptoms, little is known about the degree to which physicians address symptoms and adhere to the guidelines for treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective chart review, women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer who were prescribed an AI between October 15, 2012, and September 14, 2017, were randomly selected from the institution's cancer registry. Patient medical records were reviewed to identify the prevalence of symptom documentation and management. Documented symptoms were categorized into musculoskeletal, vasomotor, and urogenital. Symptom treatment guidelines were compiled from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and the American Cancer Society/American Society of Clinical Oncology (ACS/ASCO). Treatments were categorized as either meeting or not meeting the guidelines. Among patients with symptoms recorded, chi-square tests and time-to-event models were used to examine factors associated with treatment and factors associated with guideline-based treatment. RESULTS: Among 179 women prescribed an AI, 82% had at least one symptom and 46% had multiple symptoms. Of the 147 women with any documented symptom, 97 (66%) received some form of symptom-palliating treatment. Seventy-seven patients (52%) received guideline-based treatments or guideline-based treatments in combination with non-guideline-based treatments. There were no differences in receipt of treatment overall (ie, guideline based or non-guideline based) for either vasomotor or musculoskeletal symptoms by age, race, or stage. CONCLUSION: Although 82% of patients had symptoms documented in their medical records, just over half of those patients received guideline-based treatment.

The Impact of Previsit Contextual Data Collection on Patient-Provider Communication and Patient Activation: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patient-centered care is respectful of and responsive to individual patient preferences, needs, and values. To provide patient-centered care, clinicians need to know and incorporate patients' context into their communication and care with patients. Patient contextual data (PCD) encompass social determinants of health and patients' needs, values, goals, and preferences relevant to their care. PCD can be challenging to collect as a routine component of the time-limited primary care visit. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine if patient-provider communication and patient activation are different for patient users and patient nonusers of an electronic health record (EHR)-integrated PCD tool and assess if the impact of using PCD on patient-provider communication and patient activation differs for Black and White patients. METHODS: We describe a randomized controlled trial of a prospective cohort of non-Hispanic White and Black patients who receive primary care services at a midwestern academic health care system in the United States. We will evaluate whether providing PCD through a consumer informatics tool enhances patient-provider communication, as measured by the Communication Assessment Tool, and we will evaluate patient activation, as measured by the Patient Activation Measure for PCD tool users and nonusers. Furthermore, owing to racial disparities in care and communication, we seek to determine if the adoption and use of the tool might narrow the differences between patient groups. RESULTS: The trial was funded in November 2017 and received local ethics review approval in February 2019. The study began recruitment in April 2019 and enrollment concluded in October 2019 with 301 participants. The analysis was completed in May 2020, and trial results are expected to be published in winter 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Recently, there has been increased attention to the role of health information technology tools to enable patients to collaborate with providers through the sharing of PCD. The adoption of such tools may overcome the barriers of current EHRs by directly engaging patients to submit their contextual data. Effectively, these tools would support the EHR in providing a more holistic understanding of the patient. Research further supports that individuals who have robust digital engagement using consumer informatics tools have higher participation in treatment follow-up and self-care across populations. Therefore, it is critical to investigate interventions that elicit and share patients' social risks and care preferences with the health care team as a mechanism to improve individualized care and reduce the gap in health outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03766841; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03766841. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/20309.