Michael F Gensheimer, Winifred Teuteberg, Manali I Patel, Divya Gupta, Mahjabin Noroozi, Xi Ling, Touran Fardeen, Briththa Seevaratnam, Ying Lu, Nina Alves, Brian Rogers, Mary Khay Asuncion, Jan Denofrio, Jennifer Hansen, Nigam H Shah, Thomas Chen, Elwyn Cabebe, Douglas W Blayney, A Dimitrios Colevas, Kavitha Ramchandran
{"title":"Automated patient selection and care coaches to increase advance care planning for cancer patients.","authors":"Michael F Gensheimer, Winifred Teuteberg, Manali I Patel, Divya Gupta, Mahjabin Noroozi, Xi Ling, Touran Fardeen, Briththa Seevaratnam, Ying Lu, Nina Alves, Brian Rogers, Mary Khay Asuncion, Jan Denofrio, Jennifer Hansen, Nigam H Shah, Thomas Chen, Elwyn Cabebe, Douglas W Blayney, A Dimitrios Colevas, Kavitha Ramchandran","doi":"10.1093/jnci/djae243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Advance care planning/serious illness conversations can help clinicians understand patients' values and preferences. There are limited data on how to increase these conversations, and their effect on care patterns. We hypothesized that using a machine learning survival model to select patients for serious illness conversations, along with trained care coaches to conduct the conversations, would increase uptake in cancer patients at high risk of short-term mortality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cluster-randomized stepped wedge study on the physician level. Oncologists entered the intervention condition in a random order over six months. Adult patients with metastatic cancer were included. Patients with <2 year computer-predicted survival and no prognosis documentation were classified as high-priority for serious illness conversations. In the intervention condition, providers received automated weekly emails highlighting high-priority patients and were asked to document prognosis for them. Care coaches reached out to these patients to conduct the remainder of the conversation. The primary endpoint was proportion of visits with prognosis documentation within 14 days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>6,372 visits in 1,825 patients were included in the primary analysis. The proportion of visits with prognosis documentation within 14 days was higher in the intervention condition than control condition: 2.9% vs 1.1% (adjusted odds ratio 4.3, p < .0001). The proportion of visits with advance care planning documentation was also higher in the intervention condition: 7.7% vs 1.8% (adjusted odds ratio 14.2, p < .0001). In high-priority visits, advance care planning documentation rate in intervention/control visits was 24.2% vs 4.0%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The intervention increased documented conversations, with contributions by both providers and care coaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":14809,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djae243","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Advance care planning/serious illness conversations can help clinicians understand patients' values and preferences. There are limited data on how to increase these conversations, and their effect on care patterns. We hypothesized that using a machine learning survival model to select patients for serious illness conversations, along with trained care coaches to conduct the conversations, would increase uptake in cancer patients at high risk of short-term mortality.
Methods: We conducted a cluster-randomized stepped wedge study on the physician level. Oncologists entered the intervention condition in a random order over six months. Adult patients with metastatic cancer were included. Patients with <2 year computer-predicted survival and no prognosis documentation were classified as high-priority for serious illness conversations. In the intervention condition, providers received automated weekly emails highlighting high-priority patients and were asked to document prognosis for them. Care coaches reached out to these patients to conduct the remainder of the conversation. The primary endpoint was proportion of visits with prognosis documentation within 14 days.
Results: 6,372 visits in 1,825 patients were included in the primary analysis. The proportion of visits with prognosis documentation within 14 days was higher in the intervention condition than control condition: 2.9% vs 1.1% (adjusted odds ratio 4.3, p < .0001). The proportion of visits with advance care planning documentation was also higher in the intervention condition: 7.7% vs 1.8% (adjusted odds ratio 14.2, p < .0001). In high-priority visits, advance care planning documentation rate in intervention/control visits was 24.2% vs 4.0%.
Conclusion: The intervention increased documented conversations, with contributions by both providers and care coaches.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of the National Cancer Institute is a reputable publication that undergoes a peer-review process. It is available in both print (ISSN: 0027-8874) and online (ISSN: 1460-2105) formats, with 12 issues released annually. The journal's primary aim is to disseminate innovative and important discoveries in the field of cancer research, with specific emphasis on clinical, epidemiologic, behavioral, and health outcomes studies. Authors are encouraged to submit reviews, minireviews, and commentaries. The journal ensures that submitted manuscripts undergo a rigorous and expedited review to publish scientifically and medically significant findings in a timely manner.