Qualitative analysis of practicing oncologists’ attitudes and experiences regarding HIT-facilitated collection of patient-reported outcomes.

Abstract

56 Background: Growing interest in incorporating widespread and routine collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) into a rapid-learning system for cancer care motivates consideration of stakeholder attitudes and experiences with PRO collection. Practicing oncologists are stakeholders whose views are not well characterized to date. Methods: We developed an interview guide after literature review and 6 in-depth interviews with leaders in the field. With IRB approval, we conducted 45-minute semi-structured interviews with medical oncologists identified through affiliation with QOPI or a minority-based CCOP. Purposive sampling ensured a diverse range of viewpoints. Interviews were conducted until thematic saturation. Multiple analysts independently reviewed and thematically coded verbatim transcripts. Results: 17 interviews were conducted with oncologists from diverse practice settings and types. Emergent themes included variability in understanding and experience with PRO collection; general enthusiasm for the potential value of PROs (with subthemes focused on impact on thoroughness and efficiency, and potential for coordination with quality measurement processes); and fundamental concerns (including information overload, the possibility of identifying problems for which no good interventions exist, depersonalization of the physician-patient encounter, cost, and inefficiency). Several potential barriers to the widespread implementation of PROs were identified, including need for buy-in from other stakeholders in the practice, lack of appropriate referral resources, staffing needs, and technology concerns. Respondents generally favored simple tools, format allowing for time-trending and visualization of the impact of interventions, and tailoring to the individual patient’s disease site, stage, and point in treatment trajectory. Very few identified patient compliance, data sharing/privacy, or medical liability as major barriers to implementation. Conclusions: Widespread inclusion of PROs in a rapid-learning system of oncology care will require careful consideration of the insights provided by practicing oncologists.