Impact of digital tools in oncology: A global analysis of the adoption of ONCOassist and NCCN Chemotherapy Order Templates (NCCN Templates) in collaboration with OncoAlert.

Abstract

e13662 Background: The integration of digital technology has significantly transformed clinical practice, especially in oncology. ONCOassist, an application that integrates content from the NCCN Templates offers professionals quick and up-to-date access to information crucial for cancer treatment. Methods: To analyze and determine whether factors such as the Human Development Index (HDI) or Gross National Income (GNI) influence the adoption of the NCCN Templates, an in-application survey was distributed to health professionals who accessed NCCN content. The survey asked two questions: (1) would respondents use a specific NCCN protocol for a current patient (2) if not, the reasons why they did not utilize it. Finally, how the acceptance of the NCCN Templates was related to HDI or GNI and specialty was analyzed. Results: The survey was responded to by 2522 health professionals from 122 countries. The NCCN Templates were widely accepted (80%) across different geographic and economic contexts, indicating their global applicability and trust. Generally, GNI is categorized by high income, upper middle income, lower middle income, and low income, while HDI includes very high, high, medium, and low income. For the lowest levels of GNI and HDI, there were few responses (1% by GNI and 8% by HDI), and for purposes of this abstract, they were combined with the next highest level, lower middle income, and medium HDI. Using GNI, the rates of using the NCCN Templates in countries with high income (72%) were lower than those with upper-middle income (83%) and lower middle/low income (86%). In a similar inverse tendency, based on HDI, the utilization rates of the NCCN Templates were 70%, 83%, and 86% in countries with very-high, high, and medium/low HDI, respectively. When stratified by specialty, the absolute numbers showed that most respondents belonged to the field of the breast (36%), followed by gastrointestinal (28%) and lung cancers (10%). However, when we analyzed percentages, we observed that the decision-making process regarding protocol adoption was consistent among specialties despite the variance in specialist population size. When we analyzed the reasons for not utilizing NCCN Templates, “Other reasons” was the primary response (51%). Among the remaining answers, using specific local protocols was the primary reason (47% of the remaining), followed by the lack of drug availability (18% of the remaining) and reimbursement issues (18% of the remaining). Conclusions: There was a general acceptance of the NCCN Templates among healthcare professionals globally. The willingness to utilize NCCN Templates content was not strongly determined by the HDI or GNI, suggesting a perception of their utility beyond economic barriers. The protocol has the potential to be used in daily clinical practice, improving decision-making.