Original Research

To the Editor:

The popularity of the social media platform TikTok, which is known for its short-form videos, has surged in recent years. Viral videos demonstrating skin care routines reach millions of viewers,¹ showcasing specific products, detailing beauty regimens, and setting fads that many users eagerly follow. These trends often influence consumer behavior—in 2023, viral videos using the tag #TikTokMadeMeBuy lead to a 14% growth in the sale of skin care products.² However, they also encourage purchasing decisions that may escalate environmental waste through plastic packaging and single-use products. In this study, we analyzed videos on TikTok to assess the environmental impact of trending skin care routines. By examining the types of products promoted, their packaging, and the frequency with which they appear in viral content, we aimed to investigate how these trends, which may be imitated by users, impact the environment.

A search of TikTok videos using #skincareroutine was conducted on June 21, 2024. Sponsored content, non–English language videos, videos without demonstrated skin care routines, and videos showing makeup routines were excluded from our analysis. Data collected from each video included username, date posted, number of likes, total number of skin care products used, number of single-use skin care products used, average amount of product used, number of skin care applicators used, and number of single-use applicators used. Single-use items, defined as those intended for one-time use and subsequent disposal, were identified visually by packaging, manufacturer intent, and common consumer usage patterns. The amount of product used per application was graded on a scale of 1 to 3 (1=pea-sized amount or less; 2=single full pump/spray; 3=multiple pumps/sprays). Videos were categorized as personal (ie, skin care routine walk-throughs by the creator) or autonomous sensory meridian response (ASMR)(focused on product sounds and aesthetics).³ A Mann-Whitney U test was utilized to statistically compare the 2 groups. Statistical analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel (α=0.05). 

A total of 50 videos met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The average number of likes per video was 499,696.15, with skin care routines featuring an average of 6.4 unique products (Table). There was a weak positive correlation (r=0.1809) between the number of skin care products used and the number of likes. A total of 320 products were used across the videos, 23 of which were single-use (7.2%).On average, single-use skin care items were used 0.46 times per routine, comprising a mean 7.99% of total products per video. The average score for the amount of product used per application was 2.18. There was no difference in personal vs ASMR videos with regard to the total number of skin care products used or the average amount of product used per application (P>.05). Thirty-three (70.2%) of the 47 applicators used across all videos were single-use. An average of 0.94 applicators per routine were utilized, with a mean 68.83% being single-use applicators. Common single-use products were toner wipes and eye patches, and single-use applicators included cotton pads and plastic spatulas. 

Our findings indicated a prevalence of multiple products and large amount of product used in trending skin care routines, suggesting a shift toward multistep skin care. This implies a high rate of product consumption that may accelerate the carbon footprint associated with skin care products,³ which could contribute to climate change and environmental degradation. Consumers also may feel compelled to purchase and discard numerous partially used products in order to keep up with the latest trends, exacerbating the environmental impact. Furthermore, the utilization of single-use products and applicators contributes to increased plastic waste, pollution, and resource depletion. Single-use items often are difficult to recycle due to their mixed materials and small size,^4,5 and therefore they can accumulate in landfills and oceans. This impact can be mitigated by switching to reusable applicators, refillable packaging, and biodegradable materials. 

The substantial average number of likes per video indicates high engagement with skin care content among TikTok users. The continued popularity of complex multi­step skin care routines, despite a weak correlation between the number of skin care products used and the number of likes per video, likely stems from factors such as aesthetic appeal, ASMR effects, and creators’ established followings, which may drive user engagement to contribute to unsustainable consumption patterns. Factors such as presentation style, aesthetics, or creators’ pre-existing online following may have a major impact on how well a video performs on TikTok. The similarity between personal and ASMR videos, particularly in the number of products used and the amount applied, suggests that both formats employ common approaches to meet audience expectations and align with promotional trends, relying more on sensory and aesthetic strategies than substantive differences in skin care routines.

Our use of only one tag in our search as well as the subjective quantity scale limits the generalizability of these findings to broader TikTok skin care content.

Overall, our study underscores the role of brands and social media influencers in skin care education and promotion of sustainable practices. The extensive number of products used and generous application of each product in skin care routines demonstrated in TikTok videos may mislead viewers into believing that using more product improves outcomes, when often, less is more. We recommend that dermatologists counsel patients about informed skin care regimens that prioritize individual needs over social media fads.

To the Editor:

The popularity of the social media platform TikTok, which is known for its short-form videos, has surged in recent years. Viral videos demonstrating skin care routines reach millions of viewers,¹ showcasing specific products, detailing beauty regimens, and setting fads that many users eagerly follow. These trends often influence consumer behavior—in 2023, viral videos using the tag #TikTokMadeMeBuy lead to a 14% growth in the sale of skin care products.² However, they also encourage purchasing decisions that may escalate environmental waste through plastic packaging and single-use products. In this study, we analyzed videos on TikTok to assess the environmental impact of trending skin care routines. By examining the types of products promoted, their packaging, and the frequency with which they appear in viral content, we aimed to investigate how these trends, which may be imitated by users, impact the environment.

A search of TikTok videos using #skincareroutine was conducted on June 21, 2024. Sponsored content, non–English language videos, videos without demonstrated skin care routines, and videos showing makeup routines were excluded from our analysis. Data collected from each video included username, date posted, number of likes, total number of skin care products used, number of single-use skin care products used, average amount of product used, number of skin care applicators used, and number of single-use applicators used. Single-use items, defined as those intended for one-time use and subsequent disposal, were identified visually by packaging, manufacturer intent, and common consumer usage patterns. The amount of product used per application was graded on a scale of 1 to 3 (1=pea-sized amount or less; 2=single full pump/spray; 3=multiple pumps/sprays). Videos were categorized as personal (ie, skin care routine walk-throughs by the creator) or autonomous sensory meridian response (ASMR)(focused on product sounds and aesthetics).³ A Mann-Whitney U test was utilized to statistically compare the 2 groups. Statistical analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel (α=0.05). 

