Federal Practitioner

PURPOSE

Reduce financial toxicity of housing costs associated with cancer treatment for rural Veterans.

BACKGROUND

Veterans diagnosed with cancer experience financial burdens associated with treatments: financial toxicities (FT). New Mexico (NM) an underserved and socioeconomically challenged state has one VA facility. Veterans commonly experience increased FT in the form of financial burdens related to travel distance, housing, and time off from work for caregivers as required to seek specialized care and cancer treatments. Travel pay and the Mission Act does little to alleviate this burden, and many still experience financial hardships.

METHODS

NMVAHCS Fisher House is reserved for families seeking housing accommodations during their loved one’s hospitalization. Surgical Service coordinated an additional plan to provide services for rural Veterans requiring 4-6 weeks of daily radiation therapy. Special accommodations were granted. Each case is reviewed via consult. Veteran requires an accompanying caregiver. Prior available Veteran discounted hotel rates averaged $96 per night. A 6-week course of shelter during radiation therapy could be $4,032.00, before taxes. No discounts or vouchers were available for meals, or other expenses.

RESULTS

Since FY23, 38 families seeking oncology care were welcomed into the Fisher House, reflecting a potential Veteran cost savings of $153,216.00 related to housing alone. Veterans also experienced cost saving related to food, as most meals were provided through community donations. Veteran satisfaction was improved, evidenced by Fisher House journal for families. Entries were heartwarming, with an outpouring of gratitude to the staff and VA for providing care and hospitality in a difficult time. Several Veterans stated they would not have been able to complete treatment without the Fisher House.

IMPLICATIONS

Although most Veterans have manageable associated out of pocket expenses with cancer treatments, many have associated extensive financial burdens related to receiving treatments. Even with the Mission Act, many live 4-6 hours from the closest oncology center providing radiation therapy, making a round trip for daily treatment up to 12 hours. Consideration in the reduction of travel time and housing expenses, can mean the difference of Veterans accepting treatments resulting in improved overall quality of life and survival outcomes.

PURPOSE

Reduce financial toxicity of housing costs associated with cancer treatment for rural Veterans.

BACKGROUND

Veterans diagnosed with cancer experience financial burdens associated with treatments: financial toxicities (FT). New Mexico (NM) an underserved and socioeconomically challenged state has one VA facility. Veterans commonly experience increased FT in the form of financial burdens related to travel distance, housing, and time off from work for caregivers as required to seek specialized care and cancer treatments. Travel pay and the Mission Act does little to alleviate this burden, and many still experience financial hardships.

METHODS

NMVAHCS Fisher House is reserved for families seeking housing accommodations during their loved one’s hospitalization. Surgical Service coordinated an additional plan to provide services for rural Veterans requiring 4-6 weeks of daily radiation therapy. Special accommodations were granted. Each case is reviewed via consult. Veteran requires an accompanying caregiver. Prior available Veteran discounted hotel rates averaged $96 per night. A 6-week course of shelter during radiation therapy could be $4,032.00, before taxes. No discounts or vouchers were available for meals, or other expenses.

RESULTS

Since FY23, 38 families seeking oncology care were welcomed into the Fisher House, reflecting a potential Veteran cost savings of $153,216.00 related to housing alone. Veterans also experienced cost saving related to food, as most meals were provided through community donations. Veteran satisfaction was improved, evidenced by Fisher House journal for families. Entries were heartwarming, with an outpouring of gratitude to the staff and VA for providing care and hospitality in a difficult time. Several Veterans stated they would not have been able to complete treatment without the Fisher House.

IMPLICATIONS

Although most Veterans have manageable associated out of pocket expenses with cancer treatments, many have associated extensive financial burdens related to receiving treatments. Even with the Mission Act, many live 4-6 hours from the closest oncology center providing radiation therapy, making a round trip for daily treatment up to 12 hours. Consideration in the reduction of travel time and housing expenses, can mean the difference of Veterans accepting treatments resulting in improved overall quality of life and survival outcomes.

PURPOSE

Reduce financial toxicity of housing costs associated with cancer treatment for rural Veterans.

BACKGROUND

Veterans diagnosed with cancer experience financial burdens associated with treatments: financial toxicities (FT). New Mexico (NM) an underserved and socioeconomically challenged state has one VA facility. Veterans commonly experience increased FT in the form of financial burdens related to travel distance, housing, and time off from work for caregivers as required to seek specialized care and cancer treatments. Travel pay and the Mission Act does little to alleviate this burden, and many still experience financial hardships.

METHODS

NMVAHCS Fisher House is reserved for families seeking housing accommodations during their loved one’s hospitalization. Surgical Service coordinated an additional plan to provide services for rural Veterans requiring 4-6 weeks of daily radiation therapy. Special accommodations were granted. Each case is reviewed via consult. Veteran requires an accompanying caregiver. Prior available Veteran discounted hotel rates averaged $96 per night. A 6-week course of shelter during radiation therapy could be $4,032.00, before taxes. No discounts or vouchers were available for meals, or other expenses.

RESULTS

Since FY23, 38 families seeking oncology care were welcomed into the Fisher House, reflecting a potential Veteran cost savings of $153,216.00 related to housing alone. Veterans also experienced cost saving related to food, as most meals were provided through community donations. Veteran satisfaction was improved, evidenced by Fisher House journal for families. Entries were heartwarming, with an outpouring of gratitude to the staff and VA for providing care and hospitality in a difficult time. Several Veterans stated they would not have been able to complete treatment without the Fisher House.

IMPLICATIONS

Although most Veterans have manageable associated out of pocket expenses with cancer treatments, many have associated extensive financial burdens related to receiving treatments. Even with the Mission Act, many live 4-6 hours from the closest oncology center providing radiation therapy, making a round trip for daily treatment up to 12 hours. Consideration in the reduction of travel time and housing expenses, can mean the difference of Veterans accepting treatments resulting in improved overall quality of life and survival outcomes.

PURPOSE

This workforce project evaluated potential enhancement of health psychology services with the establishment of a dedicated and integrated psychooncology position at one VA.

BACKGROUND

Broad health psychology services have been offered across this VA healthcare system with some success (Bloor et al., 2017; Bloor et al., 2022). Previously, some services were enhanced when a dedicated psychology position was funded and integrated with the interdisciplinary pain team (Dadabeyev et al., 2019).

METHODS

We reviewed utilization of services with clinic data for a 4-month period prior to the new position, compared to the first 4-months the health psychologist integrated with Oncology. We also conducted a “perceptions of referring providers” survey, assessing Utility and Quality.

DATA ANALYSIS

For utilization of health psychology services, we explored descriptive statistics. An independent samples t-test was conducted to evaluate perceptions of the services’ Utility and Quality, comparing perceptions of referring providers across the healthcare system (Bloor et al., 2017) to Oncology providers’ perceptions when a dedicated psychologist became available.

