Oncologists' Perceptions of a Digital Tool to Improve Cancer Survivors' Cardiovascular Health

Oncology Provider and Patient Perspectives on a Cardiovascular Health Assessment Tool Used During Posttreatment Survivorship Care in Community Oncology (Results from WF-1804CD): Mixed Methods Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Most survivors of cancer have multiple cardiovascular risk factors, increasing their risk of poor cardiovascular and cancer outcomes. The Automated Heart-Health Assessment (AH-HA) tool is a novel electronic health record clinical decision support tool based on the American Heart Association's Life's Simple 7 cardiovascular health metrics to promote cardiovascular health assessment and discussion in outpatient oncology. Before proceeding to future implementation trials, it is critical to establish the acceptability of the tool among providers and survivors.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess provider and survivor acceptability of the AH-HA tool and provider training at practices randomized to the AH-HA tool arm within WF-1804CD.

METHODS

Providers (physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants) completed a survey to assess the acceptability of the AH-HA training, immediately following training. Providers also completed surveys to assess AH-HA tool acceptability and potential sustainability. Tool acceptability was assessed after 30 patients were enrolled at the practice with both a survey developed for the study as well as with domains from the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology survey (performance expectancy, effort expectancy, attitude toward using technology, and facilitating conditions). Semistructured interviews at the end of the study captured additional provider perceptions of the AH-HA tool. Posttreatment survivors (breast, prostate, colorectal, endometrial, and lymphomas) completed a survey to assess the acceptability of the AH-HA tool immediately after the designated study appointment.

RESULTS

Providers (n=15) reported high overall acceptability of the AH-HA training (mean 5.8, SD 1.0) and tool (mean 5.5, SD 1.4); provider acceptability was also supported by the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology scores (eg, effort expectancy: mean 5.6, SD 1.5). Qualitative data also supported provider acceptability of different aspects of the AH-HA tool (eg, "It helps focus the conversation and give the patient a visual of continuum of progress"). Providers were more favorable about using the AH-HA tool for posttreatment survivorship care. Enrolled survivors (n=245) were an average of 4.4 (SD 3.7) years posttreatment. Most survivors reported that they strongly agreed or agreed that they liked the AH-HA tool (n=231, 94.3%). A larger proportion of survivors with high health literacy strongly agreed or agreed that it was helpful to see their heart health score (n=161, 98.2%) compared to survivors with lower health literacy scores (n=68, 89.5%; P=.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Quantitative surveys and qualitative interview data both demonstrate high acceptability of the AH-HA tool among both providers and survivors. Although most survivors found it helpful to see their heart health score, there may be room for improving communication with survivors who have lower health literacy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03935282; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03935282.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-https://doi-org.wake.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2021.100808.

The Nigerian Dietary Screening Tool: A Step toward Improved Patient-Clinician Communication in Nigerian Hospitals: A Pilot Implementation Study

Implementing dietary screening tools into clinical practice has been challenging, including in Nigeria. This study evaluated the impact of the Nigerian dietary screening tool (NiDST) on patient-clinician communication and barriers to and facilitators of implementation. A mixed methods approach was used to collect data from patients (n = 151) and clinicians (n = 20) from outpatient clinics in Nigeria. Patients completed the validated 25-item NiDST prior to outpatient consultations. Both patients and clinicians completed the Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations (MIDI) questionnaire to assess implementation determinants post-consultation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted for in-depth feedback. The fidelity of implementation was 92% for NiDST-reported dietary discussion, with a mean completion time of <6 min and an accepted marginal increase in consultation time (<10 min). For clinicians, 25% reported time constraints and their additional nutritional knowledge as barriers, while facilitators of NiDST implementation were the clarity and completeness of the NiDST, clinical relevance and improved patient-clinician communication, as reported by all the clinicians. Over 96% of patients reported the NiDST as quick to complete, with 90.7% reporting self-reflection on dietary intake. This study demonstrated the NiDST's potential to enhance patient-clinician communication and highlighted major facilitators of implementation in clinical practice to improve dietary discussion in Nigeria.

Cardiovascular Disease Incidence and Cardiovascular Health Among Diverse Women With Breast and Gynecologic Cancers

OBJECTIVES

To examine if racial differences in cardiovascular health (CVH) are associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) disparities among women with breast and gynecologic cancers.

SAMPLE & SETTING

The sample consisted of 252 Black women and 93 White women without a self-reported history of cancer or CVD who developed a breast or gynecologic malignancy. Women who developed CVD before their cancer diagnosis were excluded.