A total of 50 videos met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The average number of likes per video was 499,696.15, with skin care routines featuring an average of 6.4 unique products (Table). There was a weak positive correlation (r=0.1809) between the number of skin care products used and the number of likes. A total of 320 products were used across the videos, 23 of which were single-use (7.2%).On average, single-use skin care items were used 0.46 times per routine, comprising a mean 7.99% of total products per video. The average score for the amount of product used per application was 2.18. There was no difference in personal vs ASMR videos with regard to the total number of skin care products used or the average amount of product used per application (P>.05). Thirty-three (70.2%) of the 47 applicators used across all videos were single-use. An average of 0.94 applicators per routine were utilized, with a mean 68.83% being single-use applicators. Common single-use products were toner wipes and eye patches, and single-use applicators included cotton pads and plastic spatulas. 

Our findings indicated a prevalence of multiple products and large amount of product used in trending skin care routines, suggesting a shift toward multistep skin care. This implies a high rate of product consumption that may accelerate the carbon footprint associated with skin care products,³ which could contribute to climate change and environmental degradation. Consumers also may feel compelled to purchase and discard numerous partially used products in order to keep up with the latest trends, exacerbating the environmental impact. Furthermore, the utilization of single-use products and applicators contributes to increased plastic waste, pollution, and resource depletion. Single-use items often are difficult to recycle due to their mixed materials and small size,^4,5 and therefore they can accumulate in landfills and oceans. This impact can be mitigated by switching to reusable applicators, refillable packaging, and biodegradable materials. 

The substantial average number of likes per video indicates high engagement with skin care content among TikTok users. The continued popularity of complex multi­step skin care routines, despite a weak correlation between the number of skin care products used and the number of likes per video, likely stems from factors such as aesthetic appeal, ASMR effects, and creators’ established followings, which may drive user engagement to contribute to unsustainable consumption patterns. Factors such as presentation style, aesthetics, or creators’ pre-existing online following may have a major impact on how well a video performs on TikTok. The similarity between personal and ASMR videos, particularly in the number of products used and the amount applied, suggests that both formats employ common approaches to meet audience expectations and align with promotional trends, relying more on sensory and aesthetic strategies than substantive differences in skin care routines.

Our use of only one tag in our search as well as the subjective quantity scale limits the generalizability of these findings to broader TikTok skin care content.

Overall, our study underscores the role of brands and social media influencers in skin care education and promotion of sustainable practices. The extensive number of products used and generous application of each product in skin care routines demonstrated in TikTok videos may mislead viewers into believing that using more product improves outcomes, when often, less is more. We recommend that dermatologists counsel patients about informed skin care regimens that prioritize individual needs over social media fads.

To the Editor:

The popularity of the social media platform TikTok, which is known for its short-form videos, has surged in recent years. Viral videos demonstrating skin care routines reach millions of viewers,¹ showcasing specific products, detailing beauty regimens, and setting fads that many users eagerly follow. These trends often influence consumer behavior—in 2023, viral videos using the tag #TikTokMadeMeBuy lead to a 14% growth in the sale of skin care products.² However, they also encourage purchasing decisions that may escalate environmental waste through plastic packaging and single-use products. In this study, we analyzed videos on TikTok to assess the environmental impact of trending skin care routines. By examining the types of products promoted, their packaging, and the frequency with which they appear in viral content, we aimed to investigate how these trends, which may be imitated by users, impact the environment.

A search of TikTok videos using #skincareroutine was conducted on June 21, 2024. Sponsored content, non–English language videos, videos without demonstrated skin care routines, and videos showing makeup routines were excluded from our analysis. Data collected from each video included username, date posted, number of likes, total number of skin care products used, number of single-use skin care products used, average amount of product used, number of skin care applicators used, and number of single-use applicators used. Single-use items, defined as those intended for one-time use and subsequent disposal, were identified visually by packaging, manufacturer intent, and common consumer usage patterns. The amount of product used per application was graded on a scale of 1 to 3 (1=pea-sized amount or less; 2=single full pump/spray; 3=multiple pumps/sprays). Videos were categorized as personal (ie, skin care routine walk-throughs by the creator) or autonomous sensory meridian response (ASMR)(focused on product sounds and aesthetics).³ A Mann-Whitney U test was utilized to statistically compare the 2 groups. Statistical analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel (α=0.05). 

A total of 50 videos met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The average number of likes per video was 499,696.15, with skin care routines featuring an average of 6.4 unique products (Table). There was a weak positive correlation (r=0.1809) between the number of skin care products used and the number of likes. A total of 320 products were used across the videos, 23 of which were single-use (7.2%).On average, single-use skin care items were used 0.46 times per routine, comprising a mean 7.99% of total products per video. The average score for the amount of product used per application was 2.18. There was no difference in personal vs ASMR videos with regard to the total number of skin care products used or the average amount of product used per application (P>.05). Thirty-three (70.2%) of the 47 applicators used across all videos were single-use. An average of 0.94 applicators per routine were utilized, with a mean 68.83% being single-use applicators. Common single-use products were toner wipes and eye patches, and single-use applicators included cotton pads and plastic spatulas. 

Our findings indicated a prevalence of multiple products and large amount of product used in trending skin care routines, suggesting a shift toward multistep skin care. This implies a high rate of product consumption that may accelerate the carbon footprint associated with skin care products,³ which could contribute to climate change and environmental degradation. Consumers also may feel compelled to purchase and discard numerous partially used products in order to keep up with the latest trends, exacerbating the environmental impact. Furthermore, the utilization of single-use products and applicators contributes to increased plastic waste, pollution, and resource depletion. Single-use items often are difficult to recycle due to their mixed materials and small size,^4,5 and therefore they can accumulate in landfills and oceans. This impact can be mitigated by switching to reusable applicators, refillable packaging, and biodegradable materials. 

The substantial average number of likes per video indicates high engagement with skin care content among TikTok users. The continued popularity of complex multi­step skin care routines, despite a weak correlation between the number of skin care products used and the number of likes per video, likely stems from factors such as aesthetic appeal, ASMR effects, and creators’ established followings, which may drive user engagement to contribute to unsustainable consumption patterns. Factors such as presentation style, aesthetics, or creators’ pre-existing online following may have a major impact on how well a video performs on TikTok. The similarity between personal and ASMR videos, particularly in the number of products used and the amount applied, suggests that both formats employ common approaches to meet audience expectations and align with promotional trends, relying more on sensory and aesthetic strategies than substantive differences in skin care routines.

