Successes and challenges of implementing a cancer care delivery intervention in community oncology practices: lessons learned from SWOG S1415CD

Kate K Watabayashi, Ari Bell-Brown, Karma Kreizenbeck, Kathryn Egan, Gary H Lyman, Dawn L Hershman, Kathryn B Arnold, Aasthaa Bansal, William E Barlow, Sean D Sullivan, Scott D Ramsey, Kate K Watabayashi, Ari Bell-Brown, Karma Kreizenbeck, Kathryn Egan, Gary H Lyman, Dawn L Hershman, Kathryn B Arnold, Aasthaa Bansal, William E Barlow, Sean D Sullivan, Scott D Ramsey

Abstract

Background: Cancer Care Delivery (CCD) research studies often require practice-level interventions that pose challenges in the clinical trial setting. The SWOG Cancer Research Network (SWOG) conducted S1415CD, one of the first pragmatic cluster-randomized CCD trials to be implemented through the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Community Oncology Program (NCORP), to compare outcomes of primary prophylactic colony stimulating factor (PP-CSF) use for an intervention of automated PP-CSF standing orders to usual care. The introduction of new methods for study implementation created challenges and opportunities for learning that can inform the design and approach of future CCD interventions.

Methods: The order entry system intervention was administered at the site level; sites were affiliated NCORP practices that shared the same chemotherapy order system. 32 sites without existing guideline-based PP-CSF standing orders were randomized to the intervention (n = 24) or to usual care (n = 8). Sites assigned to the intervention participated in tailored training, phone calls and onboarding activities administered by research team staff and were provided with additional funding and external IT support to help them make protocol required changes to their order entry systems.

Results: The average length of time for intervention sites to complete reconfiguration of their order sets following randomization was 7.2 months. 14 of 24 of intervention sites met their individual patient recruitment target of 99 patients enrolled per site.

Conclusions: In this paper we share seven recommendations based on lessons learned from implementation of the S1415CD intervention at NCORP community oncology practices representing diverse geographies and patient populations across the U. S. It is our hope these recommendations can be used to guide future implementation of CCD interventions in both research and community settings.

Trial registration: NCT02728596 , registered April 5, 2016.

Keywords: Cancer care delivery; Cluster-randomized; Colony stimulating factor; Computerized clinical decision support system; Intervention.

Conflict of interest statement

SR reports consulting or advisory roles with Bayer Corporation, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Merck & Company Inc, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, Biovica, Genentech (institution); research funding from Bayer Corporation, Bristol-Myers Squibb; and travel accommodations or expenses from Bayer Schering Pharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Bayer. GL reports educational programs or consulting roles with G1 Therapeutics; Partners Healthcare; BeyondSpring; Sandoz; Squibb; Merck; Jazz Pharm; Kallyope; TEVA; Seattle Genetics and Samsung; and research funding from Amgen (Inst). The reported relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. All other authors declare that they have no competing interests.

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Intervention to patient enrollment workflow
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Process to establish a primary prophylactic colony stimulating factor entry protocol

References

    1. Geiger AM, O'Mara AM, McCaskill-Stevens WJ, Adjei B, Tuovenin P, Castro KM. Evolution of Cancer Care Delivery Research in the NCI Community Oncology Research Program. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2020;112(6):557–561. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djz234.
    1. Printz C. NCI launches program for community-based clinical research: NCORP replaces 2 previous programs. Cancer. 2014;120(20):3097–3098. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29067.
    1. Bansal A, Sullivan SD, Hershman DL, Lyman GH, Barlow WE, McCune JS, et al. A stakeholder-informed randomized, controlled comparative effectiveness study of an order prescribing intervention to improve colony stimulating factor use for cancer patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy: the TrACER study. J Comp Eff Res. 2017;6(5):461–470. doi: 10.2217/cer-2017-0005.
    1. Pettit NN, Han Z, Choksi A, Voas-Marszowski D, Pisano J. Reducing medication errors involving antiretroviral therapy with targeted electronic medical record modifications. AIDS Care. 2019;31(7):893–896. doi: 10.1080/09540121.2019.1566512.
    1. Kreizenbeck KL, Egan K, Wong T, Jagels B, Jensen B, Smith JC, et al. Results of a pilot study to increase adherence to ASCO G-CSF recommendations at community clinics. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(29_suppl):19. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2020.38.29_suppl.19.
    1. 10 things physicians and patients should question. American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2013: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO); 2014 [Available from: .
    1. National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program: About NCORP 2021 Available from: .
    1. SWOG Cancer Research Network About page: SWOG Cancer Research Network; updated 2021. Available from: .
    1. National Cancer Institute NCTN: NCI's National Clinical Trials Network 2021 Available from: .
    1. Barger S, Sullivan SD, Bell-Brown A, Bott B, Ciccarella AM, Golenski J, et al. Effective stakeholder engagement: design and implementation of a clinical trial (SWOG S1415CD) to improve cancer care. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019;19(1):119. doi: 10.1186/s12874-019-0764-2.
    1. NRG Oncology [Available from: .
    1. Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology 2021 Available from: .
    1. ECOG-ACRIN cancer research group about us: ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group; 2022. Available from: .
    1. Alolayan A, Alkaiyat M, Ali Y, Alshami M, Al-Surimi K, Jazieh AR. Improving physician’s hand over among oncology staff using standardized communication tool. BMJ Qual Improv Rep. 2017;6(1):u211844. doi: 10.1136/bmjquality.u211844.w6141.
    1. Haq R, Kong A, Gulasingam P. A multidisciplinary approach to implement personalized breast cancer treatment and care plans. Curr Oncol. 2021;28(1):767–782. doi: 10.3390/curroncol28010075.
    1. Institute TWED. PDSA Cycle: The W. Edwards Deming Institute; 2022 Available from: .
    1. Tan RY, Met-Domestici M, Zhou K, Guzman AB, Lim ST, Soo KC, et al. Using quality improvement methods and time-driven activity-based costing to improve value-based cancer care delivery at a cancer genetics clinic. J Oncol Pract. 2016;12(3):e320–e331. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2015.007765.
    1. Abelson-Taylor, Hearts & Science. The Day After Chemo. . 2018. . Accessed 28 Mar 2022.

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다