Abstract S06-03: Cancer care telehealth utilization rates and provider attitudes in the wake of the novel coronavirus pandemic: The Kaiser Permanente Northern California experience

Abstract

Abstract Background: In response to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the multidisciplinary care of cancer patients has rapidly evolved. This study aims to determine utilization trends of in-person, telephone, and video visits, before and after the California shelter-in-place (SIP) orders on 3/19/20, and assess perspectives of cancer care providers on telehealth. Methods: This study was conducted in 22 medical centers of a large integrated health care system. Utilization of different visit types in medical oncology (excluding infusion visits) was collected between 12/1/2019–5/24/2020, for a total of 104,588 visits. Chi-square with Yates correction was used for p-values. Voluntary, anonymous electronic surveys were sent to 276 cancer care providers measuring attitudes and experiences with telehealth. Overall, 68.8% responded: 101/128 medical oncologists (MedOnc), 34/37 radiation oncologists (RadOnc), 16/62 breast surgeons (Brst Surg), 18/28 breast oncology nurse navigators (OncNav), and 21/21 cancer survivorship advanced practitioners (SurvOnc). Results: Comparing visit types prior to and after SIP, in-person visits went from 55.3% to 3.3%, telephone visits went from 44.2% to 79%, and video visits went from 0.5% to 17.8% (p<.0001). Between 12/2019 and 05/2020, video visits increased from 0.42% to 31.3%. Telephone visits increased from 39.3 to a peak of 86.6% in 04/2020 and then decreased to 63.7%. In-person visits dropped from 60.3% to 2.3% in 04/2020 and then increased to 5.0% (p<.0001). Satisfaction with telehealth was high: 87.1% of MedOnc, 91.2% of RadOnc, 68.6% of BrstSurg, 72.2% of OncNav, and 90.4% SurvOnc providers were very or somewhat satisfied. Most providers preferred to increase or maintain telehealth utilization after the pandemic: 84% of MedOnc, 85% of RadOnc, 81% of BrstSurg, 51% of OncNav, and 90% of SurvOnc. Among most providers, highest cited benefits of telehealth included work from home, reduced commute, staying on time, flexible hours, and shorter visits. Commonly cited challenges included connection/equipment problems, need for physical exam, difficulty evaluating performance status, and in-person visit required anyway. Of MedOnc, 11.8% responded that a patient suffered an adverse effect that could have been prevented with in-person visit. In-person visits were thought to promote the strongest provider-patient connection, followed by video, telephone visits, and emails. MedOnc providers deemed in-person visits were needed for end-of-life discussion (49%), discussing a new diagnosis (47.1%), palliative care discussion (34.3%), and clinical trial enrollment (34.3%). Activities for which email or phone visits were most accepted included check-in pretreatment, survivorship planning/follow-up, and patient navigation. Conclusion: Overall, telehealth utilization has rapidly increased and is well accepted by various cancer care providers. Addressing technical issues and tailoring visit type to specific activities may further promote telehealth adoption and satisfaction. Citation Format: Elad Neeman, Tatjana Kolevska, Mary Reed, Tilak Sundaresan, Amit Arora, Yan Li, Samantha Seaward, Gillian Kuehner, Sharon Likely, Julia Trossman, Christine Weldon, Raymond Liu. Cancer care telehealth utilization rates and provider attitudes in the wake of the novel coronavirus pandemic: The Kaiser Permanente Northern California experience [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Virtual Meeting: COVID-19 and Cancer; 2020 Jul 20-22. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2020;26(18_Suppl):Abstract nr S06-03.