Our use of only one tag in our search as well as the subjective quantity scale limits the generalizability of these findings to broader TikTok skin care content.

Overall, our study underscores the role of brands and social media influencers in skin care education and promotion of sustainable practices. The extensive number of products used and generous application of each product in skin care routines demonstrated in TikTok videos may mislead viewers into believing that using more product improves outcomes, when often, less is more. We recommend that dermatologists counsel patients about informed skin care regimens that prioritize individual needs over social media fads.

Purpose

Skin adnexal tumors (SAT) include a group of benign and malignant appendageal tumors that arise from hair follicles, sebaceous glands, or sweat glands. They typically appear as small, painless bumps or nodules on the skin, and are more common in men compared to women. The 5-year overall SAT survival rate ranges from 74-90%. To better understand the differences in survival outcomes based on subtypes of SAT, the National Cancer Database (NCDB) was analyzed.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study of 11,627 patients with histologically confirmed SAT between 2004 and 2021 was conducted across 1,500 Commission on Cancer facilities located in the US and Puerto Rico. Demographic factors such as sex, age, and race were analyzed using Pearson Chi-squared tests, and survival outcomes were analyzed by Kaplan- Meier survival analysis. P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Most patients with SAT were male (57.3%). The average age at diagnosis was 65.9 (SD=14.4, range 0-90). Of the patient sample, 87.2% were White, 7.6% Black, 2.5% Asian, and 2.7% other. Several subtypes disproportionately affected Black individuals, including apocrine adenocarcinoma (15.7%) and hidradenocarcinoma (13.6%). The estimated 5-year survival of SAT was 74.9% with an overall survival of 135.8 months (SE=1.1). Sebaceous carcinoma (which accounts for 41.8% of all cases) had the lowest average survival time of 119.6 months (SE=1.8), while digital papillary adenocarcinoma had the highest survival at around 183.5 months (SE=4.6).

Conclusions

This study supports a higher frequency of SAT among men. While White patients were more likely to get SAT overall, including the most common sebaceous carcinoma, Black race were associated with higher frequency of rarer subtypes. The average age of diagnosis of SAT mimics other non-melanoma skin cancers, but has a lower overall survival rate. Future studies should consider other risk factors that may be impacting the differences in survival outcomes to guide treatment and address health disparities among the various subtypes.

Purpose

Skin adnexal tumors (SAT) include a group of benign and malignant appendageal tumors that arise from hair follicles, sebaceous glands, or sweat glands. They typically appear as small, painless bumps or nodules on the skin, and are more common in men compared to women. The 5-year overall SAT survival rate ranges from 74-90%. To better understand the differences in survival outcomes based on subtypes of SAT, the National Cancer Database (NCDB) was analyzed.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study of 11,627 patients with histologically confirmed SAT between 2004 and 2021 was conducted across 1,500 Commission on Cancer facilities located in the US and Puerto Rico. Demographic factors such as sex, age, and race were analyzed using Pearson Chi-squared tests, and survival outcomes were analyzed by Kaplan- Meier survival analysis. P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Most patients with SAT were male (57.3%). The average age at diagnosis was 65.9 (SD=14.4, range 0-90). Of the patient sample, 87.2% were White, 7.6% Black, 2.5% Asian, and 2.7% other. Several subtypes disproportionately affected Black individuals, including apocrine adenocarcinoma (15.7%) and hidradenocarcinoma (13.6%). The estimated 5-year survival of SAT was 74.9% with an overall survival of 135.8 months (SE=1.1). Sebaceous carcinoma (which accounts for 41.8% of all cases) had the lowest average survival time of 119.6 months (SE=1.8), while digital papillary adenocarcinoma had the highest survival at around 183.5 months (SE=4.6).

Conclusions

This study supports a higher frequency of SAT among men. While White patients were more likely to get SAT overall, including the most common sebaceous carcinoma, Black race were associated with higher frequency of rarer subtypes. The average age of diagnosis of SAT mimics other non-melanoma skin cancers, but has a lower overall survival rate. Future studies should consider other risk factors that may be impacting the differences in survival outcomes to guide treatment and address health disparities among the various subtypes.

Purpose

Skin adnexal tumors (SAT) include a group of benign and malignant appendageal tumors that arise from hair follicles, sebaceous glands, or sweat glands. They typically appear as small, painless bumps or nodules on the skin, and are more common in men compared to women. The 5-year overall SAT survival rate ranges from 74-90%. To better understand the differences in survival outcomes based on subtypes of SAT, the National Cancer Database (NCDB) was analyzed.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study of 11,627 patients with histologically confirmed SAT between 2004 and 2021 was conducted across 1,500 Commission on Cancer facilities located in the US and Puerto Rico. Demographic factors such as sex, age, and race were analyzed using Pearson Chi-squared tests, and survival outcomes were analyzed by Kaplan- Meier survival analysis. P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Most patients with SAT were male (57.3%). The average age at diagnosis was 65.9 (SD=14.4, range 0-90). Of the patient sample, 87.2% were White, 7.6% Black, 2.5% Asian, and 2.7% other. Several subtypes disproportionately affected Black individuals, including apocrine adenocarcinoma (15.7%) and hidradenocarcinoma (13.6%). The estimated 5-year survival of SAT was 74.9% with an overall survival of 135.8 months (SE=1.1). Sebaceous carcinoma (which accounts for 41.8% of all cases) had the lowest average survival time of 119.6 months (SE=1.8), while digital papillary adenocarcinoma had the highest survival at around 183.5 months (SE=4.6).

Conclusions

This study supports a higher frequency of SAT among men. While White patients were more likely to get SAT overall, including the most common sebaceous carcinoma, Black race were associated with higher frequency of rarer subtypes. The average age of diagnosis of SAT mimics other non-melanoma skin cancers, but has a lower overall survival rate. Future studies should consider other risk factors that may be impacting the differences in survival outcomes to guide treatment and address health disparities among the various subtypes.

Background

Studies show that early referral to Specialty Palliative Care (SPC) can improve patient- reported outcomes among Veterans with cancer; quality metrics include referral within 8 weeks of an advanced cancer diagnosis. In this study, we explored timeliness of specialty referrals and compared various factors.