RESULTS

For the first 4 months psychology services were dedicated to Oncology, 82 Veterans received 1 or more sessions for a total of 222 encounters compared to 44 Veterans receiving health psychology services for a total of 98 sessions in the 4-month period prior. Also, during the first 4-month period with integrated care, previously unavailable same-day services were offered to Veterans, ranging from 4-9 same-day sessions each week. For the referring providers’ survey, perceptions of Utility increased significantly from m=13.70 (SD=1.36) to m=14.90 (SD=0.32), t=2.76, (p-value=.0076).

IMPLICATIONS

These data suggest increased availability and usage of services, and enhanced perceptions of the Utility of health psychology services when funding for a dedicated position was implemented. Additional measures of service enhancement can be explored in the future to understand better the added value of integrated health psychology. This could explore improvement in distress and suicide risk screening, availability to identify and outreach to Veterans at risk, and/or enhancement for survivorship, prevention or other cancer care standards. Moreover, it is important to capture Veterans’ perceptions of services, including changes in mood, functioning and quality of life.

PURPOSE

This workforce project evaluated potential enhancement of health psychology services with the establishment of a dedicated and integrated psychooncology position at one VA.

BACKGROUND

Broad health psychology services have been offered across this VA healthcare system with some success (Bloor et al., 2017; Bloor et al., 2022). Previously, some services were enhanced when a dedicated psychology position was funded and integrated with the interdisciplinary pain team (Dadabeyev et al., 2019).

METHODS

We reviewed utilization of services with clinic data for a 4-month period prior to the new position, compared to the first 4-months the health psychologist integrated with Oncology. We also conducted a “perceptions of referring providers” survey, assessing Utility and Quality.

DATA ANALYSIS

For utilization of health psychology services, we explored descriptive statistics. An independent samples t-test was conducted to evaluate perceptions of the services’ Utility and Quality, comparing perceptions of referring providers across the healthcare system (Bloor et al., 2017) to Oncology providers’ perceptions when a dedicated psychologist became available.

RESULTS

For the first 4 months psychology services were dedicated to Oncology, 82 Veterans received 1 or more sessions for a total of 222 encounters compared to 44 Veterans receiving health psychology services for a total of 98 sessions in the 4-month period prior. Also, during the first 4-month period with integrated care, previously unavailable same-day services were offered to Veterans, ranging from 4-9 same-day sessions each week. For the referring providers’ survey, perceptions of Utility increased significantly from m=13.70 (SD=1.36) to m=14.90 (SD=0.32), t=2.76, (p-value=.0076).

IMPLICATIONS

These data suggest increased availability and usage of services, and enhanced perceptions of the Utility of health psychology services when funding for a dedicated position was implemented. Additional measures of service enhancement can be explored in the future to understand better the added value of integrated health psychology. This could explore improvement in distress and suicide risk screening, availability to identify and outreach to Veterans at risk, and/or enhancement for survivorship, prevention or other cancer care standards. Moreover, it is important to capture Veterans’ perceptions of services, including changes in mood, functioning and quality of life.

PURPOSE

This workforce project evaluated potential enhancement of health psychology services with the establishment of a dedicated and integrated psychooncology position at one VA.

BACKGROUND

Broad health psychology services have been offered across this VA healthcare system with some success (Bloor et al., 2017; Bloor et al., 2022). Previously, some services were enhanced when a dedicated psychology position was funded and integrated with the interdisciplinary pain team (Dadabeyev et al., 2019).

METHODS

We reviewed utilization of services with clinic data for a 4-month period prior to the new position, compared to the first 4-months the health psychologist integrated with Oncology. We also conducted a “perceptions of referring providers” survey, assessing Utility and Quality.

DATA ANALYSIS

For utilization of health psychology services, we explored descriptive statistics. An independent samples t-test was conducted to evaluate perceptions of the services’ Utility and Quality, comparing perceptions of referring providers across the healthcare system (Bloor et al., 2017) to Oncology providers’ perceptions when a dedicated psychologist became available.

RESULTS

For the first 4 months psychology services were dedicated to Oncology, 82 Veterans received 1 or more sessions for a total of 222 encounters compared to 44 Veterans receiving health psychology services for a total of 98 sessions in the 4-month period prior. Also, during the first 4-month period with integrated care, previously unavailable same-day services were offered to Veterans, ranging from 4-9 same-day sessions each week. For the referring providers’ survey, perceptions of Utility increased significantly from m=13.70 (SD=1.36) to m=14.90 (SD=0.32), t=2.76, (p-value=.0076).

IMPLICATIONS

These data suggest increased availability and usage of services, and enhanced perceptions of the Utility of health psychology services when funding for a dedicated position was implemented. Additional measures of service enhancement can be explored in the future to understand better the added value of integrated health psychology. This could explore improvement in distress and suicide risk screening, availability to identify and outreach to Veterans at risk, and/or enhancement for survivorship, prevention or other cancer care standards. Moreover, it is important to capture Veterans’ perceptions of services, including changes in mood, functioning and quality of life.

PURPOSE

To improve veteran surgical literacy, satisfaction, and overall outcomes.

BACKGROUND

For years, discharge education at the New Mexico VAHCS consisted of a fill-in templated non-specific and limited facility wide CPRS note written above an 8th grade reading level. Specific surgical instructions were not provided regarding drain/catheter/ostomy/wound care, activity and bathing instructions, and signs and symptoms to notify the provider. This resulted in post-discharge anxiety, provider calls, and avoidable re-admissions.

METHODS

Nurse Navigator/Patient Educator position was created and filled with intent to create discharge education database specific to diagnosis and procedure, 1:1 patient centered education, and direct access to subject matter expert. The Navigators collaborated with surgeons to develop concise post-operative, evidence- based education, which included easy to read diagrams, 8th grade reading level, and 14 font. Packets were approved through the VHEC/I committee for distribution and stored on the VA Intranet for afterhours ward access to ensure consistency.

RESULTS

28 educational packets were created for the most common surgeries completed to customize education to fit individual needs of the Veteran. Each packet contains basic information regarding the procedure and wound care, but is customizable to include specific drain, catheter, or ostomy teaching. The Navigators meet with the Veteran prior to surgery to develop trusting relationships and begin the education process. After surgery, they visit daily to reinforce education with teach back demonstrations and encourage self-care. Family members are included in education sessions and are provided time for questions. The Navigators ensure veterans do not leave the hospital without necessary equipment and medications. As a result, the NMVAHCS has experienced improvements in the Survey of Healthcare Experiences of Patients (SHEP) scores. Prior to improvements in the educational process, SHEP scores related to discharge education identified areas of concern. After hiring Nurse Navigators, SHEP scores for discharge information increased to 90.3%. General Surgery 14-day readmission rate improved (2.9% in FY 21 to 1.7% FY 22); and 30-day readmission rate improved (12.8% FY21 to 8.7% FY 22), despite increased operative volume.

IMPLICATIONS

Providing Veteran Centered Care with comprehensive education improves selfcare, patient satisfaction, and decreases avoidable readmissions.

PURPOSE

To improve veteran surgical literacy, satisfaction, and overall outcomes.

