Barbara Halpenny

Enhancing Patient-Provider Communication With the Electronic Self-Report Assessment for Cancer: A Randomized Trial

PURPOSE Although patient-reported cancer symptoms and quality-of-life issues (SQLIs) have been promoted as essential to a comprehensive assessment, efficient and efficacious methods have not been widely tested in clinical settings. The purpose of this trial was to determine the effect of the Electronic Self-Report Assessment-Cancer (ESRA-C) on the likelihood of SQLIs discussed between clinicians and patients with cancer in ambulatory clinic visits. Secondary objectives included comparison of visit duration between groups and usefulness of the ESRA-C as reported by clinicians. PATIENTS AND METHODS This randomized controlled trial was conducted in 660 patients with various cancer diagnoses and stages at two institutions of a comprehensive cancer center. Patient-reported SQLIs were automatically displayed on a graphical summary and provided to the clinical team before an on-treatment visit (n = 327); in the control group, no summary was provided (n = 333). SQLIs were scored for level of severity or distress. One on-treatment clinic visit was audio recorded for each participant and then scored for discussion of each SQLI. We hypothesized that problematic SQLIs would be discussed more often when the intervention was delivered to the clinicians. RESULTS The likelihood of SQLIs being discussed differed by randomized group and depended on whether an SQLI was first reported as problematic (P = .032). Clinic visits were similar with regard to duration between groups, and clinicians reported the summary as useful. CONCLUSION The ESRA-C is the first electronic self-report application to increase discussion of SQLIs in a US randomized clinical trial.

Depression screening using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 administered on a touch screen computer

Objective: To (1) evaluate the feasibility of touch screen depression screening in cancer patients using the Patient Health Questionnaire‐9 (PHQ‐9), (2) evaluate the construct validity of the PHQ‐9 using the touch screen modality, and (3) examine the prevalence and severity of depression using this screening modality.

Electronic Self-Report Assessment for Cancer and Self-Care Support: Results of a Multicenter Randomized Trial

PURPOSE The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the effect of a Web-based, self-report assessment and educational intervention on symptom distress during cancer therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 752 ambulatory adult participants were randomly assigned to symptom/quality-of-life (SxQOL) screening at four time points (control) versus screening, targeted education, communication coaching, and the opportunity to track/graph SxQOL over time (intervention). A summary of the participant-reported data was delivered to clinicians at each time point in both groups. All participants used the assessment before a new therapeutic regimen, at 3 to 6 weeks and 6 to 8 weeks later, completing the final assessment at the end of therapy. Change in Symptom Distress Scale-15 (SDS-15) score from pretreatment to end of study was compared using analysis of covariance and regression analysis adjusting for selected variables. RESULTS We detected a significant difference between study groups in mean SDS-15 score change from baseline to end of study: 1.27 (standard deviation [SD], 6.7) in the control group (higher distress) versus -0.04 (SD, 5.8) in the intervention group (lower distress). SDS-15 score was reduced by an estimated 1.21 (95% CI, 0.23 to 2.20; P = .02) in the intervention group. Baseline SDS-15 score (P < .001) and clinical service (P = .01) were predictive. Multivariable analyses suggested an interaction between age and study group (P = .06); in subset analysis, the benefit of intervention was strongest in those age > 50 years (P = .002). CONCLUSION Web-based self-care support and communication coaching added to SxQOL screening reduced symptom distress in a multicenter sample of participants with various diagnoses during and after active cancer treatment. Participants age > 50 years, in particular, may have benefited from the intervention.

The Personal Patient Profile-Prostate decision support for men with localized prostate cancer: A multi-center randomized trial ☆

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this trial was to compare usual patient education plus the Internet-based Personal Patient Profile-Prostate, vs. usual education alone, on conflict associated with decision making, plus explore time-to-treatment, and treatment choice. METHODS A randomized, multi-center clinical trial was conducted with measures at baseline, 1-, and 6 months. Men with newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer (CaP) who sought consultation at urology, radiation oncology, or multi-disciplinary clinics in 4 geographically-distinct American cities were recruited. Intervention group participants used the Personal Patient Profile-Prostate, a decision support system comprised of customized text and video coaching regarding potential outcomes, influential factors, and communication with care providers. The primary outcome, patient-reported decisional conflict, was evaluated over time using generalized estimating equations to fit generalized linear models. Additional outcomes, time-to-treatment, treatment choice, and program acceptability/usefulness, were explored. RESULTS A total of 494 eligible men were randomized (266 intervention; 228 control). The intervention reduced adjusted decisional conflict over time compared with the control group, for the uncertainty score (estimate -3.61; (confidence interval, -7.01, 0.22), and values clarity (estimate -3.57; confidence interval (-5.85,-1.30). Borderline effect was seen for the total decisional conflict score (estimate -1.75; confidence interval (-3.61,0.11). Time-to-treatment was comparable between groups, while undecided men in the intervention group chose brachytherapy more often than in the control group. Acceptability and usefulness were highly rated. CONCLUSION The Personal Patient Profile-Prostate is the first intervention to significantly reduce decisional conflict in a multi-center trial of American men with newly diagnosed localized CaP. Our findings support efficacy of P3P for addressing decision uncertainty and facilitating patient selection of a CaP treatment that is consistent with the patient values and preferences.

