User login
Data Elements Captured in Breast and Gynecologic Oncology System of Excellence Health Informatics Tool
Background
The VA National Oncology Program (NOP) Breast and Gynecologic Oncology System of Excellence (BGSOE) aims to ensure that Veterans with breast and gynecologic cancers receive state-of-the-art, guidelineadherent, Veteran-centric, timely, and well-coordinated care. Achieving these aims relies on a national multidisciplinary Cancer Care Navigation Team that provides tele-oncology navigation services. The teams connect with Veterans to identify and support clinical, psychological, system, coordination-related needs. To assist the navigation team to find these relatively rare diagnoses within VA, we developed a health informatics tool (HIT) that automatically identifies patients with breast or gynecologic cancers, displays demographic and clinical information, and facilitates systematic needs assessment and care coordination and tracking.
Methods
We used multiple frameworks to ensure alignment between HIT mission and coordinator workflow. A separate view was provided for each phase of the workflow: assessment of Veteran eligibility, intake assessment, and care coordination and tracking. Algorithmic identification of candidate Veterans was validated to ensure coordinators were not inundated with information on Veterans outside the scope of the program. User interface was implemented in accordance with Lean principles applied to HIT design, with close attention to information inventory, efficient user motion, information transportation, and avoidance of overprocessing.
Results
From January 1, 2021, to March 6, 2024, the HIT captured 5,561 breast cancer and 1,663 gynecologic cancer patients. 908 patients were reviewed by the coordinator, of whom 817 patients had a correct diagnosis assigned by the screening algorithm. From these, 332 patients were added to the intake process. The intake process is pending for 207 patients and complete for 102 patients; 23 patients declined intake. For patients who have completed intake, we have captured information that includes Veteran demographics, social history, insurance details, medical history, family history, hazards, barriers, and information specific to BGSOE care coordination.
Conclusions
We applied a novel framework to design and implement mission-driven, workflow-aligned HIT that achieves high user efficiency using Lean principles. This facilitated an exciting new model in tele-oncology care navigation delivery. Although the program is still in early phases, it has improved care coordination for Veterans with breast and gynecologic cancers across the United States.
Background
The VA National Oncology Program (NOP) Breast and Gynecologic Oncology System of Excellence (BGSOE) aims to ensure that Veterans with breast and gynecologic cancers receive state-of-the-art, guidelineadherent, Veteran-centric, timely, and well-coordinated care. Achieving these aims relies on a national multidisciplinary Cancer Care Navigation Team that provides tele-oncology navigation services. The teams connect with Veterans to identify and support clinical, psychological, system, coordination-related needs. To assist the navigation team to find these relatively rare diagnoses within VA, we developed a health informatics tool (HIT) that automatically identifies patients with breast or gynecologic cancers, displays demographic and clinical information, and facilitates systematic needs assessment and care coordination and tracking.
Methods
We used multiple frameworks to ensure alignment between HIT mission and coordinator workflow. A separate view was provided for each phase of the workflow: assessment of Veteran eligibility, intake assessment, and care coordination and tracking. Algorithmic identification of candidate Veterans was validated to ensure coordinators were not inundated with information on Veterans outside the scope of the program. User interface was implemented in accordance with Lean principles applied to HIT design, with close attention to information inventory, efficient user motion, information transportation, and avoidance of overprocessing.
Results
From January 1, 2021, to March 6, 2024, the HIT captured 5,561 breast cancer and 1,663 gynecologic cancer patients. 908 patients were reviewed by the coordinator, of whom 817 patients had a correct diagnosis assigned by the screening algorithm. From these, 332 patients were added to the intake process. The intake process is pending for 207 patients and complete for 102 patients; 23 patients declined intake. For patients who have completed intake, we have captured information that includes Veteran demographics, social history, insurance details, medical history, family history, hazards, barriers, and information specific to BGSOE care coordination.
Conclusions
We applied a novel framework to design and implement mission-driven, workflow-aligned HIT that achieves high user efficiency using Lean principles. This facilitated an exciting new model in tele-oncology care navigation delivery. Although the program is still in early phases, it has improved care coordination for Veterans with breast and gynecologic cancers across the United States.