BACKGROUND

For years, discharge education at the New Mexico VAHCS consisted of a fill-in templated non-specific and limited facility wide CPRS note written above an 8th grade reading level. Specific surgical instructions were not provided regarding drain/catheter/ostomy/wound care, activity and bathing instructions, and signs and symptoms to notify the provider. This resulted in post-discharge anxiety, provider calls, and avoidable re-admissions.

METHODS

Nurse Navigator/Patient Educator position was created and filled with intent to create discharge education database specific to diagnosis and procedure, 1:1 patient centered education, and direct access to subject matter expert. The Navigators collaborated with surgeons to develop concise post-operative, evidence- based education, which included easy to read diagrams, 8th grade reading level, and 14 font. Packets were approved through the VHEC/I committee for distribution and stored on the VA Intranet for afterhours ward access to ensure consistency.

RESULTS

28 educational packets were created for the most common surgeries completed to customize education to fit individual needs of the Veteran. Each packet contains basic information regarding the procedure and wound care, but is customizable to include specific drain, catheter, or ostomy teaching. The Navigators meet with the Veteran prior to surgery to develop trusting relationships and begin the education process. After surgery, they visit daily to reinforce education with teach back demonstrations and encourage self-care. Family members are included in education sessions and are provided time for questions. The Navigators ensure veterans do not leave the hospital without necessary equipment and medications. As a result, the NMVAHCS has experienced improvements in the Survey of Healthcare Experiences of Patients (SHEP) scores. Prior to improvements in the educational process, SHEP scores related to discharge education identified areas of concern. After hiring Nurse Navigators, SHEP scores for discharge information increased to 90.3%. General Surgery 14-day readmission rate improved (2.9% in FY 21 to 1.7% FY 22); and 30-day readmission rate improved (12.8% FY21 to 8.7% FY 22), despite increased operative volume.

IMPLICATIONS

Providing Veteran Centered Care with comprehensive education improves selfcare, patient satisfaction, and decreases avoidable readmissions.

PURPOSE

To improve veteran surgical literacy, satisfaction, and overall outcomes.

BACKGROUND

For years, discharge education at the New Mexico VAHCS consisted of a fill-in templated non-specific and limited facility wide CPRS note written above an 8th grade reading level. Specific surgical instructions were not provided regarding drain/catheter/ostomy/wound care, activity and bathing instructions, and signs and symptoms to notify the provider. This resulted in post-discharge anxiety, provider calls, and avoidable re-admissions.

METHODS

Nurse Navigator/Patient Educator position was created and filled with intent to create discharge education database specific to diagnosis and procedure, 1:1 patient centered education, and direct access to subject matter expert. The Navigators collaborated with surgeons to develop concise post-operative, evidence- based education, which included easy to read diagrams, 8th grade reading level, and 14 font. Packets were approved through the VHEC/I committee for distribution and stored on the VA Intranet for afterhours ward access to ensure consistency.

RESULTS

28 educational packets were created for the most common surgeries completed to customize education to fit individual needs of the Veteran. Each packet contains basic information regarding the procedure and wound care, but is customizable to include specific drain, catheter, or ostomy teaching. The Navigators meet with the Veteran prior to surgery to develop trusting relationships and begin the education process. After surgery, they visit daily to reinforce education with teach back demonstrations and encourage self-care. Family members are included in education sessions and are provided time for questions. The Navigators ensure veterans do not leave the hospital without necessary equipment and medications. As a result, the NMVAHCS has experienced improvements in the Survey of Healthcare Experiences of Patients (SHEP) scores. Prior to improvements in the educational process, SHEP scores related to discharge education identified areas of concern. After hiring Nurse Navigators, SHEP scores for discharge information increased to 90.3%. General Surgery 14-day readmission rate improved (2.9% in FY 21 to 1.7% FY 22); and 30-day readmission rate improved (12.8% FY21 to 8.7% FY 22), despite increased operative volume.

IMPLICATIONS

Providing Veteran Centered Care with comprehensive education improves selfcare, patient satisfaction, and decreases avoidable readmissions.

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of biosimilars are carefully reviewed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ensure the biosimilar meets the high standards for approval. However, safety concerns from infusion nursing staff prompted a review of rituximab-PVVR and rituximab for any new trends in National VA, primary literature, and facility adverse events.

METHODS

Utilizing the VA ADERS (Veteran’s Affairs Adverse Drug Event Reporting System), data was analyzed from 01/01/21 thru 04/01/23. No clear trends were identified to support an increased reaction rate for Rituximab-PVVR or Rituximab. A total of 104 Rituximab product (both parent and biosimilar products) adverse reactions were reported nationally. Of those reported, about half 56 ADEs (54%) were specifically to Rituximab-PVVR.

RESULTS

Reviewing our facility specific VA ADERS data, Birmingham VA reported 7 ADEs. Similarly other sites reported a range of 0 to 13 Rituximab product ADEs. The total number of unique patients to receive a rituximab product in the Birmingham VA since 2021 is 106, resulting in an overall incidence rate of 6.6%.

DISCUSSION

Based on the recent publication, Safety of switching between rituximab biosimilars in onco-hematology “adverse events were similar, in terms of seriousness and frequency, to those described in the literature, providing further support to the clinical safety of biosimilars.” This prospective clinical trial published in 2021, reported grade 1 rituximab related infusion events in 7.1% of patients (n=83) which correlates closely to the reported incidence at our facility referenced above (6.6%). Our current pre-medications include acetaminophen, an antihistamine, and steroid 30 minutes prior to infusion. Although our interdisciplinary team deemed this appropriate, to improve and minimize infusion reaction symptoms, the following interventions were instituted including changing ORAL Diphenhydramine to intravenous Diphenhydramine 25mg IV and providing education to infusion nursing staff on the safety and efficacy of the rituximab and biosimilar products.

CONCLUSIONS

Following the intervention (04/07/23), 36 total unique patients received rituximab products with zero incidents reported. Although the results are limited, the data may suggest IV diphenhydramine reduces the severity of ADEs which may alter reporting or show a potential “nocebo” effect could be a factor with any rituximab infusion needing further evaluation.

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of biosimilars are carefully reviewed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ensure the biosimilar meets the high standards for approval. However, safety concerns from infusion nursing staff prompted a review of rituximab-PVVR and rituximab for any new trends in National VA, primary literature, and facility adverse events.

METHODS

Utilizing the VA ADERS (Veteran’s Affairs Adverse Drug Event Reporting System), data was analyzed from 01/01/21 thru 04/01/23. No clear trends were identified to support an increased reaction rate for Rituximab-PVVR or Rituximab. A total of 104 Rituximab product (both parent and biosimilar products) adverse reactions were reported nationally. Of those reported, about half 56 ADEs (54%) were specifically to Rituximab-PVVR.

RESULTS

Reviewing our facility specific VA ADERS data, Birmingham VA reported 7 ADEs. Similarly other sites reported a range of 0 to 13 Rituximab product ADEs. The total number of unique patients to receive a rituximab product in the Birmingham VA since 2021 is 106, resulting in an overall incidence rate of 6.6%.