Decision preparation, satisfaction and regret in a multi-center sample of men with newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE To describe relationships between use of the Personal Patient Profile-Prostate (P3P) decision support system and patient characteristics, and perceived preparation for decision making (PrepDM), satisfaction and decisional regret in the context of prostate cancer treatment choice. METHODS 494 men with localized prostate cancer (LPC) were randomized to receive the P3P intervention or usual care and completed pre-treatment, 1-month and 6-month outcome measures. Multivariable linear regression models were fit for each outcome. RESULTS Physician consult visits prior to enrollment, race/ethnicity, and use of clinic-provided books were significant predictors of perceived PrepDM at 1 month. Prior Internet use and PrepDM significantly predicted 6-month decision satisfaction. Decisional regret was significantly predicted by demographics, anxiety, PrepDM score, and EPIC bowel domain score at 6 months. Use of P3P did not predict any outcome. CONCLUSION While the P3P intervention did not significantly affect the outcomes, pre-enrollment information and preparation were strong predictors of the 1- and 6-month outcomes. Decision regret was significantly influenced by personal characteristics and post-treatment symptoms/side effects. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Information received and used between biopsy and the treatment options consult visit is likely to make a difference in decision satisfaction.

Development and Evaluation of the Personal Patient Profile-Prostate (P3P), a Web-Based Decision Support System for Men Newly Diagnosed With Localized Prostate Cancer

Background Given that no other disease with the high incidence of localized prostate cancer (LPC) has so many treatments with so few certainties related to outcomes, many men are faced with assuming some responsibility for the treatment decision along with guidance from clinicians. Men strongly consider their own personal characteristics and other personal factors as important and influential to the decision. Clinical researchers have not developed or comprehensively investigated interventions to facilitate the insight and prioritizing of personal factors along with medical factors that are required of a man in preparation for the treatment decision. Objectives The purpose of this pilot study was to develop and evaluate the feasibility and usability of a Web-based decision support technology, the Personal Patient Profile-Prostate (P3P), in men newly diagnosed with LPC. Methods Use cases were developed followed by infrastructure and content application. The program was provided on a personal desktop computer with a touch screen monitor. Participant responses to the query component of P3P determined the content of the multimedia educational and coaching intervention. The intervention was tailored to race, age, and personal factors reported as influencing the decision. Prepilot usability testing was conducted using a “think aloud” interview to identify navigation and content challenges. These issues were addressed prior to deployment in the clinic. A clinical pilot was conducted in an academic medical center where men sought consultation and treatment for LPC. Completion time, missing data, and acceptability were measured. Results Prepilot testing included 4 men with a past diagnosis of LPC who had completed therapy. Technical navigation issues were documented along with confusing content language. A total of 30 additional men with a recent diagnosis of LPC completed the P3P program in clinic prior to consulting with a urologist regarding treatment options. In a mean time of 46 minutes (SD 13 minutes), participants completed the P3P query and intervention components. Of a possible 4560 items for 30 participants, 22 (0.5%) were missing. Acceptability was reported as high overall. The sections of the intervention reported as most useful were the statistics graphs, priority information topics, and annotated external website links. Conclusions The P3P intervention is a feasible and usable program to facilitate treatment decision making by men with newly diagnosed LPC. Testing in a multisite randomized trial with a diverse sample is warranted.

Acceptability of an Electronic Self Report Assessment Program for Patients with Cancer

