TY - JOUR
T1 - Clinical Utility and User Perceptions of a Digital System for Electronic Patient-Reported Symptom Monitoring during Routine Cancer Care
T2 - Findings from the PRO-TECT Trial
AU - Basch, Ethan
AU - Stover, Angela M.
AU - Schrag, Deborah
AU - Chung, Arlene
AU - Jansen, Jennifer
AU - Henson, Sydney
AU - Carr, Philip
AU - Ginos, Brenda
AU - Deal, Allison
AU - Spears, Patricia A.
AU - Jonsson, Mattias
AU - Bennett, Antonia V.
AU - Mody, Gita
AU - Thanarajasingam, Gita
AU - Rogak, Lauren J.
AU - Reeve, Bryce B.
AU - Snyder, Claire
AU - Kottschade, Lisa A.
AU - Charlot, Marjory
AU - Weiss, Anna
AU - Bruner, Deborah
AU - Dueck, Amylou C.
N1 - Funding Information:
Supported by funding from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) award No. IHS-1511-33392. The study made use of technology systems provided by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Core (PRO Core; pro.unc.edu) at the Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center of the University of North Carolina, which is funded in part by National Cancer Institute Cancer Center Core Support Grant No. 5-P30-CA016086 and the University Cancer Research Fund of North Carolina. The trial was facilitated by the Foundation of the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org).
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2020 American Society of Clinical Oncology. All rights reserved.
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - PURPOSE There is increasing interest in implementing digital systems for remote monitoring of patients’ symptoms during routine oncology practice. Information is limited about the clinical utility and user perceptions of these systems. METHODS PRO-TECT is a multicenter trial evaluating implementation of electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) among adults with advanced and metastatic cancers receiving treatment at US community oncology practices (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03249090). Questions derived from the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) are administered weekly by web or automated telephone system, with alerts to nurses for severe or worsening symptoms. To elicit user feedback, surveys were administered to participating patients and clinicians. RESULTS Among 496 patients across 26 practices, the majority found the system and questions easy to understand (95%), easy to use (93%), and relevant to their care (91%). Most patients reported that PRO information was used by their clinicians for care (70%), improved discussions with clinicians (73%), made them feel more in control of their own care (77%), and would recommend the system to other patients (89%). Scores for most patient feedback questions were significantly positively correlated with weekly PRO completion rates in both univariate and multivariable analyses. Among 57 nurses, most reported that PRO information was helpful for clinical documentation (79%), increased efficiency of patient discussions (84%), and was useful for patient care (75%). Among 39 oncologists, most found PRO information useful (91%), with 65% using PROs to guide patient discussions sometimes or often and 65% using PROs to make treatment decisions sometimes or often. CONCLUSION These findings support the clinical utility and value of implementing digital systems for monitoring PROs, including the PRO-CTCAE, in routine cancer care.
AB - PURPOSE There is increasing interest in implementing digital systems for remote monitoring of patients’ symptoms during routine oncology practice. Information is limited about the clinical utility and user perceptions of these systems. METHODS PRO-TECT is a multicenter trial evaluating implementation of electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) among adults with advanced and metastatic cancers receiving treatment at US community oncology practices (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03249090). Questions derived from the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) are administered weekly by web or automated telephone system, with alerts to nurses for severe or worsening symptoms. To elicit user feedback, surveys were administered to participating patients and clinicians. RESULTS Among 496 patients across 26 practices, the majority found the system and questions easy to understand (95%), easy to use (93%), and relevant to their care (91%). Most patients reported that PRO information was used by their clinicians for care (70%), improved discussions with clinicians (73%), made them feel more in control of their own care (77%), and would recommend the system to other patients (89%). Scores for most patient feedback questions were significantly positively correlated with weekly PRO completion rates in both univariate and multivariable analyses. Among 57 nurses, most reported that PRO information was helpful for clinical documentation (79%), increased efficiency of patient discussions (84%), and was useful for patient care (75%). Among 39 oncologists, most found PRO information useful (91%), with 65% using PROs to guide patient discussions sometimes or often and 65% using PROs to make treatment decisions sometimes or often. CONCLUSION These findings support the clinical utility and value of implementing digital systems for monitoring PROs, including the PRO-CTCAE, in routine cancer care.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85094853093&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85094853093&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1200/CCI.20.00081
DO - 10.1200/CCI.20.00081
M3 - Article
C2 - 33112661
AN - SCOPUS:85094853093
SN - 2473-4276
VL - 4
SP - 947
EP - 957
JO - JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
JF - JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
ER -