DISCUSSION

Based on the recent publication, Safety of switching between rituximab biosimilars in onco-hematology “adverse events were similar, in terms of seriousness and frequency, to those described in the literature, providing further support to the clinical safety of biosimilars.” This prospective clinical trial published in 2021, reported grade 1 rituximab related infusion events in 7.1% of patients (n=83) which correlates closely to the reported incidence at our facility referenced above (6.6%). Our current pre-medications include acetaminophen, an antihistamine, and steroid 30 minutes prior to infusion. Although our interdisciplinary team deemed this appropriate, to improve and minimize infusion reaction symptoms, the following interventions were instituted including changing ORAL Diphenhydramine to intravenous Diphenhydramine 25mg IV and providing education to infusion nursing staff on the safety and efficacy of the rituximab and biosimilar products.

CONCLUSIONS

Following the intervention (04/07/23), 36 total unique patients received rituximab products with zero incidents reported. Although the results are limited, the data may suggest IV diphenhydramine reduces the severity of ADEs which may alter reporting or show a potential “nocebo” effect could be a factor with any rituximab infusion needing further evaluation.

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of biosimilars are carefully reviewed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ensure the biosimilar meets the high standards for approval. However, safety concerns from infusion nursing staff prompted a review of rituximab-PVVR and rituximab for any new trends in National VA, primary literature, and facility adverse events.

METHODS

Utilizing the VA ADERS (Veteran’s Affairs Adverse Drug Event Reporting System), data was analyzed from 01/01/21 thru 04/01/23. No clear trends were identified to support an increased reaction rate for Rituximab-PVVR or Rituximab. A total of 104 Rituximab product (both parent and biosimilar products) adverse reactions were reported nationally. Of those reported, about half 56 ADEs (54%) were specifically to Rituximab-PVVR.

RESULTS

Reviewing our facility specific VA ADERS data, Birmingham VA reported 7 ADEs. Similarly other sites reported a range of 0 to 13 Rituximab product ADEs. The total number of unique patients to receive a rituximab product in the Birmingham VA since 2021 is 106, resulting in an overall incidence rate of 6.6%.

DISCUSSION

Based on the recent publication, Safety of switching between rituximab biosimilars in onco-hematology “adverse events were similar, in terms of seriousness and frequency, to those described in the literature, providing further support to the clinical safety of biosimilars.” This prospective clinical trial published in 2021, reported grade 1 rituximab related infusion events in 7.1% of patients (n=83) which correlates closely to the reported incidence at our facility referenced above (6.6%). Our current pre-medications include acetaminophen, an antihistamine, and steroid 30 minutes prior to infusion. Although our interdisciplinary team deemed this appropriate, to improve and minimize infusion reaction symptoms, the following interventions were instituted including changing ORAL Diphenhydramine to intravenous Diphenhydramine 25mg IV and providing education to infusion nursing staff on the safety and efficacy of the rituximab and biosimilar products.

CONCLUSIONS

Following the intervention (04/07/23), 36 total unique patients received rituximab products with zero incidents reported. Although the results are limited, the data may suggest IV diphenhydramine reduces the severity of ADEs which may alter reporting or show a potential “nocebo” effect could be a factor with any rituximab infusion needing further evaluation.

OBJECTIVE

Transitional zone cancers are not accounted for when using standard prostate biopsy techniques. Using MRI/Transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy (UroNav) can more accurately diagnose transitional zone prostate cancer. The goal of this study is to evaluate 375 patients with transitional zone only cancer found on a UroNav biopsy MRI/Transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy over a three-year period to evaluate the clinical significance of their cancer.

METHOD

We retrospectively analyzed 1500 patients that underwent a UroNav biopsy over a 3 year period. 375 of these patients had transitional zone only cancers. The patients with transitional and peripheral zone cancer were analyzed. The PIRAD scores were evaluated and the percent cancer determined for each zone. Clinically significant cancer for each zone was also determined.

RESULTS

Of the 1500 patients with a PIRAD lesion, 25% were located in the transitional zone, 36% in the peripheral zone and 39% in both transitional and peripheral zone. Cancer was detected in 40% of transitional zone only lesions, 44% of peripheral zone only lesions and 38% combined zone lesion. Clinically significant cancer was noted in 26%, 27% and 20%, respectively, for the TZ, PZ and combined zones. Kaplan- Meier, Cox Proportional Hazards test, ANOVA and Chi- Square tests were performed. Data was analyzed using IBM SPSS version 27 and statistical significance was set at α=0.05. PIRAD breakdown for transitional zone only cancers are as follows, PIRAD 3 (52% of patients): 24% cancer, 10% clinically significant PIRAD 4 (34% of patients): 43% cancer, 30% clinically significant PIRAD 5 (14% of patients): 75% cancer, 60% clinically significant

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a UroNav biopsy has been instrumental in detecting clinically significant cancers in the transitional zone that otherwise would have been missed on a standard mapping biopsy.

OBJECTIVE

Transitional zone cancers are not accounted for when using standard prostate biopsy techniques. Using MRI/Transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy (UroNav) can more accurately diagnose transitional zone prostate cancer. The goal of this study is to evaluate 375 patients with transitional zone only cancer found on a UroNav biopsy MRI/Transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy over a three-year period to evaluate the clinical significance of their cancer.

METHOD

We retrospectively analyzed 1500 patients that underwent a UroNav biopsy over a 3 year period. 375 of these patients had transitional zone only cancers. The patients with transitional and peripheral zone cancer were analyzed. The PIRAD scores were evaluated and the percent cancer determined for each zone. Clinically significant cancer for each zone was also determined.

RESULTS

Of the 1500 patients with a PIRAD lesion, 25% were located in the transitional zone, 36% in the peripheral zone and 39% in both transitional and peripheral zone. Cancer was detected in 40% of transitional zone only lesions, 44% of peripheral zone only lesions and 38% combined zone lesion. Clinically significant cancer was noted in 26%, 27% and 20%, respectively, for the TZ, PZ and combined zones. Kaplan- Meier, Cox Proportional Hazards test, ANOVA and Chi- Square tests were performed. Data was analyzed using IBM SPSS version 27 and statistical significance was set at α=0.05. PIRAD breakdown for transitional zone only cancers are as follows, PIRAD 3 (52% of patients): 24% cancer, 10% clinically significant PIRAD 4 (34% of patients): 43% cancer, 30% clinically significant PIRAD 5 (14% of patients): 75% cancer, 60% clinically significant

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a UroNav biopsy has been instrumental in detecting clinically significant cancers in the transitional zone that otherwise would have been missed on a standard mapping biopsy.

OBJECTIVE

Transitional zone cancers are not accounted for when using standard prostate biopsy techniques. Using MRI/Transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy (UroNav) can more accurately diagnose transitional zone prostate cancer. The goal of this study is to evaluate 375 patients with transitional zone only cancer found on a UroNav biopsy MRI/Transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy over a three-year period to evaluate the clinical significance of their cancer.

METHOD

We retrospectively analyzed 1500 patients that underwent a UroNav biopsy over a 3 year period. 375 of these patients had transitional zone only cancers. The patients with transitional and peripheral zone cancer were analyzed. The PIRAD scores were evaluated and the percent cancer determined for each zone. Clinically significant cancer for each zone was also determined.