Background
The VA National Oncology Program (NOP) Breast and Gynecologic Oncology System of Excellence (BGSOE) aims to ensure that Veterans with breast and gynecologic cancers receive state-of-the-art, guidelineadherent, Veteran-centric, timely, and well-coordinated care. Achieving these aims relies on a national multidisciplinary Cancer Care Navigation Team that provides tele-oncology navigation services. The teams connect with Veterans to identify and support clinical, psychological, system, coordination-related needs. To assist the navigation team to find these relatively rare diagnoses within VA, we developed a health informatics tool (HIT) that automatically identifies patients with breast or gynecologic cancers, displays demographic and clinical information, and facilitates systematic needs assessment and care coordination and tracking.
Methods
We used multiple frameworks to ensure alignment between HIT mission and coordinator workflow. A separate view was provided for each phase of the workflow: assessment of Veteran eligibility, intake assessment, and care coordination and tracking. Algorithmic identification of candidate Veterans was validated to ensure coordinators were not inundated with information on Veterans outside the scope of the program. User interface was implemented in accordance with Lean principles applied to HIT design, with close attention to information inventory, efficient user motion, information transportation, and avoidance of overprocessing.
Results
From January 1, 2021, to March 6, 2024, the HIT captured 5,561 breast cancer and 1,663 gynecologic cancer patients. 908 patients were reviewed by the coordinator, of whom 817 patients had a correct diagnosis assigned by the screening algorithm. From these, 332 patients were added to the intake process. The intake process is pending for 207 patients and complete for 102 patients; 23 patients declined intake. For patients who have completed intake, we have captured information that includes Veteran demographics, social history, insurance details, medical history, family history, hazards, barriers, and information specific to BGSOE care coordination.
Conclusions
We applied a novel framework to design and implement mission-driven, workflow-aligned HIT that achieves high user efficiency using Lean principles. This facilitated an exciting new model in tele-oncology care navigation delivery. Although the program is still in early phases, it has improved care coordination for Veterans with breast and gynecologic cancers across the United States.
Do We Need More Screen Time? Patterns of Telehealth Utilization for Patients With Prostate Cancer in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA)
Background
Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in the VHA. Telehealth use has increased and has the potential to improve access for patients. We examined patterns of care for VHA patients with prostate cancer, including whether visits were in person, by telephone or by video.
Methods
Using the VHA Corporate Data Warehouse, we extracted data on all incident cases of prostate cancer from 1/1/2016-1/31/2023 with sufficient information (Gleason score, prostate-specific antigen [PSA], and tumor stage) to categorize into National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk strata. We excluded patients who died within 1 year of diagnosis and those with no evidence of PSA testing, prostate biopsy or treatment within 2 years. We categorized all outpatient visits related to a person’s Urology- and Medical Oncology based care – including the visit modality – based on administrative visit stop codes. We defined ‘during COVID’ as visits after 3/11/2020. We calculated the percent of visits performed by modality in each year after diagnosis.
Results
Among the 60,381 men with prostate cancer, 61% were White, 33% Black; 5% Hispanic; 32% rural. For NCCN category, 30% had high risk prostate cancer, which increased with age, 50% had intermediate risk and 20% had low risk. Prior to COVID, for visits to Urology within the first year after diagnosis, 79% were in person, 20% were by telephone and 0.1% were by video. Visits to Oncology within the first year after diagnosis were similar—82% in person, 16% by phone and 0.3% by video.
Discussion
During the COVID period, video visits increased significantly but remained a small proportion, accounting for only 2% of visits for both Urology and Oncology. Video visits increased during the COVID-19 pandemic but remained rare. Across many diseases and conditions, the quality of care for video visits has been at least as good as for in-person care.
Conclusions
There is a missed opportunity to provide care by video within VHA for patients with prostate cancer, particularly given that about 1/3 of patients are from rural areas. Future analyses will examine barriers to video telehealth and the impact of video visits on quality and equity of prostate cancer care.
Background
Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in the VHA. Telehealth use has increased and has the potential to improve access for patients. We examined patterns of care for VHA patients with prostate cancer, including whether visits were in person, by telephone or by video.
Methods
Using the VHA Corporate Data Warehouse, we extracted data on all incident cases of prostate cancer from 1/1/2016-1/31/2023 with sufficient information (Gleason score, prostate-specific antigen [PSA], and tumor stage) to categorize into National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk strata. We excluded patients who died within 1 year of diagnosis and those with no evidence of PSA testing, prostate biopsy or treatment within 2 years. We categorized all outpatient visits related to a person’s Urology- and Medical Oncology based care – including the visit modality – based on administrative visit stop codes. We defined ‘during COVID’ as visits after 3/11/2020. We calculated the percent of visits performed by modality in each year after diagnosis.
