The Feasibility, Acceptability, and Effectiveness of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Symptom Monitoring for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Toxicities: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: Increasing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in routine cancer care will increase the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Systems are needed to support remote monitoring for irAEs. Electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) symptom monitoring systems can help monitor and manage symptoms and side effects. We assessed the content and features of ePRO symptom monitoring systems for irAEs, and their feasibility, acceptability, and impact on patient outcomes and health care utilization. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in May 2022 on MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Quantitative and qualitative data relevant to the review questions were extracted and synthesized in tables. RESULTS: Seven papers describing five ePRO systems were included. All systems collected PROs between clinic visits. Two of five used validated symptom questionnaires, 3/5 provided prompts to complete questionnaires, 4/5 provided reminders to self-report, and 3/5 provided clinician alerts for severe/worsening side effects. Four of five provided coverage of ≥26/30 irAEs in the ASCO irAE guideline. Feasibility and acceptability were demonstrated with consent rates of 54%-100%, 17%-27% of questionnaires generating alerts, and adherence rates of 74%-75%. One paper showed a reduction in grade 3-4 irAEs, treatment discontinuation, clinic visit duration, and emergency department presentations, while another showed no difference in these outcomes or the rate of steroid use. CONCLUSION: There is preliminary evidence of the feasibility and acceptability of ePRO symptom monitoring for irAEs. However, further studies are needed to confirm the impact on ICI-specific outcomes, such as the frequency of grade 3-4 irAEs and duration of immunosuppression. Suggestions for the content and features of future ePRO systems for irAEs are provided.

Implementation of a clinical practice guideline for assessment and management of renal colic in the emergency department.

INTRODUCTION: Renal colic is a common emergency department (ED) presentation. Variations in assessment and management of suspected renal colic may have significant implications on patient and hospital outcomes. We developed a clinical practice guideline to standardize the assessment and management of renal colic in the ED. We subsequently compared outcomes before and after guideline implementation. METHODS: The guideline standardizes the analgesia regimen, urology consult criteria, imaging modality, patient education, and followup instructions. This is a single-center, observational cohort study of patients presenting to the ED with renal colic prospectively collected after guideline implementation (December 2018 to May 2019) compared to a control group retrospectively collected before guideline implementation (December 2017 to May 2018). A total of 528 patients (pre-guideline n=283, post-guideline n=245) were included. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS using multivariate linear regression. RESULTS: ED length of stay (LOS) was significantly shorter after guideline implementation (pre-guideline 295.82±178.8 minutes vs. post-guideline 253.2±118.2 minutes, p=0.017). The number of computed tomography (CT) scans patients received was significantly less after guideline implementation (pre guideline 1.35±1.34 vs. post-guideline 1.00±0.68, p=0.034). Patients discharged for conservative management had a lower re-presentation rate in the post-guideline group (12.6%) than the pre-guideline group (17.2%); however, this did not reach statistical significance (p=0.18). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a clinical practice guideline for ureteric stones reduces the ED LOS and the total number of CT scan in patients who present with renal colic. Standardizing assessment and management of ureteric stones can potentially improve patient and hospital outcomes without compromising the quality of care.