Healthcare Professionals-Perceived Benefits and Opportunities to Improve an Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes (ePRO)-Based Remote Symptom Monitoring (RSM) Program During Cancer Treatment
Author(s)
Brandon Boyle, PharmD1, Meni Styliadou, BA2, Ipek Ozer Stillman, MBA, MSc1, H Mark Lin, PhD3, Aaron Galaznik, MD, MBA4, Debra Wujcik, RN, PhD5, Emelly Rusli, MPH4.
1Takeda, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2Takeda Pharmaceuticals International AG, Glattpark-Opfikon, Switzerland, 3Takeda, Lexington, MA, USA, 4Carevive by Health Catalyst, Boston, MA, USA, 5Carevive by Health Catalyst, Columbia, TN, USA.
1Takeda, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2Takeda Pharmaceuticals International AG, Glattpark-Opfikon, Switzerland, 3Takeda, Lexington, MA, USA, 4Carevive by Health Catalyst, Boston, MA, USA, 5Carevive by Health Catalyst, Columbia, TN, USA.
OBJECTIVES: Electronic Patient reported outcomes (ePROs) deployed in remote symptom monitoring (RSM) technology platforms for standard care have shown benefits for clinical outcomes and resource utilization. This study qualitatively explores healthcare professionals’ (HCPs) experiences of perceived benefits and limitations to inform future use.
METHODS: This qualitative study engaged a convenience sample of HCPs (n=10) currently using eRSM for treatment planning, symptom monitoring and accessing aggregated patient data. Participants were US-based physicians and nurses working in oncology. The research project was IRB exempt by Advarra IRB. Semi-structured 45 minute interviews were conducted by telephone or video call. Thematic analysis was applied as follows: familiarisation, generation of codes, searching for themes, reviewing themes, defining the themes, and reporting. Qualitative data analysis was supported by MAXQDA.
RESULTS: Ten HCPs participated: two clinical nurses, three research nurses, and five physicians. HCPS worked across small (n=3), medium (n=2) and large (n=4) clinics (missing=1). Participants’ average experience was 9.2 years (range 2 - 21 years) with a range of PRO experience from none to extensive experience applying PROs in clinic and research. Enhancement opportunities were described by 8 of 10 (80%) as mindfulness of staffing needs and burnout, and 5 of 10 (50%) as better integration with electronic medical records (EMR) and other systems. All respondents felt, however, that the platform improved patient care and 9 of 10 (90%) cited improved patient outcomes such as early problem identification, enhanced patient self-management, and increased patient satisfaction. Improvement opportunities included further automation to improve workflow integration, address patient follow-up and reduce data missingness.
CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative study identified multiple benefits of ePRO’s and eRSM in oncology patient care and highlighted future enhancement opportunities. As eRSM use increases, there is opportunity to continuously improve HCP and patient engagement and satisfaction to optimize incorporation into clinical practice.
METHODS: This qualitative study engaged a convenience sample of HCPs (n=10) currently using eRSM for treatment planning, symptom monitoring and accessing aggregated patient data. Participants were US-based physicians and nurses working in oncology. The research project was IRB exempt by Advarra IRB. Semi-structured 45 minute interviews were conducted by telephone or video call. Thematic analysis was applied as follows: familiarisation, generation of codes, searching for themes, reviewing themes, defining the themes, and reporting. Qualitative data analysis was supported by MAXQDA.
RESULTS: Ten HCPs participated: two clinical nurses, three research nurses, and five physicians. HCPS worked across small (n=3), medium (n=2) and large (n=4) clinics (missing=1). Participants’ average experience was 9.2 years (range 2 - 21 years) with a range of PRO experience from none to extensive experience applying PROs in clinic and research. Enhancement opportunities were described by 8 of 10 (80%) as mindfulness of staffing needs and burnout, and 5 of 10 (50%) as better integration with electronic medical records (EMR) and other systems. All respondents felt, however, that the platform improved patient care and 9 of 10 (90%) cited improved patient outcomes such as early problem identification, enhanced patient self-management, and increased patient satisfaction. Improvement opportunities included further automation to improve workflow integration, address patient follow-up and reduce data missingness.
CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative study identified multiple benefits of ePRO’s and eRSM in oncology patient care and highlighted future enhancement opportunities. As eRSM use increases, there is opportunity to continuously improve HCP and patient engagement and satisfaction to optimize incorporation into clinical practice.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-11, ISPOR Europe 2025, Glasgow, Scotland
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S2
Code
PCR111
Topic
Clinical Outcomes, Health Service Delivery & Process of Care, Patient-Centered Research
Topic Subcategory
Patient-reported Outcomes & Quality of Life Outcomes
Disease
Oncology