RESULTS

Of the 1500 patients with a PIRAD lesion, 25% were located in the transitional zone, 36% in the peripheral zone and 39% in both transitional and peripheral zone. Cancer was detected in 40% of transitional zone only lesions, 44% of peripheral zone only lesions and 38% combined zone lesion. Clinically significant cancer was noted in 26%, 27% and 20%, respectively, for the TZ, PZ and combined zones. Kaplan- Meier, Cox Proportional Hazards test, ANOVA and Chi- Square tests were performed. Data was analyzed using IBM SPSS version 27 and statistical significance was set at α=0.05. PIRAD breakdown for transitional zone only cancers are as follows, PIRAD 3 (52% of patients): 24% cancer, 10% clinically significant PIRAD 4 (34% of patients): 43% cancer, 30% clinically significant PIRAD 5 (14% of patients): 75% cancer, 60% clinically significant

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a UroNav biopsy has been instrumental in detecting clinically significant cancers in the transitional zone that otherwise would have been missed on a standard mapping biopsy.

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is one of the most common oncologic diagnoses in VA. Follow-up after radiation treatment involves PSA lab work and a provider visit every 6 months to evaluate for recurrence and longterm side effects. This requires a large amount of VA resources in terms of staff time and can lead to reduced provider access and increased outsourcing costs. If the veteran has in person appointments, this also increases time and travel costs for the veteran.

METHODS

The Cleveland VA Radiation Oncology department has designed a novel Prostate Cancer Tracker to monitor veterans for prostate cancer follow-up. The novel workflow uses a combination of data analysis and sorting techniques along with a dedicated clinical team to triage patients to (1) direct counseling for biochemical recurrence or (2) continued follow-up through the tracker. This process improves resource utilization, efficiently tracks patients, and reduces the risk of a patient lost to follow-up. The program started in August 2022 and has been running in a pilot phase until January 2023. Patient statistics using VA analytics were collected for January 2023 to March 2023.

RESULTS

At the end of March 2023, the tracker contained 250 patients. 56 veterans had their lab work coordinated with PCP labs to avoid unnecessary needle sticks. 50 letters for overdue labs were sent out of which 31 resulted in returning to standard of care follow up. 6 patients were converted from the tracker to in person for counseling regarding biochemical recurrence. The number of in person appointments saved was 80 per month, resulting in better access for providers and savings for veterans for miles driven and veteran’s time. In addition, we have reduced outsourcing costs by re-capturing outsourced veterans back to VA for prostate cancer follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The prostate cancer tracker workflow is a novel workflow that has had a successful pilot as a VA iNET seed investee. We plan to expand its use within our department and further quantify improvements for the VA. We are actively looking to expand to other VA sites.

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is one of the most common oncologic diagnoses in VA. Follow-up after radiation treatment involves PSA lab work and a provider visit every 6 months to evaluate for recurrence and longterm side effects. This requires a large amount of VA resources in terms of staff time and can lead to reduced provider access and increased outsourcing costs. If the veteran has in person appointments, this also increases time and travel costs for the veteran.

METHODS

The Cleveland VA Radiation Oncology department has designed a novel Prostate Cancer Tracker to monitor veterans for prostate cancer follow-up. The novel workflow uses a combination of data analysis and sorting techniques along with a dedicated clinical team to triage patients to (1) direct counseling for biochemical recurrence or (2) continued follow-up through the tracker. This process improves resource utilization, efficiently tracks patients, and reduces the risk of a patient lost to follow-up. The program started in August 2022 and has been running in a pilot phase until January 2023. Patient statistics using VA analytics were collected for January 2023 to March 2023.

RESULTS

At the end of March 2023, the tracker contained 250 patients. 56 veterans had their lab work coordinated with PCP labs to avoid unnecessary needle sticks. 50 letters for overdue labs were sent out of which 31 resulted in returning to standard of care follow up. 6 patients were converted from the tracker to in person for counseling regarding biochemical recurrence. The number of in person appointments saved was 80 per month, resulting in better access for providers and savings for veterans for miles driven and veteran’s time. In addition, we have reduced outsourcing costs by re-capturing outsourced veterans back to VA for prostate cancer follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The prostate cancer tracker workflow is a novel workflow that has had a successful pilot as a VA iNET seed investee. We plan to expand its use within our department and further quantify improvements for the VA. We are actively looking to expand to other VA sites.

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is one of the most common oncologic diagnoses in VA. Follow-up after radiation treatment involves PSA lab work and a provider visit every 6 months to evaluate for recurrence and longterm side effects. This requires a large amount of VA resources in terms of staff time and can lead to reduced provider access and increased outsourcing costs. If the veteran has in person appointments, this also increases time and travel costs for the veteran.

METHODS

The Cleveland VA Radiation Oncology department has designed a novel Prostate Cancer Tracker to monitor veterans for prostate cancer follow-up. The novel workflow uses a combination of data analysis and sorting techniques along with a dedicated clinical team to triage patients to (1) direct counseling for biochemical recurrence or (2) continued follow-up through the tracker. This process improves resource utilization, efficiently tracks patients, and reduces the risk of a patient lost to follow-up. The program started in August 2022 and has been running in a pilot phase until January 2023. Patient statistics using VA analytics were collected for January 2023 to March 2023.

RESULTS

At the end of March 2023, the tracker contained 250 patients. 56 veterans had their lab work coordinated with PCP labs to avoid unnecessary needle sticks. 50 letters for overdue labs were sent out of which 31 resulted in returning to standard of care follow up. 6 patients were converted from the tracker to in person for counseling regarding biochemical recurrence. The number of in person appointments saved was 80 per month, resulting in better access for providers and savings for veterans for miles driven and veteran’s time. In addition, we have reduced outsourcing costs by re-capturing outsourced veterans back to VA for prostate cancer follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The prostate cancer tracker workflow is a novel workflow that has had a successful pilot as a VA iNET seed investee. We plan to expand its use within our department and further quantify improvements for the VA. We are actively looking to expand to other VA sites.

BACKGROUND

The incidence of adenocarcinoma, the most common type of small intestine cancer, is increasing. Prior studies found a 5-year survival of about 25% even with surgical resection and lymph node dissection. A recent study found higher survival in insured versus uninsured patients, yet differential outcomes and treatments between private insurance and Medicare, along with Medicaid and no insurance, are unknown. This study aims to determine differential survival and treatment of patients with small intestine adenocarcinoma based on insurance status.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients diagnosed with small intestine adenocarcinoma from 2004-2019 using the histology code 8140 as assigned by the Commission on Cancer Accreditation program. Kaplan-Meier, Chi-Square, ANOVA, and Cox Proportional Hazards tests were performed. Data was analyzed using IBM SPSS version 28 and statistical significance was set at α=0.05.

