Improving the assessment and documentation of systemic cancer therapy–related toxicity in the ambulatory oncology setting.

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

221 Background: Accurate documentation of systemic cancer therapy toxicity is crucial for patient safety and effective treatment management. However, achieving consistent and comprehensive documentation remains challenging. While the use of electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) is becoming standard in clinical practice, small community-based practices lack the resources to implement this strategy. This project aims to offer alternative methods for implementing patient-reported outcomes in such practices and utilize this information to enhance the documentation of systemic cancer therapy toxicities using the CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events). Methods: We conducted a quality improvement project targeting the adequate assessment and documentation of graded toxicity assessments among healthcare providers. Interventions included implementing a patient-reported outcome survey created using the National Cancer Institute PRO-CTCAE form builder, which patients completed while waiting to be seen by the provider. Additionally, we educated providers on how to use the CTCAE grading tool available in Cerner. Rates of documented graded toxicity assessment using the CTCAE system were evaluated among 71 patients aged 18 years or older receiving systemic cancer therapy and attending follow-up appointments at the Seton Cancer Clinic. Data were collected from electronic medical records both before and after the intervention, with 50 patients assessed pre-intervention and 21 patients assessed post-intervention. Results: The implementation of the patient-reported outcome survey and the utilization of the CTCAE grading tool available in Cerner facilitated a more consistent and comprehensive assessment and documentation process. Post-intervention, the rate of documented graded toxicities increased significantly; the percentage of patients with documented graded toxicities increased from 4% pre-intervention to 80% post-intervention. The intervention also improved the workflow efficiency and the accuracy of toxicity assessments in the oncology clinic. Conclusions: These findings highlight the importance of implementing strategies to improve the assessment and documentation of systemic cancer therapy-related toxicity, especially in small community-based practices where resources may be limited. Continued monitoring and periodic data collection will be essential for sustaining these improvements.