Methods

We identified our cohort using Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW). Eligibility criteria included active or history of cancer—using a peer-reviewed, in-house list of ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes—between 2013-2023. We stratified our cohort of Veterans using factors including cancer stage, rurality, and care assessment needs (CAN) scores. We performed survival analyses to look at time to SPC from initial diagnosis and peak CAN score. Predictors of utilization were evaluated using multinomial regression and Cox proportional hazards models through R.

Results

Using CDW’s oncology domain, we identified 475,775 Veterans. 28% received SPC. Most received it near the end of their life as evidenced by the mortality rates (79.5%) in the early period following SPC consultation. Median time to SPC was 515 days. There was a significant difference in utilization rates between urban and rural Veterans (Wilcoxon W-statistic = 2.31E+10, p < 0.001). Peak CAN scores ranged from 0 to 0.81, median peak of 0.057 and interquartile range of 0.1. Multinomial regression model indicated statistically significant associations of advanced cancer (Stages 3 and 4) with timing of SPC. Stage 4 cancer showed the strongest association with receipt of palliative care within 60 days of initial diagnosis (OR 4.8, 95% CI: 4.69-4.93, p < 0.001), suggesting higher stage disease increases the likelihood of palliative care referral and accelerates the timing of these referrals.

Conclusions

We found Veterans received SPC from a broad range of peak CAN scores (0 to 0.81), suggesting that absolute CAN scores may not be clinically actionable indicators but perhaps indicative of changes in condition warranting referral. Stage IV cancer at diagnosis was associated with early SPC. The significant differences in utilization rates between urban and rural patients highlight potential access barriers that should be addressed.

Background

Studies show that early referral to Specialty Palliative Care (SPC) can improve patient- reported outcomes among Veterans with cancer; quality metrics include referral within 8 weeks of an advanced cancer diagnosis. In this study, we explored timeliness of specialty referrals and compared various factors.

Methods

We identified our cohort using Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW). Eligibility criteria included active or history of cancer—using a peer-reviewed, in-house list of ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes—between 2013-2023. We stratified our cohort of Veterans using factors including cancer stage, rurality, and care assessment needs (CAN) scores. We performed survival analyses to look at time to SPC from initial diagnosis and peak CAN score. Predictors of utilization were evaluated using multinomial regression and Cox proportional hazards models through R.

Results

Using CDW’s oncology domain, we identified 475,775 Veterans. 28% received SPC. Most received it near the end of their life as evidenced by the mortality rates (79.5%) in the early period following SPC consultation. Median time to SPC was 515 days. There was a significant difference in utilization rates between urban and rural Veterans (Wilcoxon W-statistic = 2.31E+10, p < 0.001). Peak CAN scores ranged from 0 to 0.81, median peak of 0.057 and interquartile range of 0.1. Multinomial regression model indicated statistically significant associations of advanced cancer (Stages 3 and 4) with timing of SPC. Stage 4 cancer showed the strongest association with receipt of palliative care within 60 days of initial diagnosis (OR 4.8, 95% CI: 4.69-4.93, p < 0.001), suggesting higher stage disease increases the likelihood of palliative care referral and accelerates the timing of these referrals.

Conclusions

We found Veterans received SPC from a broad range of peak CAN scores (0 to 0.81), suggesting that absolute CAN scores may not be clinically actionable indicators but perhaps indicative of changes in condition warranting referral. Stage IV cancer at diagnosis was associated with early SPC. The significant differences in utilization rates between urban and rural patients highlight potential access barriers that should be addressed.

Background

Studies show that early referral to Specialty Palliative Care (SPC) can improve patient- reported outcomes among Veterans with cancer; quality metrics include referral within 8 weeks of an advanced cancer diagnosis. In this study, we explored timeliness of specialty referrals and compared various factors.

Methods

We identified our cohort using Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW). Eligibility criteria included active or history of cancer—using a peer-reviewed, in-house list of ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes—between 2013-2023. We stratified our cohort of Veterans using factors including cancer stage, rurality, and care assessment needs (CAN) scores. We performed survival analyses to look at time to SPC from initial diagnosis and peak CAN score. Predictors of utilization were evaluated using multinomial regression and Cox proportional hazards models through R.

Results

Using CDW’s oncology domain, we identified 475,775 Veterans. 28% received SPC. Most received it near the end of their life as evidenced by the mortality rates (79.5%) in the early period following SPC consultation. Median time to SPC was 515 days. There was a significant difference in utilization rates between urban and rural Veterans (Wilcoxon W-statistic = 2.31E+10, p < 0.001). Peak CAN scores ranged from 0 to 0.81, median peak of 0.057 and interquartile range of 0.1. Multinomial regression model indicated statistically significant associations of advanced cancer (Stages 3 and 4) with timing of SPC. Stage 4 cancer showed the strongest association with receipt of palliative care within 60 days of initial diagnosis (OR 4.8, 95% CI: 4.69-4.93, p < 0.001), suggesting higher stage disease increases the likelihood of palliative care referral and accelerates the timing of these referrals.

Conclusions

We found Veterans received SPC from a broad range of peak CAN scores (0 to 0.81), suggesting that absolute CAN scores may not be clinically actionable indicators but perhaps indicative of changes in condition warranting referral. Stage IV cancer at diagnosis was associated with early SPC. The significant differences in utilization rates between urban and rural patients highlight potential access barriers that should be addressed.

Background

To close the food insecurity gap by providing food assistance and increasing opportunities for screening in Veterans receiving cancer treatment at a VA outpatient cancer clinic. Food Insecurity is associated with chronic disease such as cancer given insufficient access to nutritious foods leading to nutritional deficiencies and worsening health outcomes. The rates of food insecurity among Veterans revealed 28% of female veterans and 16% overall in male Veterans were faced with limited or uncertain access to adequate food.

Methods

A pivotal distress screening occurs at time of education consult or cycle 1 day 1 of antineoplastic therapy. A positive screening for any practical concern generates a discussion about food insecurity. A positive distress screen triggers an oncology social work referral to complete a systematic screening assessing circumstances and offering resources for needs (ACORN).

Results

Root cause analysis uncovered 24% of Veterans with cancer screened positive for food insecurity in the 9E oncology outpatient clinic. Post-implementation of robust screenings and conversation initiatives identified 36 unique Veterans who received 251 meals from July to December 2024.

