The evolution of the education module for men with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) in the prostate cancer supportive care (PCSC) program.

Abstract

279 Background: The PCSC Program was initiated in 2013 at the Vancouver Prostate Centre to provide a comprehensive program for patients and partners with prostate cancer. This program provides educational sessions (ES) and clinical services, including decision-making for primary therapy, sexual health, pelvic floor physiotherapy, hormone therapy, counseling, exercise, and nutrition for patients in BC, Canada. In 2016, the PCSC Program expanded to BC Cancer Victoria and in 2017 to other BC Cancer sites. In 2018, medical oncologists (MDs) in Victoria (JR, SP) developed an Education Module addressing treatment options for men with metastatic hormone sensitive (mHSPC) and metastatic castration resistant (mCRPC) disease. MDs delivered in-person ES in Victoria in 2018 and, in 2019, added a virtual platform (VP) option. From 3-5/2020, the ESs were on hold due to the COVID pandemic and parental leaves. In 6/2020, the ESs resumed only on VP, and the PCSC Oncology Nurse Practitioner (NP), NI, gave the presentations for the MDs on leave. In 10/2020, due to a changing standard of care for mHSPC, the PCSC team consolidated the two ESs into one. We report on the evolution of this Education Module in response to both the changing standard of care and the COVID pandemic. Methods: We prospectively collected attendance and patient characteristic metrics from all ES for men with mPC. We tracked presenter type (MD vs. NP) and prospectively collected anonymous patient satisfaction questionnaires. Results: From 1/2018 to 1/2021, 100 men registered for 27 ES; 81 men, 41 partners, and 2 family members actually attended. 48/75 (64%) men were white, 39/75 (52%) retired, and 56/75 (74.7%) married. 47 men attended 12 mHSPC ES, 13 men attended ten mCRPC ES, and 17 attended four consolidated ES. MDs presented 15 ES, and the NP presented 12 ES. Responses to questions on 70 satisfaction surveys were similar for MD vs. NP presenters. 9 responders to the recently added VP-specific questions said they agreed (4) or strongly agreed (5) that it was beneficial to watch the ES at home on a computer. The Table below shows attendance per site per year. Conclusions: The ESs for men with mPC were well-received. Although there was a VP option before COVID, attendance increased significantly after the lockdown as patients and providers became more familiar with VPs. Satisfaction surveys confirmed that an NP could deliver the ES rather than MD. Consolidation of the mHSPC and mCRPC ES reflected the changing standard of care and resulted in more efficient use of presenter time. Virtual delivery of the sessions provided greater access to those living in distant or remote areas of the province and those in lockdown during the COVID pandemic. [Table: see text]