Improving the chemotherapy consent: From paper to tablet
Abstract only 298 Background: A comprehensive chemotherapy informed consent process improves shared decision-making. Additionally, the Oncology Care Model (OCM) emphasizes providing patients with a documented care plan that contains the 13 components in the Institute of Medicine Care Management Plan...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Journal of clinical oncology Vol. 37; no. 27_suppl; p. 298 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
20-09-2019
|
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Abstract only
298
Background: A comprehensive chemotherapy informed consent process improves shared decision-making. Additionally, the Oncology Care Model (OCM) emphasizes providing patients with a documented care plan that contains the 13 components in the Institute of Medicine Care Management Plan. Within our health system, we incorporated the care plan into our existing chemotherapy consent process and utilized technology to increase compliance and reduce administrative burden. Methods: Our 2 phase PDSA included: 1) updating our existing paper chemotherapy form with the 13 components of the IOM care plan and then 2) piloting an electronic version of the chemotherapy consent form. We updated our new chemotherapy consent with the addition of Prognosis, Expected Response to Treatment, Potential Effect on Quality of Life, Potential Benefits/Goals of Treatment, and added more options for potential side effects/harm. Given the increased administrative burden, we created and piloted the use of an electronic version of the consent form in our breast oncology program. Results: Baseline, monthly random chart audit of 20-40 patients revealed compliance with completing every question of the paper chemotherapy consent at 30% of all patients receiving IV chemotherapy at our cancer center that month- 7/2018. When the new chemotherapy consent incorporating the IOM elements was rolled out, compliance initially rose to 50% (8/2018), however the following months dropped to 10-20% (9-11/2018) and then back up to 41% briefly (12/2018). The results were low and inconsistent. A pareto chart confirmed that redundancy and too many questions were the reasons for under-completion. By auto-populating fields for certain questions on the paper consent, compliance increased to 75% (2/2019). Finally within our breast cancer pilot group our compliance rose to 100% (3-4/2019), by converting to an electronic form with the maximum options for auto-population and drop-down selections for certain fields. Conclusions: Incorporating regulatory requirements into an existing workflow can reduce administrative burden. The use of innovative technology can further increase clinician and OCM compliance while delivering value to patients. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0732-183X 1527-7755 |
| DOI: | 10.1200/JCO.2019.37.27_suppl.298 |