Eliciting symptom and quality of life information from patients is an important component of medical and nursing care processes. Traditionally, this information has been collected with paper and pencil. However, this approach presents several barriers, including delays in receiving information, difficulty in integrating responses with electronic records, and the time required to manually score questionnaires for measurement purposes. One solution that addresses many of these barriers is the adoption of computerized screening for symptom and quality-of-life information. This research explored the acceptability of asking symptom and quality-of-life questions using the Electronic Self Report Assessment-Cancer program on wireless laptops equipped with touch-screen format. Acceptability data were explored with respect to whether any differences may be attributed to demographics and symptom and quality-of-life levels, such as depression and cognitive and emotional functioning. This evaluation used descriptive and univariate statistics to examine data from 342 participants from the ongoing ESRA-C randomized clinical trial. Research participants for the ESRA-C study were recruited from the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, a consortium among the University of Washington Medical Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, and Childrens Hospital and Regional Medical Center in Seattle, WA. The sample consisted of 342 adult participants who completed both baseline and follow-up survey sessions. Medical oncology represented the largest recruitment group (45.3%), followed by stem cell transplant (34.5%) and radiation oncology (20.2%). The primary finding was that patients were generally able to use ESRA-C quickly and without difficulty in a real-world clinical setting and that they were overall quite satisfied with the ESRA-C program. Significant differences were found in several acceptability areas with respect to demographics and quality of life measures such as age, sex, and severe distress. This analysis confirms that the ESRA-C application for collecting symptom and quality of life information is easy for patients to use and acceptable across a range of user characteristics. We intend to build on our work by using the survey platform in other modalities while ensuring that the patients preferences are considered at all times.

Validation and testing of the Acceptability E-scale for web-based patient-reported outcomes in cancer care

The performance of the Acceptability E-scale was tested in a sample of 627 adult and older adult patients from various oncology clinics who completed an electronic symptoms survey. The revised Acceptability E-scale has strong psychometric properties and can be useful in assessing the acceptability and usability of computerized health-related programs in oncology and other health population.

Point-of-care clinical decision support for cancer symptom management: Results of a group randomized trial.

1 Background: Integration of palliative care into oncology is recommended for quality care. Clinicians may benefit from assistance in assessing and managing multiple symptoms. Palliative care clinicians have the expertise but may not be available or are not consulted early in the course of a patients disease. Clinical decision support (CDS) offers an innovative way to deliver symptom management and trigger palliative care referrals at the point-of-care. METHODS Twenty clinicians and their patients were randomized to usual care (UC) or CDS using the symptom assessment and management intervention (SAMI), which provided tailored suggestions for pain, fatigue, depression, anxiety and/or dyspnea. One-hundred seventy-nine patients completed a Web-based symptom assessment prior to each visit for 6 months. A tailored report provided a longitudinal symptom report and suggestions for management were provided to clinicians in the SAMI arm prior to the visit. Standardized questionnaires were administered to patients at baseline, 2, 4 and 6 months later to measure communication about symptoms and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL). The treatment outcome index (TOI) was the primary outcome for HR-QOL. Management of the target symptoms was assessed through chart review. Linear mixed models and logistic regression were used for analyses. RESULTS Patient characteristics were: mean age of 63 years, 58% female, 88% white, and 32% had < HS education. No differences were noted in communication between patients and their clinicians. Significant differences were noted in physical well-being (p = 0.007, 0.08 adjusted for baseline) and a clinically significant difference in the TOI (62 vs. 68) at 4 months in SAMI as compared to UC. The odds of managing depression (1.6, 90% CI, 1.0-2.5), anxiety (1.7, 90% CI, 1.0-3.0) and fatigue (1.6, 90% CI, 1.1-2.5) were higher in SAMI as compared to UC. The odds of palliative care consults for pain (3.2, 90% CI, 0.7-13.4) appear to be higher in SAMI as compared to UC. CONCLUSIONS Enhanced HR-QOL was noted among patients in the SAMI arm at 4 months. SAMI increased management of depression, fatigue and anxiety and appeared to increase palliative care consults for pain. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION NCT00852462.

Development and usability testing of a web-based cancer symptom and quality-of-life support intervention:

The feasibility and acceptability of computerized screening and patient-reported outcome measures have been demonstrated in the literature. However, patient-centered management of health information entails two challenges: gathering and presenting data using “patient-tailored” methods and supporting “patient-control” of health information. The design and development of many symptom and quality-of-life information systems have not included opportunities for systematically collecting and analyzing user input. As part of a larger clinical trial, the Electronic Self-Report Assessment for Cancer–II project, participatory design approaches were used to build and test new features and interfaces for patient/caregiver users. The research questions centered on patient/caregiver preferences with regard to the following: (a) content, (b) user interface needs, (c) patient-oriented summary, and (d) patient-controlled sharing of information with family, caregivers, and clinicians. Mixed methods were used with an emphasis on qualitative approaches; focus groups and individual usability tests were the primary research methods. Focus group data were content analyzed, while individual usability sessions were assessed with both qualitative and quantitative methods. We identified 12 key patient/caregiver preferences through focus groups with 6 participants. We implemented seven of these preferences during the iterative design process. We deferred development for some of the preferences due to resource constraints. During individual usability testing (n = 8), we were able to identify 65 usability issues ranging from minor user confusion to critical errors that blocked task completion. The participatory development model that we used led to features and design revisions that were patient centered. We are currently evaluating new approaches for the application interface and for future research pathways. We encourage other researchers to adopt user-centered design approaches when building patient-centered technologies.