Rahman, Parvez A

AbstractThe Enhanced EHR-facilitated Cancer Symptom Control (E2C2) Trial is a pragmatic trial testing a collaborative care approach for managing common cancer symptoms. There were challenges in identifying cancer site and metastatic status.This study compares three different approaches to determine cancer site and six strategies for identifying the presence of metastasis using EHR and cancer registry data.The E2C2 cohort included 50,559 patients seen in the medical oncology clinics of a large health system. SPPADE symptoms were assessed with 0 to 10 numeric rating scales (NRS). A multistep process was used to develop three approaches for representing cancer site: the single most prevalent International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision (ICD-10) code, the two most prevalent codes, and any diagnostic code. Six approaches for identifying metastatic disease were compared: ICD-10 codes, natural language processing (NLP), cancer registry, medications typically prescribed for incurable disease, treatment plan, and evaluation for phase 1 trials.The approach counting the two most prevalent ICD-10 cancer site diagnoses per patient detected a median of 92% of the cases identified by counting all cancer site diagnoses, whereas the approach counting only the single most prevalent cancer site diagnosis identified a median of 65%. However, agreement among the three approaches was very good (kappa > 0.80) for most cancer sites. ICD and NLP methods could be applied to the entire cohort and had the highest agreement (kappa = 0.53) for identifying metastasis. Cancer registry data was available for less than half of the patients.Identification of cancer site and metastatic disease using EHR data was feasible in this large and diverse cohort of patients with common cancer symptoms. The methods were pragmatic and may be acceptable for covariates, but likely require refinement for key dependent and independent variables.

The Deterioration Index (DI) is an automatic early warning system that utilizes a machine learning algorithm integrated into the electronic health record and was implemented to improve risk stratification of inpatients. Our pilot implementation showed superior diagnostic accuracy than standard care. A score >60 had a specificity of 88.5% and a sensitivity of 59.8% (PPV 0.1758, NPP 0.9817). However, acceptance in the clinical workflow was divided; nurses preferred standard care, while providers found it helpful.

Abstract Background The symptom burden associated with cancer and its treatment can negatively affect patients’ quality of life and survival. Symptom-focused collaborative care model (CCM) interventions can improve outcomes, but only if patients engage with them. We assessed the receptivity of severely symptomatic oncology patients to a remote nurse-led CCM intervention. Methods In a pragmatic, cluster-randomized, stepped-wedge trial conducted as part of the National Cancer Institute IMPACT Consortium (E2C2, NCT03892967), patients receiving cancer care were asked to rate their sleep disturbance, pain, anxiety, emotional distress, fatigue, and limitations in physical function. Patients reporting at least 1 severe symptom (≥7/10) were offered phone consultation with a nurse symptom care manager (RN SCM). Initially, patients had to “opt-in” to receive a call, but the protocol was later modified so they had to “opt-out” if they did not want a call. We assessed the impact of opt-in vs opt-out framing and patient characteristics on receptiveness to RN SCM calls. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results Of the 1204 symptom assessments (from 864 patients) on which at least 1 severe symptom was documented, 469 (39.0%) indicated receptivity to an RN SCM phone call. The opt-out period (odds ratio [OR] = 1.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.12 to 2.32, P = .01), receiving care at a tertiary care center (OR = 3.59, 95% CI = 2.18 to 5.91, P < .001), and having severe pain (OR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.24 to 2.62, P = .002) were associated with statistically significantly greater willingness to receive a call. Conclusions Many severely symptomatic patients were not receptive to an RN SCM phone call. Better understanding of reasons for refusal and strategies for improving patient receptivity are needed.

BACKGROUNDAlthough posthospitalization care transitions programs (CTP) are highly diverse, their overall program thoroughness is most predictive of their success.OBJECTIVETo identify components of a successful homebased CTP and patient characteristics that are most predictive of reduced 30‐day readmissions.DESIGNRetrospective cohort.PATIENTSA total of 315 community‐dwelling, hospitalized, older adults (≥60 years) at high risk for readmission (Elder Risk Assessment score ≥16), discharged home over the period of January 1, 2011 to June 30, 2013.SETTINGMidwest primary care practice in an integrated health system.INTERVENTIONEnrollment in a CTP during acute hospitalization.MEASUREMENTSThe primary outcome was all‐cause readmission within 30 days of the first CTP evaluation. Logistic regression was used to examine independent variables, including patient demographics, comorbidities, number of medications, completion, and timing of program fidelity measures, and prior utilization of healthcare.RESULTSThe overall 30‐day readmission rate was 17.1%. The intensity of follow‐up varied among patients, with 17.1% and 50.8% of the patients requiring one and ≥3 home visits, respectively, within 30 days. More than half (54.6%) required visits beyond 30 days. Compared with patients who were not readmitted, readmitted patients were less likely to exhibit cognitive impairment (29.6% vs 46.0%; P = .03) and were more likely to have high medication use (59.3% vs 44.4%; P = .047), more emergency department (ED; 0.8 vs 0.4; P = .03) and primary care visits (4.0 vs 3.0; P = .018), and longer cumulative time in the hospital (4.6 vs 2.5 days; P = .03) within 180 days of the index hospitalization. Multivariable analysis indicated that only cognitive impairment and previous ED visits were important predictors of readmission.CONCLUSIONSNo single CTP component reliably predicted reduced readmission risk. Patients with cognitive impairment and polypharmacy derived the most benefit from the program.

ObjectiveAssess algorithms for linking patients across de‐identified databases without compromising confidentiality.Data Sources/Study SettingHospital discharges from 11 Mayo Clinic hospitals during January 2008–September 2012 (assessment and validation data). Minnesota death certificates and hospital discharges from 2009 to 2012 for entire state (application data).Study DesignCross‐sectional assessment of sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) for four linking algorithms tested by identifying readmissions and posthospital mortality on the assessment data with application to statewide data.Data Collection/Extraction MethodsDe‐identified claims included patient gender, birthdate, and zip code. Assessment records were matched with institutional sources containing unique identifiers and the last four digits of Social Security number (SSNL4).Principal FindingsGender, birthdate, and five‐digit zip code identified readmissions with a sensitivity of 98.0 percent and a PPV of 97.7 percent and identified postdischarge mortality with 84.4 percent sensitivity and 98.9 percent PPV. Inclusion of SSNL4 produced nearly perfect identification of readmissions and deaths. When applied statewide, regions bordering states with unavailable hospital discharge data had lower rates.ConclusionAddition of SSNL4 to administrative data, accompanied by appropriate data use and data release policies, can enable trusted repositories to link data with nearly perfect accuracy without compromising patient confidentiality. States maintaining centralized de‐identified databases should add SSNL4 to data specifications.