Remote symptom monitoring after hospital discharge.

Authors: Robert Michael Daly, Jennifer R. Cracchiolo, Jennie Huang, Michael Hannon, Jessie C. Holland, Aaron Begue, AnnMarie Mazzella, Rori Salvaggio, Fernanda C. G. Polubriaginof, Gilad Kuperman, Karen Roberts, Rosanna Fiorarancio Fahy

Published: 2022-06-06

DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.1517

Source: Full article


Abstract

1517 Background: Strategies to improve transitions from the hospital to home for patients with cancer are considered an important component of quality, patient-centered care in oncology. CMS evaluates cancer hospital performance based on the 30-day unplanned hospital readmission rate, and this measure has been endorsed by the National Quality Forum. Nationally, the 30-day readmission rate for oncology patients ranges from 19%-27%. These readmissions come at high psychosocial, physical, and financial costs for patients and caregivers. A remote monitoring intervention that includes frequent contacts with the patient is likely to be effective in improving this transition. Methods: We evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, and perceived value of a mobile health intervention to monitor and manage symptoms of adult medical and surgical oncology patients discharged from an NCI-designated cancer center to home. Patients were monitored for 10 days, which is the median time to readmission for an oncology patient. The technology supporting the program included: 1) a patient portal enabling daily electronic patient-reported outcomes assessments; 2) a pulse oximeter to provide data on blood oxygen level and heart rate; 3) alerts for concerning symptoms; 4) an application to allow staff to review and trend symptom data; 5) a secure platform to support communications and televisits between staff and patients; 6) an advanced feedback report to provide just-in-time patient symptom education. Feasibility and acceptability were evaluated through engagement (goal: > 50% response rate) and symptom alerts and perceived value was measured through a patient engagement survey that included a net promoter score (how likely the patient is to recommend the program to similar patients; goal > 0.7). Results: Between September 27, 2020 to December 31, 2021, the program enrolled 1,091 medical oncology (median age: 63 years, 55% female) and 4,222 surgical oncology patients (median age: 63 years,55% female). Of those enrolled, 65% of medical and 74% of surgical oncology patients participated in home remote monitoring by self-reporting symptom data. This resulted in 2,869 completed symptom assessment from medical and 16,009 completed assessments from surgical patients. Sixty-three percent of medical oncology assessments resulted in a yellow (moderate) or red (severe) symptom alert compared with 26% for surgical oncology patients. Pain was the predominant symptom generating red alerts for medical oncology patients (17%). Fifty-two percent of patients completed the engagement survey, and the net promoter score was 0.82. Conclusions: A remote monitoring program after discharge was feasible, acceptable, and perceived to be of value by oncology patients discharged from a cancer center. Surgical and medical patients have similar response rates but differ in symptom burden. Future work will evaluate the value of a remote symptom monitoring platform in decreasing readmissions.