ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Despite evidence of clinical benefits, widespread implementation of remote symptom monitoring has been limited. We describe a process of adapting a remote symptom monitoring intervention developed in a research setting to a real-world clinical setting at two cancer centers. METHODS: This formative evaluation assessed core components and adaptations to improve acceptability and fit of remote symptom monitoring using Stirman's Framework for Modifications and Adaptations. Implementation outcomes were evaluated in pilot studies at the two cancer centers testing technology (phase I) and workflow (phase II and III) using electronic health data; qualitative evaluation with semistructured interviews of clinical team members; and capture of field notes from clinical teams and administrators regarding barriers and recommended adaptations for future implementation. RESULTS: Core components of remote symptom monitoring included electronic delivery of surveys with actionable symptoms, patient education on the intervention, a system to monitor survey compliance in real time, the capacity to generate alerts, training nurses to manage alerts, and identification of personnel responsible for managing symptoms. In the pilot studies, while most patients completed > 50% of expected surveys, adaptations were identified to address barriers related to workflow challenges, patient and clinician access to technology, digital health literacy, survey fatigue, alert fatigue, and data visibility. CONCLUSION: Using an implementation science approach, we facilitated adaptation of remote symptom monitoring interventions from the research setting to clinical practice and identified key areas to promote effective uptake and sustainability.
Subject(s)
Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Humans , Surveys and Questionnaires , Pilot ProjectsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients with high-intermediate risk endometrial cancer (H-IR EMCA) have an elevated risk of recurrence compared to low-risk counterparts. Many H-IR EMCA patients are treated with radiation or chemotherapy, but their overall survival is not significantly impacted by treatment. The objective of this study was to compare molecular profiles of H-IR EMCA patients with disease recurrence to those without to identify characteristics that could better predict patient outcomes. METHODS: Tissue was acquired from H-IR EMCA patients with disease recurrence (n=15) and without disease recurrence (n=15) who had not received adjuvant therapy and performed DNA and RNA analyses. RESULTS: In recurrent population, 5 patients had matchingrecurrent and initial tumor tissues. Of note, 5/7 (71%) African Americanpatients had disease recurrence compared to 10/23 (43%) White patients. Inaddition, several new mutations were found in individual patient's recurrentcompared to initial tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Currently the treatment ofendometrial cancer is rapidly changing with molecular profiling becoming partof the standard of care. Additionally, it and is being incorporated intoclinical trials in this group of patients. The specific gene mutations and RNAexpression signatures that were observed in our small cohort need to bevalidated in larger cohorts to determine their impact.