Zafar, S. Yousuf

Background: Electronic health records (EHRs) may help enable reliable, rapid data management for many uses, such as facilitating communication of advance care planning (ACP). However, issues with validity and accuracy of EHRs hinder the use of ACP information for practical applications. Design: We present a cross-sectional pilot study of 433 older adults with cancer from three large health care systems, participating in an ongoing multisite pragmatic trial (4UH3AG060626-02). We compared data extracted from dedicated structured EHR fields for ACP to a chart review of corresponding ACP documentation contained in the medical chart. Results: Structured ACP data existed for 43.2% of patients and varied by site (25.7% −48.9%). Of the identified structured ACP data elements, 59.2% of recorded elements were correct, 23.7% were incorrect, and 17.1% were duplicates with heterogeneity across sites. Conclusion: Structured ACP data in EHRs were frequently incorrect. This represents a problem for patients and their families, as well as quality improvement and research efforts. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT03609177.

Abstract Background: Financial burden during cancer treatment is associated with compromised patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Being aware of impending costs may help preserve affected PROs during treatment, as patients can adjust their financial expectations. We aimed to determine if the relationship between financial burden and PROs differs among those who were aware versus unaware of transplant-related costs before hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for hematologic malignancy. Methods: In 2015, we administered a mailed survey to adult patients at least 150 days after autologous or allogeneic HCT at three centers: Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, and Mayo Clinic Arizona. We assessed pre-treatment awareness of transplant-related costs, decreased household income after HCT, and financial hardship (defined as any one or two of the following: reporting being either unsatisfied with present finances, having difficulty meeting monthly bill payments, or not having enough money at the end of the month; given that experiencing all three would represent extreme hardship likely to impact PROs regardless of awareness, we excluded this group). A seven-point scale was provided for perceptions of overall quality of life (QOL, and patient-reported stress was measured with the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). We fit regression models-stratified by awareness-to assess for the association of income decline and financial hardship with QOL below the median and perceived stress above the median (adjusting for transplant type, sex, age, race, marital status, income, distance to transplant center, and time since diagnosis). Results:In the overall survey cohort (n=325; response rate = 65.1%), 21.6% reported being unaware of HCT-related costs, with no differences due to age, race, income, or education as compared to those who were aware. Patients who reported being aware prior to transplant most often reported being informed of costs by a social worker (40.6%) and least often by a physician (23.4%; sources not mutually exclusive). Among aware patients, income decline after HCT was not associated with QOL below the median (AOR 1.4 [0.8, 2.5]; p=0.24); in contrast, among the unaware, income decline increased the odds of reporting worse QOL (AOR 4.3 [1.1, 16.7]; p=0.04). Among the aware, self-reported financial hardship was associated with worse QOL after HCT (AOR 2.7 [1.5, 4.8]; p=<.001), but the odds were even higher among the unaware (AOR 4.7 [1.2, 19.4]; p=0.03). Similar increases were observed among the unaware for the association of decline in income and financial hardship with increased perceived stress. Conclusions: In this large multi-institutional cohort of patients post-HCT, more than one-fifth reported being unaware of transplant-related costs before the procedure. Moreover, this analysis suggests that pre-treatment awareness of transplant-related costs may ameliorate the impact of post-HCT financial burden on patient-reported outcomes. Figure Figure. Disclosures Khera: Novartis: Consultancy. Zafar: Novartis: Other: Spouse's Employment.

Background: Financial distress from medical treatment is an increasing concern. Healthcare organizations may have different levels of organizational commitment, existing programs, and expected outcomes of screening and management of patient financial distress. Patients and Methods: In November 2018, representatives from 17 (63%) of the 27 existing NCCN Member Institutions completed an online survey. The survey focused on screening and management practices for patient financial distress, perceived barriers in implementation, and leadership attitudes about such practices. Due to the lack of a validated questionnaire in this area, survey questions were generated after a comprehensive literature search and discussions among the study team, including NCCN Best Practices Committee representatives. Results: Responses showed that 76% of centers routinely screened for financial distress, mostly with social worker assessment (94%), and that 56% screened patients multiple times. All centers offered programs to help with drug costs, meal or gas vouchers, and payment plans. Charity care was provided by 100% of the large centers (≥10,000 unique annual patients) but none of the small centers that responded (<10,000 unique annual patients; P =.008). Metrics to evaluate the impact of financial advocacy services included number of patients assisted, bad debt/charity write-offs, or patient satisfaction surveys. The effectiveness of institutional practices for screening and management of financial distress was reported as poor/very poor by 6% of respondents. Inadequate staffing and resources, limited budget, and lack of reimbursement were potential barriers in the provision of these services. A total of 94% agreed with the need for better integration of financial advocacy into oncology practice. Conclusions: Three-fourths of NCCN Member Institutions reported screening and management programs for financial distress, although the actual practices and range of services vary. Information from this study can help centers benchmark their performance relative to similar programs and identify best practices in this area.

Purpose High-quality supportive care is an essential component of comprehensive cancer care. We implemented a patient-centered quality of cancer care survey to examine and identify predictors of quality of supportive care for bowel problems, pain, fatigue, depression, and other symptoms among 1,109 patients with colorectal cancer. Patients and Methods Patients with new diagnosis of colorectal cancer at any Veterans Health Administration medical center nationwide in 2008 were ascertained through the Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry and sent questionnaires assessing a variety of aspects of patient-centered cancer care. We received questionnaires from 63% of eligible patients (N = 1,109). Descriptive analyses characterizing patient experiences with supportive care and binary logistic regression models were used to examine predictors of receipt of help wanted for each of the five symptom categories. Results There were significant gaps in patient-centered quality of supportive care, beginning with symptom assessment. In multivariable modeling, the impact of clinical factors and patient race on odds of receiving wanted help varied by symptom. Coordination of care quality predicted receipt of wanted help for all symptoms, independent of patient demographic or clinical characteristics. Conclusion This study revealed substantial gaps in patient-centered quality of care, difficult to characterize through quality measurement relying on medical record review alone. It established the feasibility of collecting patient-reported quality measures. Improving quality measurement of supportive care and implementing patient-reported outcomes in quality-measurement systems are high priorities for improving the processes and outcomes of care for patients with cancer.