RESULTS

Of the 20,933 patients included, 7,629 (32.4%) had private insurance and 13,075 (55.5%) had Medicare. Patients with private insurance had a longer median survival (28.8 months) than patients with Medicare, Medicaid, and no insurance (p<.001), while patients with Medicare had a shorter median survival (12.2 months) than other insurance statuses (p<.001). No median survival difference existed between those with Medicaid (18.9 months) and no insurance (18.0 months) (p=.882). After controlling for age, co-morbidity score, grade, tumor size, low-income, academic facility, surgery of primary site, palliative care, and days between diagnosis and treatment, private insurance was associated with an independent decrease in hazard (HR=.874; p<.001). Patients with private insurance received more surgery (67.8%) than those with Medicaid (58.6%), no insurance (54.4%), and Medicare (52.9%) (p<.001). Patients with Medicare received more adjuvant radiation, but patients with private insurance received more adjuvant chemoradiation (p<.001). While patients with Medicare presented with greater co-morbidities and age, patients with private insurance presented with fewer co-morbidities, smaller sized tumors, and shorter time between diagnosis and treatment (p<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Since patients with private insurance received the most surgery and displayed the highest overall survival, while patients with Medicare displayed the lowest survival, future research should explore ways to alleviate this disparity in surgical resections.

BACKGROUND

The incidence of adenocarcinoma, the most common type of small intestine cancer, is increasing. Prior studies found a 5-year survival of about 25% even with surgical resection and lymph node dissection. A recent study found higher survival in insured versus uninsured patients, yet differential outcomes and treatments between private insurance and Medicare, along with Medicaid and no insurance, are unknown. This study aims to determine differential survival and treatment of patients with small intestine adenocarcinoma based on insurance status.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients diagnosed with small intestine adenocarcinoma from 2004-2019 using the histology code 8140 as assigned by the Commission on Cancer Accreditation program. Kaplan-Meier, Chi-Square, ANOVA, and Cox Proportional Hazards tests were performed. Data was analyzed using IBM SPSS version 28 and statistical significance was set at α=0.05.

RESULTS

Of the 20,933 patients included, 7,629 (32.4%) had private insurance and 13,075 (55.5%) had Medicare. Patients with private insurance had a longer median survival (28.8 months) than patients with Medicare, Medicaid, and no insurance (p<.001), while patients with Medicare had a shorter median survival (12.2 months) than other insurance statuses (p<.001). No median survival difference existed between those with Medicaid (18.9 months) and no insurance (18.0 months) (p=.882). After controlling for age, co-morbidity score, grade, tumor size, low-income, academic facility, surgery of primary site, palliative care, and days between diagnosis and treatment, private insurance was associated with an independent decrease in hazard (HR=.874; p<.001). Patients with private insurance received more surgery (67.8%) than those with Medicaid (58.6%), no insurance (54.4%), and Medicare (52.9%) (p<.001). Patients with Medicare received more adjuvant radiation, but patients with private insurance received more adjuvant chemoradiation (p<.001). While patients with Medicare presented with greater co-morbidities and age, patients with private insurance presented with fewer co-morbidities, smaller sized tumors, and shorter time between diagnosis and treatment (p<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Since patients with private insurance received the most surgery and displayed the highest overall survival, while patients with Medicare displayed the lowest survival, future research should explore ways to alleviate this disparity in surgical resections.

BACKGROUND

The incidence of adenocarcinoma, the most common type of small intestine cancer, is increasing. Prior studies found a 5-year survival of about 25% even with surgical resection and lymph node dissection. A recent study found higher survival in insured versus uninsured patients, yet differential outcomes and treatments between private insurance and Medicare, along with Medicaid and no insurance, are unknown. This study aims to determine differential survival and treatment of patients with small intestine adenocarcinoma based on insurance status.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients diagnosed with small intestine adenocarcinoma from 2004-2019 using the histology code 8140 as assigned by the Commission on Cancer Accreditation program. Kaplan-Meier, Chi-Square, ANOVA, and Cox Proportional Hazards tests were performed. Data was analyzed using IBM SPSS version 28 and statistical significance was set at α=0.05.

RESULTS

Of the 20,933 patients included, 7,629 (32.4%) had private insurance and 13,075 (55.5%) had Medicare. Patients with private insurance had a longer median survival (28.8 months) than patients with Medicare, Medicaid, and no insurance (p<.001), while patients with Medicare had a shorter median survival (12.2 months) than other insurance statuses (p<.001). No median survival difference existed between those with Medicaid (18.9 months) and no insurance (18.0 months) (p=.882). After controlling for age, co-morbidity score, grade, tumor size, low-income, academic facility, surgery of primary site, palliative care, and days between diagnosis and treatment, private insurance was associated with an independent decrease in hazard (HR=.874; p<.001). Patients with private insurance received more surgery (67.8%) than those with Medicaid (58.6%), no insurance (54.4%), and Medicare (52.9%) (p<.001). Patients with Medicare received more adjuvant radiation, but patients with private insurance received more adjuvant chemoradiation (p<.001). While patients with Medicare presented with greater co-morbidities and age, patients with private insurance presented with fewer co-morbidities, smaller sized tumors, and shorter time between diagnosis and treatment (p<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Since patients with private insurance received the most surgery and displayed the highest overall survival, while patients with Medicare displayed the lowest survival, future research should explore ways to alleviate this disparity in surgical resections.

INTRODUCTION

Gemcitabine is a part of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines as salvage therapy for relapsed/refractory B-cell lymphomas, but its role in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) remains unclear. We describe a case of relapsed CLL showing complete response while on gemcitabine for another primary malignancy, suggesting a potential curative role of gemcitabine for CLL.

CASE REPORT

A 78-year-old male with relapsed CD38+ CLL with del11q on ibrutinib with partial response, presented with gross hematuria for one week. Of note, he was diagnosed with BRCA-negative Stage Ib pancreatic adenocarcinoma within the previous year, treated with surgery and adjuvant capecitabine-gemcitabine. Physical examination was unremarkable and bloodwork showed a white cell count of 32,000 cells/ mm3 with 1.5% lymphocytes, hemoglobin 9.5 g/dL, and platelets 866,000 cells/mm3. Hematuria remained persistent despite frequent bladder irrigations but resolved within a week of stopping ibrutinib. Eight months later, his white cell count is 6,600 cells/mm3, with 16% lymphocytes, hemoglobin 10.2 g/dL, platelets 519,000/m3, and CT scans show no pathological lymphadenopathy. A recent flow cytometry done for academic purposes showed no clonal B cells.

DISCUSSION

Relapsed CLL has a poor prognosis with no curative treatment. Gemcitabine is a part of NCCN guidelines for relapse/refractory B-cell lymphomas but is not included in guidelines for CLL. A study by Jamie et al in 2001 suggested the pre-clinical effectiveness of gemcitabine for relapsed/refractory CLL and phase II trials conducted in 2005 and 2012 on combination chemotherapy including gemcitabine have shown overall CLL response rates of 50-65%. The resolution of B-cell clonality and improvement in biochemical markers after treatment with gemcitabine for an alternate primary malignancy suggested that gemcitabine played a potential curative role in our patient. Further prospective studies are needed to explore this avenue for the role of gemcitabine as a salvage as well as potentially curative therapy for relapsed CLL with variable cytogenetics and treatment histories.