METHODS & VARIABLES

CVH was classified using metrics of the American Heart Association's Life's Simple 7 framework. Metrics were summed to create a total CVH score (0-7). Associations among race, ideal CVH (score of 5-7), and CVD incidence following cancer diagnosis were estimated with Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Ideal CVH was similar between Black women (33%) and White women (37%). Race and CVH were not associated with CVD incidence.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

In a small sample of women diagnosed with breast and gynecologic cancers, racial disparities in CVH and CVD incidence were not observed. Additional investigation of potential confounders relating to social determinants of health tied to the construct of race is warranted.

Perceptions and Usability of PREVENTION: A Breast Cancer Risk Assessment e-Platform

BACKGROUND

The PREVENTION e-platform was developed to provide accessible and evidence-based health information tailored to different Breast Cancer (BC) risk levels. The demonstration study objectives were to (1) assess the usability and perceived impact of PREVENTION on women with assigned hypothetical BC risk levels (i.e., near population, intermediate or high) and (2) explore perceptions and recommendations for e-platform improvement.

METHODS

Thirty women with no history of cancer were recruited through social media, commercial centers, health clinics, and community settings in Montreal, Qc, Canada. Participants accessed e-platform content tailored to their assigned hypothetical BC risk level, and then completed study e-questionnaires including the user Mobile Application Rating Scale (uMARS), an e-platform quality scale (i.e., in terms of engagement, functionality, aesthetics, and information). A subsample (n = 18) was randomly selected for an individual follow-up semi-structured interview.

RESULTS

The e-platform overall quality was high, with mean M = 4.01 (out of 5) and SD = 0.50. A total of 87% (n = 26) agreed or strongly agreed that PREVENTION increased their knowledge and awareness of BC risk, and 80% would recommend it to others while reporting likelihood of following lifestyle recommendations to decrease their BC risk. Follow up interviews indicated that participants perceived the e-platform as a trusted source of BC information and a promising means to connect with peers. They also reported that while the e-platform was easy to navigate, improvements were needed for connectivity, visuals, and the organization of scientific resources.

CONCLUSION

Preliminary findings support PREVENTION as a promising means to provide personalized BC information and support. Efforts are underway to further refine the platform, assess its impact in larger samples and gather feedback from BC specialists.

Implementing an Electronic Clinical Decision Support Tool Into Routine Care: A Qualitative Study of Stakeholders' Perceptions of a Post-Mastectomy Breast Reconstruction Tool

Objective. To explore barriers and facilitators to implementing an evidence-based clinical decision support (CDS) tool (BREASTChoice) about post-mastectomy breast reconstruction into routine care. Materials and Methods. A stakeholder advisory group of cancer survivors, clinicians who discuss and/or perform breast reconstruction in women with cancer, and informatics professionals helped design and review the interview guide. Based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we conducted qualitative semistructured interviews with key stakeholders (patients, clinicians, informatics professionals) to explore intervention, setting characteristics, and process-level variables that can impact implementation. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed based on the CFIR framework using both inductive and deductive methods. Results. Fifty-seven potential participants were contacted; 49 (85.9%) were eligible, and 35 (71.4%) were enrolled, continuing until thematic saturation was reached. Participants consisted of 13 patients, 13 clinicians, and 9 informatics professionals. Stakeholders thought that BREASTChoice was useful and provided patients with an evidence-based source of information about post-mastectomy breast reconstruction, including their personalized risks. They felt that BREASTChoice could support shared decision making, improve workflow, and possibly save consultation time, but were uncertain about the best time to deliver BREASTChoice to patients. Some worried about cost, data availability, and security of integrating the tool into an electronic health record. Most acknowledged the importance of showing clinical utility to gain institutional buy-in and encourage routine adoption. Discussion and Conclusion. Stakeholders felt that BREASTChoice could support shared decision making, improve workflow, and reduce consultation time. Addressing key questions such as cost, data integration, and timing of delivering BREASTChoice could build institutional buy-in for CDS implementation. Results can guide future CDS implementation studies.

Human Factors and Organizational Issues in Health Informatics: Innovations and Opportunities

OBJECTIVE

Human factors and ergonomics (HF/E) frameworks and methods are becoming embedded in the health informatics community. There is now broad recognition that health informatics tools must account for the diverse needs, characteristics, and abilities of end users, as well as their context of use. The objective of this review is to synthesize the current nature and scope of HF/E integration into the health informatics community.

METHODS

Because the focus of this synthesis is on understanding the current integration of the HF/E and health informatics research communities, we manually reviewed all manuscripts published in primary HF/E and health informatics journals during 2020.