Sustainability/Scalability

Prospective screening of Veterans at the time of a cancer diagnosis and ongoing screening during cancer treatment is the first step toward uncovering food insecurity and addressing this social determinate of health. A standard operating procedure following VA guidance and distress management guidelines should be updated as required. Oversight of the cancer leadership team annually evaluates the distress process, and the findings are reported to the cancer committee.

Conclusions

Uncovering food insecurity in Veterans at time of diagnosis and during cancer treatment is critical to optimize treatment outcomes. A systematic and robust screening standard operating procedure is key to implement. Veterans are a unique population with a spectrum of socioeconomic needs. Case management conferences or weekly huddles to discuss the Veteran’s needs will ensure food insecurity is addressed. Collection and analysis of screening data will highlight a program’s food insecurity need and supports community partnerships to available food resources and the opportunity to create a cancer outpatient clinic food hub for Veterans receiving cancer treatment.

Background

To close the food insecurity gap by providing food assistance and increasing opportunities for screening in Veterans receiving cancer treatment at a VA outpatient cancer clinic. Food Insecurity is associated with chronic disease such as cancer given insufficient access to nutritious foods leading to nutritional deficiencies and worsening health outcomes. The rates of food insecurity among Veterans revealed 28% of female veterans and 16% overall in male Veterans were faced with limited or uncertain access to adequate food.

Methods

A pivotal distress screening occurs at time of education consult or cycle 1 day 1 of antineoplastic therapy. A positive screening for any practical concern generates a discussion about food insecurity. A positive distress screen triggers an oncology social work referral to complete a systematic screening assessing circumstances and offering resources for needs (ACORN).

Results

Root cause analysis uncovered 24% of Veterans with cancer screened positive for food insecurity in the 9E oncology outpatient clinic. Post-implementation of robust screenings and conversation initiatives identified 36 unique Veterans who received 251 meals from July to December 2024.

Sustainability/Scalability

Prospective screening of Veterans at the time of a cancer diagnosis and ongoing screening during cancer treatment is the first step toward uncovering food insecurity and addressing this social determinate of health. A standard operating procedure following VA guidance and distress management guidelines should be updated as required. Oversight of the cancer leadership team annually evaluates the distress process, and the findings are reported to the cancer committee.

Conclusions

Uncovering food insecurity in Veterans at time of diagnosis and during cancer treatment is critical to optimize treatment outcomes. A systematic and robust screening standard operating procedure is key to implement. Veterans are a unique population with a spectrum of socioeconomic needs. Case management conferences or weekly huddles to discuss the Veteran’s needs will ensure food insecurity is addressed. Collection and analysis of screening data will highlight a program’s food insecurity need and supports community partnerships to available food resources and the opportunity to create a cancer outpatient clinic food hub for Veterans receiving cancer treatment.

Background

To close the food insecurity gap by providing food assistance and increasing opportunities for screening in Veterans receiving cancer treatment at a VA outpatient cancer clinic. Food Insecurity is associated with chronic disease such as cancer given insufficient access to nutritious foods leading to nutritional deficiencies and worsening health outcomes. The rates of food insecurity among Veterans revealed 28% of female veterans and 16% overall in male Veterans were faced with limited or uncertain access to adequate food.

Methods

A pivotal distress screening occurs at time of education consult or cycle 1 day 1 of antineoplastic therapy. A positive screening for any practical concern generates a discussion about food insecurity. A positive distress screen triggers an oncology social work referral to complete a systematic screening assessing circumstances and offering resources for needs (ACORN).

Results

Root cause analysis uncovered 24% of Veterans with cancer screened positive for food insecurity in the 9E oncology outpatient clinic. Post-implementation of robust screenings and conversation initiatives identified 36 unique Veterans who received 251 meals from July to December 2024.

Sustainability/Scalability

Prospective screening of Veterans at the time of a cancer diagnosis and ongoing screening during cancer treatment is the first step toward uncovering food insecurity and addressing this social determinate of health. A standard operating procedure following VA guidance and distress management guidelines should be updated as required. Oversight of the cancer leadership team annually evaluates the distress process, and the findings are reported to the cancer committee.

Conclusions

Uncovering food insecurity in Veterans at time of diagnosis and during cancer treatment is critical to optimize treatment outcomes. A systematic and robust screening standard operating procedure is key to implement. Veterans are a unique population with a spectrum of socioeconomic needs. Case management conferences or weekly huddles to discuss the Veteran’s needs will ensure food insecurity is addressed. Collection and analysis of screening data will highlight a program’s food insecurity need and supports community partnerships to available food resources and the opportunity to create a cancer outpatient clinic food hub for Veterans receiving cancer treatment.

Background

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous malignancy at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and every year approximately 15,000 Veterans are diagnosed and treated. Many advanced prostate cancer cases harbor genetic mutations that significantly impact prognosis, treatment decisions, and familial screening. In February 2021, the Prostate Cancer Molecular Testing Pathway (PCMTP) flow map was developed to increase appropriate genetic testing.

Methods

VHA initiated the Oncology Clinical Pathways (OCP) program to standardize cancer care for Veterans. The PCMTP was developed by a multidisciplinary team that created interactive templates within the Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS), to facilitate identification of eligible Veterans for germline and comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP). Clinical decision-making for these tests is documented as Health Factors (HF), in CPRS, allowing for assessment of pathway adherence and overall uptake.

Results

The PCMTP has achieved success, as there is over 90% compliance to molecular testing among participating Veterans which exceeds the pathway benchmark of 80%. PCMTP has been utilized at 88 VA sites, by over 700 distinct VA providers, with over 7,000 Veterans participating. This implementation has yielded over 19,200 Health Factors within CPRS.

Conclusions

The PCMTP has markedly improved the documentation and application of germline and CGP testing among Veterans diagnosed with prostate cancer. By facilitating genomic testing in appropriate patients, the PCMTP aims to enhance patient outcomes and optimize the quality of care. Prior to PCMTP establishment, assessing the prevalence of germline and CGP testing in eligible Veterans posed significant challenges. Future work will concentrate on increasing PCMTP utilization, evaluating downstream outcomes from genomic testing, including the identification of pathogenic variants, utilization of genetic counseling services, referrals to clinical trials, and the genomic impact on treatment strategies.