CONCLUSIONS

Gemcitabine is not part of NCCN guidelines for CLL currently but it is a reasonable treatment option for relapsed/refractory CLL. Further studies are needed to explore its potential curative role for relapsed CLL, and update existing guidelines.

INTRODUCTION

Gemcitabine is a part of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines as salvage therapy for relapsed/refractory B-cell lymphomas, but its role in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) remains unclear. We describe a case of relapsed CLL showing complete response while on gemcitabine for another primary malignancy, suggesting a potential curative role of gemcitabine for CLL.

CASE REPORT

A 78-year-old male with relapsed CD38+ CLL with del11q on ibrutinib with partial response, presented with gross hematuria for one week. Of note, he was diagnosed with BRCA-negative Stage Ib pancreatic adenocarcinoma within the previous year, treated with surgery and adjuvant capecitabine-gemcitabine. Physical examination was unremarkable and bloodwork showed a white cell count of 32,000 cells/ mm3 with 1.5% lymphocytes, hemoglobin 9.5 g/dL, and platelets 866,000 cells/mm3. Hematuria remained persistent despite frequent bladder irrigations but resolved within a week of stopping ibrutinib. Eight months later, his white cell count is 6,600 cells/mm3, with 16% lymphocytes, hemoglobin 10.2 g/dL, platelets 519,000/m3, and CT scans show no pathological lymphadenopathy. A recent flow cytometry done for academic purposes showed no clonal B cells.

DISCUSSION

Relapsed CLL has a poor prognosis with no curative treatment. Gemcitabine is a part of NCCN guidelines for relapse/refractory B-cell lymphomas but is not included in guidelines for CLL. A study by Jamie et al in 2001 suggested the pre-clinical effectiveness of gemcitabine for relapsed/refractory CLL and phase II trials conducted in 2005 and 2012 on combination chemotherapy including gemcitabine have shown overall CLL response rates of 50-65%. The resolution of B-cell clonality and improvement in biochemical markers after treatment with gemcitabine for an alternate primary malignancy suggested that gemcitabine played a potential curative role in our patient. Further prospective studies are needed to explore this avenue for the role of gemcitabine as a salvage as well as potentially curative therapy for relapsed CLL with variable cytogenetics and treatment histories.

CONCLUSIONS

Gemcitabine is not part of NCCN guidelines for CLL currently but it is a reasonable treatment option for relapsed/refractory CLL. Further studies are needed to explore its potential curative role for relapsed CLL, and update existing guidelines.

INTRODUCTION

Gemcitabine is a part of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines as salvage therapy for relapsed/refractory B-cell lymphomas, but its role in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) remains unclear. We describe a case of relapsed CLL showing complete response while on gemcitabine for another primary malignancy, suggesting a potential curative role of gemcitabine for CLL.

CASE REPORT

A 78-year-old male with relapsed CD38+ CLL with del11q on ibrutinib with partial response, presented with gross hematuria for one week. Of note, he was diagnosed with BRCA-negative Stage Ib pancreatic adenocarcinoma within the previous year, treated with surgery and adjuvant capecitabine-gemcitabine. Physical examination was unremarkable and bloodwork showed a white cell count of 32,000 cells/ mm3 with 1.5% lymphocytes, hemoglobin 9.5 g/dL, and platelets 866,000 cells/mm3. Hematuria remained persistent despite frequent bladder irrigations but resolved within a week of stopping ibrutinib. Eight months later, his white cell count is 6,600 cells/mm3, with 16% lymphocytes, hemoglobin 10.2 g/dL, platelets 519,000/m3, and CT scans show no pathological lymphadenopathy. A recent flow cytometry done for academic purposes showed no clonal B cells.

DISCUSSION

Relapsed CLL has a poor prognosis with no curative treatment. Gemcitabine is a part of NCCN guidelines for relapse/refractory B-cell lymphomas but is not included in guidelines for CLL. A study by Jamie et al in 2001 suggested the pre-clinical effectiveness of gemcitabine for relapsed/refractory CLL and phase II trials conducted in 2005 and 2012 on combination chemotherapy including gemcitabine have shown overall CLL response rates of 50-65%. The resolution of B-cell clonality and improvement in biochemical markers after treatment with gemcitabine for an alternate primary malignancy suggested that gemcitabine played a potential curative role in our patient. Further prospective studies are needed to explore this avenue for the role of gemcitabine as a salvage as well as potentially curative therapy for relapsed CLL with variable cytogenetics and treatment histories.

CONCLUSIONS

Gemcitabine is not part of NCCN guidelines for CLL currently but it is a reasonable treatment option for relapsed/refractory CLL. Further studies are needed to explore its potential curative role for relapsed CLL, and update existing guidelines.

BACKGROUND

The Pharmacogenomic Testing for Veterans (PHASER) program provides preemptive pharmacogenomic testing for Veterans nationally. Program implementation at the Madison VA began in the hematology and oncology (hem/onc) clinics. In these clinics, PHASER test results are reviewed by the hem/onc clinical pharmacist practitioner (CPP) who provides recommendations regarding therapy via an electronic health record note. The purpose of this retrospective chart review was to assess the impact of the CPP on medication management informed by pharmacogenomics.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was completed for all Veterans enrolled in hem/onc services and offered PHASER testing between April 1, 2022 and November 1, 2022. The number and type of interventions recommended by the hem/onc CPP, acceptance of recommended interventions, and hem/onc CPP time spent were collected for all patients who accepted and completed PHASER testing. Interventions were categorized and descriptive statistics were used to summarize data.

RESULTS

Of the 98 patients reviewed by the CPP, 75 (77%) were prescribed a medication with potential pharmacogenomic implications. At least one actionable recommendation for medication therapy adjustment was identified for 40 (53%) of those patients based on their pharmacogenomic test results. The CPP spent an average of 12 minutes per patient review (range 5 to 30 minutes) and 100% of CPP recommendations were accepted.

CONCLUSIONS

The CPP efficiently reviewed pharmacogenomic test results and made meaningful recommendations for medication therapy adjustments. CPP recommendations were highly accepted in the hem/onc setting.

BACKGROUND

The Pharmacogenomic Testing for Veterans (PHASER) program provides preemptive pharmacogenomic testing for Veterans nationally. Program implementation at the Madison VA began in the hematology and oncology (hem/onc) clinics. In these clinics, PHASER test results are reviewed by the hem/onc clinical pharmacist practitioner (CPP) who provides recommendations regarding therapy via an electronic health record note. The purpose of this retrospective chart review was to assess the impact of the CPP on medication management informed by pharmacogenomics.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was completed for all Veterans enrolled in hem/onc services and offered PHASER testing between April 1, 2022 and November 1, 2022. The number and type of interventions recommended by the hem/onc CPP, acceptance of recommended interventions, and hem/onc CPP time spent were collected for all patients who accepted and completed PHASER testing. Interventions were categorized and descriptive statistics were used to summarize data.