Results
Among the 60,381 men with prostate cancer, 61% were White, 33% Black; 5% Hispanic; 32% rural. For NCCN category, 30% had high risk prostate cancer, which increased with age, 50% had intermediate risk and 20% had low risk. Prior to COVID, for visits to Urology within the first year after diagnosis, 79% were in person, 20% were by telephone and 0.1% were by video. Visits to Oncology within the first year after diagnosis were similar—82% in person, 16% by phone and 0.3% by video.
Discussion
During the COVID period, video visits increased significantly but remained a small proportion, accounting for only 2% of visits for both Urology and Oncology. Video visits increased during the COVID-19 pandemic but remained rare. Across many diseases and conditions, the quality of care for video visits has been at least as good as for in-person care.
Conclusions
There is a missed opportunity to provide care by video within VHA for patients with prostate cancer, particularly given that about 1/3 of patients are from rural areas. Future analyses will examine barriers to video telehealth and the impact of video visits on quality and equity of prostate cancer care.
Background
Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in the VHA. Telehealth use has increased and has the potential to improve access for patients. We examined patterns of care for VHA patients with prostate cancer, including whether visits were in person, by telephone or by video.
Methods
Using the VHA Corporate Data Warehouse, we extracted data on all incident cases of prostate cancer from 1/1/2016-1/31/2023 with sufficient information (Gleason score, prostate-specific antigen [PSA], and tumor stage) to categorize into National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk strata. We excluded patients who died within 1 year of diagnosis and those with no evidence of PSA testing, prostate biopsy or treatment within 2 years. We categorized all outpatient visits related to a person’s Urology- and Medical Oncology based care – including the visit modality – based on administrative visit stop codes. We defined ‘during COVID’ as visits after 3/11/2020. We calculated the percent of visits performed by modality in each year after diagnosis.
Results
Among the 60,381 men with prostate cancer, 61% were White, 33% Black; 5% Hispanic; 32% rural. For NCCN category, 30% had high risk prostate cancer, which increased with age, 50% had intermediate risk and 20% had low risk. Prior to COVID, for visits to Urology within the first year after diagnosis, 79% were in person, 20% were by telephone and 0.1% were by video. Visits to Oncology within the first year after diagnosis were similar—82% in person, 16% by phone and 0.3% by video.
Discussion
During the COVID period, video visits increased significantly but remained a small proportion, accounting for only 2% of visits for both Urology and Oncology. Video visits increased during the COVID-19 pandemic but remained rare. Across many diseases and conditions, the quality of care for video visits has been at least as good as for in-person care.
Conclusions
There is a missed opportunity to provide care by video within VHA for patients with prostate cancer, particularly given that about 1/3 of patients are from rural areas. Future analyses will examine barriers to video telehealth and the impact of video visits on quality and equity of prostate cancer care.
Telehealth Research and Innovation for Veterans With Cancer (THRIVE): Understanding Experiences of National TeleOncology Service Providers
Background
Currently within the Veterans Health Administration, nearly 38% of VA users reside in rural areas. Approximately 70% of rural areas do not have an oncologist, resulting in a high proportion of Veterans who lack access to specialized cancer services. The National TeleOncology Service (NTO) was designed to increase access to specialty and subspecialty cancer care for Veterans regardless of geographical location, and for those who may experience additional barriers to in-person care due to medical complexity or other social determinants of health. Purpose: THRIVE focuses on health equity for telehealth-delivered cancer care. We are specifically interested in the intersection of poverty, rurality, and race. As part of this inquiry, we examined provider experiences of the NTO to better understand the benefits, drawbacks, facilitators and barriers to implementing NTO care.
Methods
We conducted two focus groups with NTO providers. We developed guides using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR 2.0) and utilized rapid qualitative analysis. We arrayed data in matrices based on CFIR 2.0-based guide for analysis.
Results
The focus groups included NTO physicians (n=4) and non-physicians (n=19). Providers agreed that NTO provides valuable cancer care to Veterans facing in-person access issues. The technology is easy to use for many patients, but those in rural areas experiencing poverty struggle most. NTO’s technical support resources reduce technical skill and equipment barriers and facilitate connection for both patients and providers. Providers enjoyed the team-based approach of NTO and believed it increases care quality through access to multiple providers and resources within the clinical encounter. The NTO’s work could be strengthened by standardizing technology to facilitate records transfer and enable sharing of documentation and education between NTO and patients. Implications: This study examined providers’ perceived acceptability, feasibility, barriers, and facilitators of NTO-delivered cancer care within VA, demonstrating that NTO service is well-liked and a valuable emerging resource of VA care.
