University of California, San Francisco Medical Center, San Francisco, CA
Ana I. Velazquez Manana, Rahul Banerjee, Vanessa Elaine Kennedy, August Reich Dietrich, Amy M. Lin, Pelin Cinar
Background: Accurate performance status (PS) documentation is essential as poor PS is a strong predictor of treatment-related toxicity. At our institution, a baseline chart review revealed missing PS documentation in 28% of Fellow-seen new patient visits (NPV); PS documentation as unstructured text comprised the remainder. The lack of structured PS documentation represents a missed opportunity for accurate data in registries, trial registration, and supportive care referrals. Methods: To improve standardized documentation of PS for NPV, we designed a Fellow-led quality improvement (QI) initiative over the course of 2 PDSA cycles. Specifically, we developed and implemented a structured PS smart data element tool (SDET) into our electronic medical record (EMR). PDSA cycle 1 (7/2019–11/2019) included SDET implementation and publicity using flyers & emails. PDSA cycle 2 (12/2019–4/2020) incorporated individualized feedback to Fellows, biweekly email reminders, and outreach to attendings regarding our SDET. We calculated cumulative usage of our SDET for PS documentation during the 2019-2020 academic year among NPV seen by Fellows. Our aim was to assess and document PS in at least 50% of NPV seen in person. Results: During PDSA cycle 1, cumulative structured PS documentation increased from 8% to 31% (Table). Focus groups revealed that Fellows were not consistently incorporating our SDET into their note templates or were relying on attending-written templates. Over PDSA cycle 2, the cumulative structured PS documentation rate increased from 24% to 54%. Overall our cumulative documentation rate is 40%, in large part driven by cycle 1 because of a drop in NPVs and the transition to telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions: Our Fellow-led QI intervention improved cumulative structured PS documentation from 8% to 40% using two rapid PDSA cycles. Our intervention highlights the importance of real-time data review and stakeholder feedback to identify ongoing challenges. Our third PDSA cycle will include expansion to all clinic providers (Fellows, attendings, and advanced-practice providers), as well as the incorporation of telehealth encounters and follow-up visits. We also hope to align our QI initiative with broader steps toward data interoperability via the ASCO-sponsored mCODE initiative.
PDSA cycle #1 | PDSA cycle #2 | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
July 2019 | Aug 2019 | Sep 2019 | Oct 2019 | Nov 2019 | Dec 2019 | Jan 2020 | Feb 2020 | March 2020 | April 2020 | |
Total NPV (n) | 84 | 71 | 61 | 95 | 60 | 38 | 82 | 72 | 32 | 6 |
Monthly PS documentation rate (%) | 8 | 24 | 30 | 45 | 48 | 24 | 46 | 74 | 66 | 50 |
Cumulative PS documentation rate (%) per PDSA cycle | 8 | 15 | 19 | 27 | 31 | 24 | 39 | 52 | 54 | 54 |
Disclaimer
This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org
Abstract Disclosures
2024 ASCO Quality Care Symposium
First Author: Manan P. Shah
2024 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Divya Deepak
2023 ASCO Quality Care Symposium
First Author: Preeti Kakani
2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Arash Maghsoudi