Care coordination for oral oncolytics through pharmacy integration and cycle 1-day 1 documentation

Abstract only 260 Background: The growing number of oral oncolytic therapies (OOTs) necessitates a standardized EMR workflow that integrates pharmacy activities for dispense and patient management and standardizes cycle-1/day-1 (C1D1) documentation. Our practice’s treatment plans contain appropriate...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of clinical oncology Vol. 37; no. 27_suppl; p. 260
Main Authors: Peacock, Nancy Walker, McCullough, Stacey, Crumb, Jared, Owens, Leah, Kaufman, Laura, Arrowsmith, Edward, Patton, Jeffrey, Taylor, Jack L., Lyss, Aaron J., Kelsey, Carolyn J., Senneke, Kimberly, Frailley, Susan A
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!
Description
Summary:Abstract only 260 Background: The growing number of oral oncolytic therapies (OOTs) necessitates a standardized EMR workflow that integrates pharmacy activities for dispense and patient management and standardizes cycle-1/day-1 (C1D1) documentation. Our practice’s treatment plans contain appropriately timed OOT follow-up activities including labs, physician follow-up visits, and pharmacy calls for toxicity and adherence checks, however complications in prescription fulfillment such as prior authorization, co-pay assistance, or inability of in-practice pharmacy to dispense limit the predictability of C1D1 dates of OOTs. Methods: An EMR query identified patients at a single clinic location of 5-medical oncologists (MDs) for whom oral oncolytic treatment plans were entered from January 1 to June 30, 2018. C1D1 date entered by the MD in the EMR was compared to the pharmacy processing system dispense date. Ten patients were identified, and 10% (1/10) had an accurate C1D1 documented within the EMR. As part of the ASCO Quality Training Program, to improve the accuracy of C1D1 documentation, a new workflow was implemented whereby: (1) a “hold” activity was added to new EMR treatment plans so that C1D1 remained pending until patients had received medication; (2) clinic checkout staff provided patients with information on the in-practice pharmacy and expectations for next steps; (3) pharmacists utilized existing reporting tools to identify newly entered treatment plans and transcribed orders into e-prescriptions sent to our practice pharmacy; (4) the pharmacy workflow ensued with pharmacy staff leading patient engagement, drug counseling; (5) pharmacists confirm C1D1, document within EMR (6) subsequent treatment plan activities were scheduled. Results: Following education and process changes within the clinic and pharmacy, accurate C1D1 documentation occurred in 90% (9/10) of patients initiating OOTs. Conclusions: Including pharmacy fulfillment time in EMR workflow can improve C1D1 documentation accuracy and associated management of OOTs. Education regarding roles and processes of prescribing MDs, pharmacy staff and clinic staff will be required to scale this process improvement throughout the organization.
ISSN:0732-183X
1527-7755
DOI:10.1200/JCO.2019.37.27_suppl.260