RESULTS

HF/E-focused health informatics studies included in this synthesis focused heavily on EHR customizations, specifically clinical decision support customizations and customized data displays, and on mobile health innovations. While HF/E methods aimed to jointly improve end user safety, performance, and satisfaction, most HF/E-focused health informatics studies measured only end user satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

HF/E-focused health informatics researchers need to identify and communicate methodological standards specific to health informatics, to better synthesize findings across resource intensive HF/E-focused health informatics studies. Important gaps in the HF/E design and evaluation process should be addressed in future work, including support for technology development platforms and training programs so that health informatics designers are as diverse as end users.

Mobile Health Applications, Cancer Survivors, and Lifestyle Modification: An Integrative Review

Cancer survivors' well-being is threatened by the risk of cancer recurrence and the increased risk of chronic diseases resulting from cancer treatments. Improving lifestyle behaviors attenuates these risks. Traditional approaches to lifestyle modification (ie, counseling) are expensive, require significant human resources, and are difficult to scale. Mobile health interventions offer a novel alternative to traditional approaches. However, to date, systematic reviews have yet to examine the use of mobile health interventions for lifestyle behavior improvement among cancer survivors. The objectives of this integrative review were to synthesize research findings, critically appraise the scientific literature, examine the use of theory in intervention design, and identify survivors' preferences in using mobile health interventions for lifestyle improvement. Nineteen articles met eligibility requirements. Only two studies used quantitative methods. Study quality was low, and only one study reported the use of theory in app design. Unfortunately, the evidence has not yet sufficiently matured, in quality or in rigor, to make recommendations on how to improve health behaviors or outcomes. However, six themes emerged as important considerations for intervention development for cancer survivors (app features/functionality, social relationships/support, provider relationships/support, app content, app acceptability, and barriers to use). These findings underscored the need for rigorous, efficacy studies before the use of mobile health interventions can be safely recommended for cancer survivors.

Cardiovascular Assessment Tool for Breast Cancer Survivors and Oncology Providers: Usability Study

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular health is of increasing concern to breast cancer survivors and their health care providers, as many survivors are more likely to die from cardiovascular disease than cancer. Implementing clinical decision support tools to address cardiovascular risk factor awareness in the oncology setting may enhance survivors' attainment or maintenance of cardiovascular health.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate survivors' awareness of cardiovascular risk factors and examine the usability of a novel electronic health record enabled cardiovascular health tool from the perspective of both breast cancer survivors and oncology providers.

METHODS

Breast cancer survivors (n=49) recruited from a survivorship clinic interacted with the cardiovascular health tool and completed pre and posttool assessments about cardiovascular health knowledge and perceptions of the tool. Oncologists, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners (n=20) who provide care to survivors also viewed the cardiovascular health tool and completed assessments of perceived usability and acceptability.

RESULTS

Enrolled breast cancer survivors (84% White race, 4% Hispanic ethnicity) had been diagnosed 10.8 years ago (SD 6.0) with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage 0, I, or II (45/49, 92%). Prior to viewing the tool, 65% of survivors (32/49) reported not knowing their level for one or more cardiovascular health factors (range 0-4). On average, only 45% (range 0%-86%) of survivors' known cardiovascular health factors were at an ideal level. More than 50% of survivors had ideal smoking status (45/48, 94%) or blood glucose level (29/45, 64%); meanwhile, less than 50% had ideal blood pressure (12/49, 24%), body mass index (12/49, 24%), cholesterol level (17/35, 49%), diet (7/49, 14%), and physical activity (10/49. 20%). More than 90% of survivors thought the tool was easy to understand (46/47, 98%), improved their understanding (43/47, 91%), and was helpful (45/47, 96%); overall, 94% (44/47 survivors) liked the tool. A majority of survivors (44/47, 94%) thought oncologists should discuss cardiovascular health during survivorship care. Most (12/20, 60%) oncology providers (female: 12/20, 60%; physicians: 14/20, 70%) had been practicing for more than 5 years. Most providers agreed the tool provided useful information (18/20, 90%), would help their effectiveness (18/20, 90%), was easy to use (20/20, 100%), and presented information in a useful format (19/20, 95%); and 85% of providers (17/20) reported they would use the tool most or all of the time when providing survivorship care.

CONCLUSIONS

These usability data demonstrate acceptability of a cardiovascular health clinical decision support tool in oncology practices. Oncology providers and breast cancer survivors would likely value the integration of such apps in survivorship care. By increasing awareness and communication regarding cardiovascular health, electronic health record-enabled tools may improve survivorship care delivery for breast cancer and ultimately patient outcomes.