Background: Despite clinical evidence illustrating the efficacy of MT for ROC, complexities, such as patient-, treatment-, and disease-related factors, and team-based care coordination, limit its optimal use in ROC. In a quality improvement (QI) program, conducted at 2 oncology systems, we evaluated gaps in evidence-based, quality ROC care. Methods: Between 09/2019-02/2020, retrospective EMR audits of 200 patients with ovarian cancer were analyzed for demographics, disease characteristics, treatment history, and shared decision-making (SDM) involving MT. Surveys were administered to evaluate challenges, barriers and experiences of healthcare professionals (HCP; N = 35) and their patients with ROC (N = 21). The HCP teams participated in audit-feedback sessions and developed action plans for resolving identified gaps. Results: EMR audits revealed low utility of MT among patients with ROC (Table), and only 20% of patients reported that MT was discussed as a treatment option. Lack of access to newer therapies was most commonly identified (27%) by HCP as the biggest challenge in treating patients with ROC. Furthermore, survey results revealed that HCP are challenged to correctly integrate guidelines for patient selection for PARP inhibitor MT based on BRCA mutation status (18% of HCP answered correctly), response to previous chemotherapy (49% correct), and line of therapy (46% correct). Data indicated a low level of SDM – none of the patients indicated a high level involvement in treatment decisions and only 20% indicated a high level of agreement that their care team understood their treatment goals. EMR audits also illustrate low documentation of multiple aspects of SDM (Table). Oncology team members formulated plans to develop guidance documents to assist in therapy sequencing and tools to improve patient education. Conclusions: Overall, data from this QI program indicate gaps, challenges, and barriers in evidence-based, MT decision-making and engagement of patients in SDM. These areas for improvement may be relevant for future interventions to improve the provision of quality ROC care.

^aAssessed by qualitative content analysis of progress notes