RESULTS

Of the 98 patients reviewed by the CPP, 75 (77%) were prescribed a medication with potential pharmacogenomic implications. At least one actionable recommendation for medication therapy adjustment was identified for 40 (53%) of those patients based on their pharmacogenomic test results. The CPP spent an average of 12 minutes per patient review (range 5 to 30 minutes) and 100% of CPP recommendations were accepted.

CONCLUSIONS

The CPP efficiently reviewed pharmacogenomic test results and made meaningful recommendations for medication therapy adjustments. CPP recommendations were highly accepted in the hem/onc setting.

BACKGROUND

The Pharmacogenomic Testing for Veterans (PHASER) program provides preemptive pharmacogenomic testing for Veterans nationally. Program implementation at the Madison VA began in the hematology and oncology (hem/onc) clinics. In these clinics, PHASER test results are reviewed by the hem/onc clinical pharmacist practitioner (CPP) who provides recommendations regarding therapy via an electronic health record note. The purpose of this retrospective chart review was to assess the impact of the CPP on medication management informed by pharmacogenomics.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was completed for all Veterans enrolled in hem/onc services and offered PHASER testing between April 1, 2022 and November 1, 2022. The number and type of interventions recommended by the hem/onc CPP, acceptance of recommended interventions, and hem/onc CPP time spent were collected for all patients who accepted and completed PHASER testing. Interventions were categorized and descriptive statistics were used to summarize data.

RESULTS

Of the 98 patients reviewed by the CPP, 75 (77%) were prescribed a medication with potential pharmacogenomic implications. At least one actionable recommendation for medication therapy adjustment was identified for 40 (53%) of those patients based on their pharmacogenomic test results. The CPP spent an average of 12 minutes per patient review (range 5 to 30 minutes) and 100% of CPP recommendations were accepted.

CONCLUSIONS

The CPP efficiently reviewed pharmacogenomic test results and made meaningful recommendations for medication therapy adjustments. CPP recommendations were highly accepted in the hem/onc setting.

BACKGROUND

The Breast and Gynecologic System of Excellence (BGSOE) program has developed a workflow support tool using health information technology to assist clinicians, coordinators and stakeholders in identifying, tracking and supporting Veterans with breast and gynecological cancers. This tool was designed and implemented through a novel process that involved clarifying program aims, defining workflows in process delivery diagrams, and identifying data, analytic products, and user needs. To determine the optimal tool for the program, a comparative usability evaluation was conducted, comparing the new workflow support tool with a previous tool that shared identical aims but utilized a different approach.

METHODS

Usability evaluation employed the System Usability Scale (SUS) and measured acceptance using modified items from a validated instrument used in a national survey of electronic health records. Task efficiency was evaluated based on time taken and the number of clicks required to complete tasks.

RESULTS

Eight healthcare professionals with experience in the BGSOE program or similar programs in the VA participated in the usability evaluation. This group comprised physicians (38%), clinical pharmacist (25%), health care coordinators (25%), and registered nurse (12%). The workflow support tool achieved an impressive SUS score of 89.06, with acceptance scores of 93% (positive statements) and 6% (negative statements), outperforming the standard tool, which scored score of 57.5 on the SUS and had acceptance scores of 53% (positive statements) and 50% (negative statements). In the comparative ranking, 100% of the users preferred the workflow support tool, citing its userfriendliness, intuitiveness, and ease of use. On average, users completed all tasks using the workflow support tool in 8 minutes with 31 clicks, while the standard tool required 18 minutes and 124 clicks.

CONCLUSIONS

The adoption of a workflow support tool in the design of health information technology interventions leads to improved usability, efficiency, and adoption. Based on the positive results from the usability evaluation, the BGSOE program has chosen to adopt the workflow support tool as its preferred health information technology solution.

BACKGROUND

The Breast and Gynecologic System of Excellence (BGSOE) program has developed a workflow support tool using health information technology to assist clinicians, coordinators and stakeholders in identifying, tracking and supporting Veterans with breast and gynecological cancers. This tool was designed and implemented through a novel process that involved clarifying program aims, defining workflows in process delivery diagrams, and identifying data, analytic products, and user needs. To determine the optimal tool for the program, a comparative usability evaluation was conducted, comparing the new workflow support tool with a previous tool that shared identical aims but utilized a different approach.

METHODS

Usability evaluation employed the System Usability Scale (SUS) and measured acceptance using modified items from a validated instrument used in a national survey of electronic health records. Task efficiency was evaluated based on time taken and the number of clicks required to complete tasks.

RESULTS

Eight healthcare professionals with experience in the BGSOE program or similar programs in the VA participated in the usability evaluation. This group comprised physicians (38%), clinical pharmacist (25%), health care coordinators (25%), and registered nurse (12%). The workflow support tool achieved an impressive SUS score of 89.06, with acceptance scores of 93% (positive statements) and 6% (negative statements), outperforming the standard tool, which scored score of 57.5 on the SUS and had acceptance scores of 53% (positive statements) and 50% (negative statements). In the comparative ranking, 100% of the users preferred the workflow support tool, citing its userfriendliness, intuitiveness, and ease of use. On average, users completed all tasks using the workflow support tool in 8 minutes with 31 clicks, while the standard tool required 18 minutes and 124 clicks.

CONCLUSIONS

The adoption of a workflow support tool in the design of health information technology interventions leads to improved usability, efficiency, and adoption. Based on the positive results from the usability evaluation, the BGSOE program has chosen to adopt the workflow support tool as its preferred health information technology solution.

BACKGROUND

The Breast and Gynecologic System of Excellence (BGSOE) program has developed a workflow support tool using health information technology to assist clinicians, coordinators and stakeholders in identifying, tracking and supporting Veterans with breast and gynecological cancers. This tool was designed and implemented through a novel process that involved clarifying program aims, defining workflows in process delivery diagrams, and identifying data, analytic products, and user needs. To determine the optimal tool for the program, a comparative usability evaluation was conducted, comparing the new workflow support tool with a previous tool that shared identical aims but utilized a different approach.

METHODS

Usability evaluation employed the System Usability Scale (SUS) and measured acceptance using modified items from a validated instrument used in a national survey of electronic health records. Task efficiency was evaluated based on time taken and the number of clicks required to complete tasks.

RESULTS

Eight healthcare professionals with experience in the BGSOE program or similar programs in the VA participated in the usability evaluation. This group comprised physicians (38%), clinical pharmacist (25%), health care coordinators (25%), and registered nurse (12%). The workflow support tool achieved an impressive SUS score of 89.06, with acceptance scores of 93% (positive statements) and 6% (negative statements), outperforming the standard tool, which scored score of 57.5 on the SUS and had acceptance scores of 53% (positive statements) and 50% (negative statements). In the comparative ranking, 100% of the users preferred the workflow support tool, citing its userfriendliness, intuitiveness, and ease of use. On average, users completed all tasks using the workflow support tool in 8 minutes with 31 clicks, while the standard tool required 18 minutes and 124 clicks.

CONCLUSIONS

The adoption of a workflow support tool in the design of health information technology interventions leads to improved usability, efficiency, and adoption. Based on the positive results from the usability evaluation, the BGSOE program has chosen to adopt the workflow support tool as its preferred health information technology solution.