Multidisciplinary prostate cancer consultation at home: Does the virtual visit platform adversely affect care for elderly patients or impact treatment recommendations?

Abstract

1521 Background: Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, Hartford Healthcare (HHC) implemented a multidisciplinary virtual visit prostate cancer clinic (MDVV) to allow patients to receive cancer consultations at home. This clinic has shown significant logistical advantages for provision of coordinated cancer care. To evaluate concerns regarding usability of the telehealth platform for elderly patients, and the absence of in person physical exam at initial consult, we evaluated the MDVV in terms of patient satisfaction based on age, as well as for differences in treatment recommendations after patients were seen in-person at a pre-treatment follow up visit. Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed or progressive prostate cancer were offered a MDVV consultation. Those who assented had sequential virtual consultations with a urologic surgeon, a radiation oncologist, and a medical oncologist, followed by a group conference with all 3 specialists, and were guided through the visit by a nurse navigator. Patients then completed a 7 item satisfaction survey using a 5 point Likert scale evaluating their perception of the efficacy, efficiency, coordination, and overall value of the clinic. Responses were stratified by age group and compared. Chart review determined the impact of subsequent in person office visit on treatment recommendations, and the proportion of patients who underwent staging imaging according to NCCN guidelines. This was compared with a cohort of consecutive patients who completed traditional consults with two high volume prostate cancer surgeons immediately before the pandemic. Results: A total of 161 patients with newly diagnosed or progressive prostate cancer received a MDVV consultation from August 2020 – February 2023. Patient age ranged from 47-84 years (9% < 60 yrs, 52% 60-70 yrs, 34% 70-80 yrs, 5% >80 yrs). The median score for patient satisfaction on all 7 domains was 1 (strongly agree), and did not differ between age groups. There were no instances of a change in treatment recommendation after follow up in person office visit. While 100% of the MDVV cohort received multidisciplinary consultation before treatment, only 14/50 traditional cohort patients (28%) ultimately received the same (p<.001). 100% of MDVV patients underwent imaging according to NCCN guidelines, compared with 33/50 (66%) of traditional patients (p<.001). Conclusions: A virtual format for a multidisciplinary prostate cancer clinic is a logistically advantageous, effective means of offering in-home consultation to prostate cancer patients, leading to high patient satisfaction, regardless of age. The absence of in-person physical examination at initial consultation did not ultimately impact treatment recommendations. This format also improved access to multidisciplinary consultation and increased adherence to imaging guidelines.