Background

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous malignancy at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and every year approximately 15,000 Veterans are diagnosed and treated. Many advanced prostate cancer cases harbor genetic mutations that significantly impact prognosis, treatment decisions, and familial screening. In February 2021, the Prostate Cancer Molecular Testing Pathway (PCMTP) flow map was developed to increase appropriate genetic testing.

Methods

VHA initiated the Oncology Clinical Pathways (OCP) program to standardize cancer care for Veterans. The PCMTP was developed by a multidisciplinary team that created interactive templates within the Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS), to facilitate identification of eligible Veterans for germline and comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP). Clinical decision-making for these tests is documented as Health Factors (HF), in CPRS, allowing for assessment of pathway adherence and overall uptake.

Results

The PCMTP has achieved success, as there is over 90% compliance to molecular testing among participating Veterans which exceeds the pathway benchmark of 80%. PCMTP has been utilized at 88 VA sites, by over 700 distinct VA providers, with over 7,000 Veterans participating. This implementation has yielded over 19,200 Health Factors within CPRS.

Conclusions

The PCMTP has markedly improved the documentation and application of germline and CGP testing among Veterans diagnosed with prostate cancer. By facilitating genomic testing in appropriate patients, the PCMTP aims to enhance patient outcomes and optimize the quality of care. Prior to PCMTP establishment, assessing the prevalence of germline and CGP testing in eligible Veterans posed significant challenges. Future work will concentrate on increasing PCMTP utilization, evaluating downstream outcomes from genomic testing, including the identification of pathogenic variants, utilization of genetic counseling services, referrals to clinical trials, and the genomic impact on treatment strategies.

Background

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous malignancy at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and every year approximately 15,000 Veterans are diagnosed and treated. Many advanced prostate cancer cases harbor genetic mutations that significantly impact prognosis, treatment decisions, and familial screening. In February 2021, the Prostate Cancer Molecular Testing Pathway (PCMTP) flow map was developed to increase appropriate genetic testing.

Methods

VHA initiated the Oncology Clinical Pathways (OCP) program to standardize cancer care for Veterans. The PCMTP was developed by a multidisciplinary team that created interactive templates within the Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS), to facilitate identification of eligible Veterans for germline and comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP). Clinical decision-making for these tests is documented as Health Factors (HF), in CPRS, allowing for assessment of pathway adherence and overall uptake.

Results

The PCMTP has achieved success, as there is over 90% compliance to molecular testing among participating Veterans which exceeds the pathway benchmark of 80%. PCMTP has been utilized at 88 VA sites, by over 700 distinct VA providers, with over 7,000 Veterans participating. This implementation has yielded over 19,200 Health Factors within CPRS.

Conclusions

The PCMTP has markedly improved the documentation and application of germline and CGP testing among Veterans diagnosed with prostate cancer. By facilitating genomic testing in appropriate patients, the PCMTP aims to enhance patient outcomes and optimize the quality of care. Prior to PCMTP establishment, assessing the prevalence of germline and CGP testing in eligible Veterans posed significant challenges. Future work will concentrate on increasing PCMTP utilization, evaluating downstream outcomes from genomic testing, including the identification of pathogenic variants, utilization of genetic counseling services, referrals to clinical trials, and the genomic impact on treatment strategies.

Background

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) faces a landscape of increasingly complex practice, especially in Hematology/Oncology (H/O), and a nationwide shortage of healthcare providers, while serving more Veterans than ever before. To understand current and future staffing needs, the VA National Oncology Program performed an assessment of H/O staffing, including attending physicians, residents/ fellows, licensed independent practitioners (LIPs) (nurse practitioners/physician assistants), and nurses for fiscal years (FY) 19–24.

Methods

Using VA Corporate Data Warehouse, we identified H/O visits in VA from 10/01/2018 through 09/30/2024 using stop codes. No-show (< 0.00001%) and National TeleOncology appointments (1%) were removed. We retrieved all notes associated with resulting visits and used area-ofspecialization and provider-type data to identify all attending physicians, trainees, LIPs, and nurses who authored or cosigned these notes. We identified H/O staff as 1. those associated with H/O clinic locations, 2. physicians who consistently cosigned H/O notes authored by fellows and LIPs associated with H/O locations, 3. fellows and LIPs authoring notes that were then cosigned by H/O physicians, and 4. nurses authoring notes associated with H/O visits.

Analysis

For each FY, we obtained total numbers of visits, unique patients, and care-providing staff by type. For validation, collaborating providers at several sites reviewed visit information, and a colleague also performed an independent, parallel data extraction. We adjusted FY totals to account for the growing patient population by dividing unique staff count by number of unique patients and multiplying by 200,000 (the approximate number of unique patients in FY19).

Results

From FY19 through FY24, VA Hematology/ Oncology saw a 14.6% rise in unique patients (from 232,084 to 265,926) and a 15.4% rise in visits (from 923,175 to 1,065,186). The absolute number of attendings rose by 4 (0.6%); of LIPs, by 138 (14.4%); and of nurses, by 142 (4.9%); trainees fell by 102 (4.3%). Adjusted to 200,000 patients, the number of attendings fell by 76 (12.3%); LIPs, by 1 (0.1%); trainees, by 335 (16.5%); and nurses, by 211 (8.4%).

Conclusions

Adjusted to number of Veterans, there are 10.4% fewer staff in Hematology/Oncology in FY24 compared to FY19.

Background

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) faces a landscape of increasingly complex practice, especially in Hematology/Oncology (H/O), and a nationwide shortage of healthcare providers, while serving more Veterans than ever before. To understand current and future staffing needs, the VA National Oncology Program performed an assessment of H/O staffing, including attending physicians, residents/ fellows, licensed independent practitioners (LIPs) (nurse practitioners/physician assistants), and nurses for fiscal years (FY) 19–24.

Methods

Using VA Corporate Data Warehouse, we identified H/O visits in VA from 10/01/2018 through 09/30/2024 using stop codes. No-show (< 0.00001%) and National TeleOncology appointments (1%) were removed. We retrieved all notes associated with resulting visits and used area-ofspecialization and provider-type data to identify all attending physicians, trainees, LIPs, and nurses who authored or cosigned these notes. We identified H/O staff as 1. those associated with H/O clinic locations, 2. physicians who consistently cosigned H/O notes authored by fellows and LIPs associated with H/O locations, 3. fellows and LIPs authoring notes that were then cosigned by H/O physicians, and 4. nurses authoring notes associated with H/O visits.