Conclusions
In an era when CMMS shifts away from reimbursing telehealth, VA has committed to continue such care providing a variety of patient-centered approaches. NTO may serve as a model for expanding telehealth-delivered care for other serious and chronic diseases and conditions.
Background
Currently within the Veterans Health Administration, nearly 38% of VA users reside in rural areas. Approximately 70% of rural areas do not have an oncologist, resulting in a high proportion of Veterans who lack access to specialized cancer services. The National TeleOncology Service (NTO) was designed to increase access to specialty and subspecialty cancer care for Veterans regardless of geographical location, and for those who may experience additional barriers to in-person care due to medical complexity or other social determinants of health. Purpose: THRIVE focuses on health equity for telehealth-delivered cancer care. We are specifically interested in the intersection of poverty, rurality, and race. As part of this inquiry, we examined provider experiences of the NTO to better understand the benefits, drawbacks, facilitators and barriers to implementing NTO care.
Methods
We conducted two focus groups with NTO providers. We developed guides using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR 2.0) and utilized rapid qualitative analysis. We arrayed data in matrices based on CFIR 2.0-based guide for analysis.
Results
The focus groups included NTO physicians (n=4) and non-physicians (n=19). Providers agreed that NTO provides valuable cancer care to Veterans facing in-person access issues. The technology is easy to use for many patients, but those in rural areas experiencing poverty struggle most. NTO’s technical support resources reduce technical skill and equipment barriers and facilitate connection for both patients and providers. Providers enjoyed the team-based approach of NTO and believed it increases care quality through access to multiple providers and resources within the clinical encounter. The NTO’s work could be strengthened by standardizing technology to facilitate records transfer and enable sharing of documentation and education between NTO and patients. Implications: This study examined providers’ perceived acceptability, feasibility, barriers, and facilitators of NTO-delivered cancer care within VA, demonstrating that NTO service is well-liked and a valuable emerging resource of VA care.
Conclusions
In an era when CMMS shifts away from reimbursing telehealth, VA has committed to continue such care providing a variety of patient-centered approaches. NTO may serve as a model for expanding telehealth-delivered care for other serious and chronic diseases and conditions.
Background
Currently within the Veterans Health Administration, nearly 38% of VA users reside in rural areas. Approximately 70% of rural areas do not have an oncologist, resulting in a high proportion of Veterans who lack access to specialized cancer services. The National TeleOncology Service (NTO) was designed to increase access to specialty and subspecialty cancer care for Veterans regardless of geographical location, and for those who may experience additional barriers to in-person care due to medical complexity or other social determinants of health. Purpose: THRIVE focuses on health equity for telehealth-delivered cancer care. We are specifically interested in the intersection of poverty, rurality, and race. As part of this inquiry, we examined provider experiences of the NTO to better understand the benefits, drawbacks, facilitators and barriers to implementing NTO care.
Methods
We conducted two focus groups with NTO providers. We developed guides using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR 2.0) and utilized rapid qualitative analysis. We arrayed data in matrices based on CFIR 2.0-based guide for analysis.
Results
The focus groups included NTO physicians (n=4) and non-physicians (n=19). Providers agreed that NTO provides valuable cancer care to Veterans facing in-person access issues. The technology is easy to use for many patients, but those in rural areas experiencing poverty struggle most. NTO’s technical support resources reduce technical skill and equipment barriers and facilitate connection for both patients and providers. Providers enjoyed the team-based approach of NTO and believed it increases care quality through access to multiple providers and resources within the clinical encounter. The NTO’s work could be strengthened by standardizing technology to facilitate records transfer and enable sharing of documentation and education between NTO and patients. Implications: This study examined providers’ perceived acceptability, feasibility, barriers, and facilitators of NTO-delivered cancer care within VA, demonstrating that NTO service is well-liked and a valuable emerging resource of VA care.
Conclusions
In an era when CMMS shifts away from reimbursing telehealth, VA has committed to continue such care providing a variety of patient-centered approaches. NTO may serve as a model for expanding telehealth-delivered care for other serious and chronic diseases and conditions.