Analysis

For each FY, we obtained total numbers of visits, unique patients, and care-providing staff by type. For validation, collaborating providers at several sites reviewed visit information, and a colleague also performed an independent, parallel data extraction. We adjusted FY totals to account for the growing patient population by dividing unique staff count by number of unique patients and multiplying by 200,000 (the approximate number of unique patients in FY19).

Results

From FY19 through FY24, VA Hematology/ Oncology saw a 14.6% rise in unique patients (from 232,084 to 265,926) and a 15.4% rise in visits (from 923,175 to 1,065,186). The absolute number of attendings rose by 4 (0.6%); of LIPs, by 138 (14.4%); and of nurses, by 142 (4.9%); trainees fell by 102 (4.3%). Adjusted to 200,000 patients, the number of attendings fell by 76 (12.3%); LIPs, by 1 (0.1%); trainees, by 335 (16.5%); and nurses, by 211 (8.4%).

Conclusions

Adjusted to number of Veterans, there are 10.4% fewer staff in Hematology/Oncology in FY24 compared to FY19.

Background

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) faces a landscape of increasingly complex practice, especially in Hematology/Oncology (H/O), and a nationwide shortage of healthcare providers, while serving more Veterans than ever before. To understand current and future staffing needs, the VA National Oncology Program performed an assessment of H/O staffing, including attending physicians, residents/ fellows, licensed independent practitioners (LIPs) (nurse practitioners/physician assistants), and nurses for fiscal years (FY) 19–24.

Methods

Using VA Corporate Data Warehouse, we identified H/O visits in VA from 10/01/2018 through 09/30/2024 using stop codes. No-show (< 0.00001%) and National TeleOncology appointments (1%) were removed. We retrieved all notes associated with resulting visits and used area-ofspecialization and provider-type data to identify all attending physicians, trainees, LIPs, and nurses who authored or cosigned these notes. We identified H/O staff as 1. those associated with H/O clinic locations, 2. physicians who consistently cosigned H/O notes authored by fellows and LIPs associated with H/O locations, 3. fellows and LIPs authoring notes that were then cosigned by H/O physicians, and 4. nurses authoring notes associated with H/O visits.

Analysis

For each FY, we obtained total numbers of visits, unique patients, and care-providing staff by type. For validation, collaborating providers at several sites reviewed visit information, and a colleague also performed an independent, parallel data extraction. We adjusted FY totals to account for the growing patient population by dividing unique staff count by number of unique patients and multiplying by 200,000 (the approximate number of unique patients in FY19).

Results

From FY19 through FY24, VA Hematology/ Oncology saw a 14.6% rise in unique patients (from 232,084 to 265,926) and a 15.4% rise in visits (from 923,175 to 1,065,186). The absolute number of attendings rose by 4 (0.6%); of LIPs, by 138 (14.4%); and of nurses, by 142 (4.9%); trainees fell by 102 (4.3%). Adjusted to 200,000 patients, the number of attendings fell by 76 (12.3%); LIPs, by 1 (0.1%); trainees, by 335 (16.5%); and nurses, by 211 (8.4%).

Conclusions

Adjusted to number of Veterans, there are 10.4% fewer staff in Hematology/Oncology in FY24 compared to FY19.

Background

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous malignancy diagnosis within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Prostate Cancer Clinical Pathways (PCCP) were developed to enable providers to treat all Veterans with prostate cancer at subject matter expert level.

Methods

The PCCP was launched in February 2021; however, provider documentation of PCCP is variable across the VA healthcare system and within the PCCP, specific flow maps have differential use. To increase urology specific flow map use, a collaboration between the National Surgery Office and National Oncology Program was established to develop a Urology Prostate Cancer Note (UPCN). The UPCN was designed by urologists with assistance from a medical oncologist and a clinical applications coordinator.

Results

The UPCN functions as a working clinical note for urologists and has the PCCPs embedded into reminder dialog templates, which when completed generate health factors. The health factors that are generated from the UPCN are data mined to record PCCP use and to perform data analytics. Since the UPCN national deployment on 9/6/24, documentation of high risk prostate cancer pathway utilization has increased 75% from 226 unique Veterans prior to launch to 395 unique Veterans after launch.

Conclusions

This collaborative effort did improve pathway utilization and documentation however other tools will need to be developed to improve provider PCCP documentation.

Background

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous malignancy diagnosis within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Prostate Cancer Clinical Pathways (PCCP) were developed to enable providers to treat all Veterans with prostate cancer at subject matter expert level.

Methods

The PCCP was launched in February 2021; however, provider documentation of PCCP is variable across the VA healthcare system and within the PCCP, specific flow maps have differential use. To increase urology specific flow map use, a collaboration between the National Surgery Office and National Oncology Program was established to develop a Urology Prostate Cancer Note (UPCN). The UPCN was designed by urologists with assistance from a medical oncologist and a clinical applications coordinator.

Results

The UPCN functions as a working clinical note for urologists and has the PCCPs embedded into reminder dialog templates, which when completed generate health factors. The health factors that are generated from the UPCN are data mined to record PCCP use and to perform data analytics. Since the UPCN national deployment on 9/6/24, documentation of high risk prostate cancer pathway utilization has increased 75% from 226 unique Veterans prior to launch to 395 unique Veterans after launch.

Conclusions

This collaborative effort did improve pathway utilization and documentation however other tools will need to be developed to improve provider PCCP documentation.

Background

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous malignancy diagnosis within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Prostate Cancer Clinical Pathways (PCCP) were developed to enable providers to treat all Veterans with prostate cancer at subject matter expert level.

Methods

The PCCP was launched in February 2021; however, provider documentation of PCCP is variable across the VA healthcare system and within the PCCP, specific flow maps have differential use. To increase urology specific flow map use, a collaboration between the National Surgery Office and National Oncology Program was established to develop a Urology Prostate Cancer Note (UPCN). The UPCN was designed by urologists with assistance from a medical oncologist and a clinical applications coordinator.

Results

The UPCN functions as a working clinical note for urologists and has the PCCPs embedded into reminder dialog templates, which when completed generate health factors. The health factors that are generated from the UPCN are data mined to record PCCP use and to perform data analytics. Since the UPCN national deployment on 9/6/24, documentation of high risk prostate cancer pathway utilization has increased 75% from 226 unique Veterans prior to launch to 395 unique Veterans after launch.

Conclusions

This collaborative effort did improve pathway utilization and documentation however other tools will need to be developed to improve provider PCCP documentation.

Purpose

The Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry (VACCR) is a data management system for cancer surveillance and epidemiologic-based efforts, seeking to reduce the overall cancer burden. In 2024, the local VACCR successfully implemented a Structured Query Language (SQL) code, created to identify documents in the electronic medical record (EMR) with associated ICD-10 codes matching reportable cancer cases in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) list. In 2025, code application expansion began at four additional VISN9 sites.

Outcomes Studied

Accuracy and usefulness of SQL code application in a significantly larger population and a diagnosis-specific population.

Methods

Local Cancer Program leadership collaborated with VISN9 leadership to expand the SQL code to the four sites’ EMR, identifying the Veteran’s name, social security number, location by city/state/county, and visit-associated data including location, ICD-10 code, and visit year. Data validation focused on ICD- 10-specific data and quality replication.

Results

After SQL code application to Mt Home TN VACCR data, 750 unique, randomized charts from 2015-2025 were selected for accuracy review. Data validation found that 90.5% (679) had a reportable cancer; 14.9% (112) were not entered into VACCR. 9.5% (71) were not reportable. The SQL code was applied to Lexington data to identify colorectal cancer (CRC) (ICD-10 codes C17-C21.9). 746 charts from 2015-2025 were identified. 88.9% (663) had a reportable CRC; 14.9% (111) of those were not entered into VACCR, and 11% (83) were not reportable. Most cases not entered into VACCR at both sites were cases in which the majority of care was provided through Care in the Community (CITC). Historically, identification of CITC-provided oncologic care has been manual and notoriously difficult.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated the feasibility and accuracy of the SQL code in the identification of Veterans with diagnoses matching the SEER list in a large population and at a diagnosis-specific level. VISN-wide use of the report will increase efficiency and timeliness of data entry into VACCR, especially related to care provided through CITC. An improved understanding of oncologic care in the VISN would provide critical data to VISN executive leadership, enabling them to advocate for resources, targeted interventions, and access to care.

Purpose

The Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry (VACCR) is a data management system for cancer surveillance and epidemiologic-based efforts, seeking to reduce the overall cancer burden. In 2024, the local VACCR successfully implemented a Structured Query Language (SQL) code, created to identify documents in the electronic medical record (EMR) with associated ICD-10 codes matching reportable cancer cases in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) list. In 2025, code application expansion began at four additional VISN9 sites.

Outcomes Studied

Accuracy and usefulness of SQL code application in a significantly larger population and a diagnosis-specific population.

Methods

Local Cancer Program leadership collaborated with VISN9 leadership to expand the SQL code to the four sites’ EMR, identifying the Veteran’s name, social security number, location by city/state/county, and visit-associated data including location, ICD-10 code, and visit year. Data validation focused on ICD- 10-specific data and quality replication.

Results

After SQL code application to Mt Home TN VACCR data, 750 unique, randomized charts from 2015-2025 were selected for accuracy review. Data validation found that 90.5% (679) had a reportable cancer; 14.9% (112) were not entered into VACCR. 9.5% (71) were not reportable. The SQL code was applied to Lexington data to identify colorectal cancer (CRC) (ICD-10 codes C17-C21.9). 746 charts from 2015-2025 were identified. 88.9% (663) had a reportable CRC; 14.9% (111) of those were not entered into VACCR, and 11% (83) were not reportable. Most cases not entered into VACCR at both sites were cases in which the majority of care was provided through Care in the Community (CITC). Historically, identification of CITC-provided oncologic care has been manual and notoriously difficult.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated the feasibility and accuracy of the SQL code in the identification of Veterans with diagnoses matching the SEER list in a large population and at a diagnosis-specific level. VISN-wide use of the report will increase efficiency and timeliness of data entry into VACCR, especially related to care provided through CITC. An improved understanding of oncologic care in the VISN would provide critical data to VISN executive leadership, enabling them to advocate for resources, targeted interventions, and access to care.

Purpose

The Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry (VACCR) is a data management system for cancer surveillance and epidemiologic-based efforts, seeking to reduce the overall cancer burden. In 2024, the local VACCR successfully implemented a Structured Query Language (SQL) code, created to identify documents in the electronic medical record (EMR) with associated ICD-10 codes matching reportable cancer cases in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) list. In 2025, code application expansion began at four additional VISN9 sites.

Outcomes Studied

Accuracy and usefulness of SQL code application in a significantly larger population and a diagnosis-specific population.

Methods

Local Cancer Program leadership collaborated with VISN9 leadership to expand the SQL code to the four sites’ EMR, identifying the Veteran’s name, social security number, location by city/state/county, and visit-associated data including location, ICD-10 code, and visit year. Data validation focused on ICD- 10-specific data and quality replication.

Results

After SQL code application to Mt Home TN VACCR data, 750 unique, randomized charts from 2015-2025 were selected for accuracy review. Data validation found that 90.5% (679) had a reportable cancer; 14.9% (112) were not entered into VACCR. 9.5% (71) were not reportable. The SQL code was applied to Lexington data to identify colorectal cancer (CRC) (ICD-10 codes C17-C21.9). 746 charts from 2015-2025 were identified. 88.9% (663) had a reportable CRC; 14.9% (111) of those were not entered into VACCR, and 11% (83) were not reportable. Most cases not entered into VACCR at both sites were cases in which the majority of care was provided through Care in the Community (CITC). Historically, identification of CITC-provided oncologic care has been manual and notoriously difficult.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated the feasibility and accuracy of the SQL code in the identification of Veterans with diagnoses matching the SEER list in a large population and at a diagnosis-specific level. VISN-wide use of the report will increase efficiency and timeliness of data entry into VACCR, especially related to care provided through CITC. An improved understanding of oncologic care in the VISN would provide critical data to VISN executive leadership, enabling them to advocate for resources, targeted interventions, and access to care.