ESTRO 2023 - Abstract Book

S43

Saturday 13 May

ESTRO 2023

The nationwide survey revealed a variety of approaches to recovering from RT disruption, emphasizing the necessity of national rules and company advice.

PD-0077 Electronic Patient Reported Outcomes in follow-up after palliative radiotherapy: a feasibility study E. Oldenburger 1 , S. Isebaert 1 , A. Coolbrandt 2 , C. Van Audenhove 3 , K. Haustermans 1 1 University Hospitals Leuven, Radiation Oncology, Leuven, Belgium; 2 University Hospitals Leuven, General Medical Oncology, Leuven, Belgium; 3 LUCAS KU Leuven Centre for Care Research & Consultancy, -, Leuven, Belgium Purpose or Objective Adequate management of treatment-related symptoms or cancer-related complaints persisting after palliative radiotherapy (PRT) is essential for maintaining or optimizing patients’ quality of life. Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (ePROMs) could be a low-threshold method to follow patients after their treatment to identify those in need of additional support, as shown in advanced cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. In this study, we implemented ePROMs to monitor patients after PRT to evaluate the implementation process and assess usability of ePROMs in this patient population. Materials and Methods Based on our earlier (in part unpublished) research, an ePROM diary consisting of nine general and one to five site-specific PRO-CTCAE questions on the most common symptoms after PRT was developed. In addition, a free text box where patients could add an additional symptom was included. The diary automatically generated self-management advice in case of limited symptoms plus the advice to contact a health care provider (HCP) for severe symptoms. Patients were asked to complete the diary for a period of three weeks after PRT and to be interviewed afterwards. Included patients were Dutch speaking with Karnofsky Index of ≥ 60 treated with PRT. Patients hospitalized during and after PRT, living in an assisted care facility or those receiving daily palliative home care were not included, as our previous study showed that these patients generally do not benefit from the diary. Results Results: During a recruitment period of 10 weeks, a total of 40 (77%) out of 52 patients that were offered the diary were included. Of these patients, 26 (65%) actively used the diary by completing at least one diary entry. Main reasons for study participation were self-management and active care participation possibilities as well as the feeling that the diary was deemed important by HCP. All 26 active participants were positive about the diary, with 21 willing to use it again in case of re-irradiation and 20 advising others to use it. All questions were perceived as relevant and easy to answer. The free text box was viewed very positively, with several patients suggesting adding more to further individualize the diary. The self-management advice was seen as helpful although generic. The advice to contact a HCP was considered useful, although some patients were not sure who to contact. Main reasons for not starting or prematurely stopping the diary were limited symptom burden and having to complete multiple diaries for different treatments in the same timeframe. Conclusion ePROMs for follow-up after PRT seem feasible and are positively received by patients. Further investigation is needed on the optimal duration and effectiveness of ePROMs as in addition to offering strategies, such as integrating ePROMs in a larger multidisciplinary oncology follow-up scheme, supervised by one general contact. PD-0078 Electronic Patient Reported Outcomes in follow-up after PRT: a national survey study E. Oldenburger 1 , S. Isebaert 1 , A. Coolbrandt 2 , C. Van Audenhove 3 , K. Haustermans 1 1 University Hospitals Leuven, Radiation Oncology, Leuven, Belgium; 2 University Hospitals Leuven, General Medical Oncology, Leuven, Belgium; 3 LUCAS KU Leuven Centre for Care Research & Consultancy, /, Leuven, Belgium Purpose or Objective Up to 50% of radiation courses are with palliative intent. Despite preventive measures, treatment-related symptoms or cancer-related complaints may occur or remain after treatment. Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (ePROMs) could be used to monitor patients after their treatment and to assure adequate supportive care. Despite the growing interest in ePROMs, their implementation and adoption in routine clinical practice (RCP) has been challenging and there is little insight in the experiences and perspectives of health care providers (HCP) on ePROMs in palliative radiotherapy (PRT). The aim of this study was to explore the opinions of HCP active in radiation oncology in Belgium to identify potential unknown barriers and facilitators for ePROMs in the setting of PRT. Materials and Methods An anonymous online survey was conducted with radiation oncologists (ROs), nurses, radiotherapists, clinical support managers and quality managers working in Belgium. Participants were recruited through their respective professional organizations. No specific ex- or inclusion criteria were applied. Results We received 128 survey responses, the majority being from ROs (36%) and nurses (33%). Twenty six percent of respondents had personal experience with ePROMs in clinical PRT. Despite limited use, ePROMs were seen as a valuable tool for follow up after PRT by the respondents, both for patients (82%) and HCP (78%) For patients, ePROMs were considered as beneficial for their health and symptom knowledge, symptom self-management and active participation in care. For HCP, ePROMs could help focus on relevant symptoms, detect these in an early stage and improve their management. Additionally, ePROMs were thought to improve communication, continuity of care and multidisciplinary care. Most respondents (75%) were willing to implement and use ePROMs routinely, despite the fact that they were associated with a presumed increase in workload both during implementation and clinical use,. Assigning the responsibility for ePROM implementation to a specific, dedicated person, such as a nurse specialist, would increase ePROM success. Feasibility of ePROMs for palliative patients, due to age of poor performance status, was a larger concern than the possible addition to workload. Again, a nurse specialist to guide, follow and support patients during ePROM use was thought to increase implementation and use. Conclusion Despite limited use in RCP, HCP active in radiotherapy are generally willing to implement and use ePROMs, as their benefits are well known. Assigning ePROM introduction and follow-up as well as patient guidance and support to a dedicated person, such as a nurse specialist, was thought to promote implementation and improve use in RCP. In spite of the limited sample, we feel that our study adds valuable insight on ePROMs in this particular patient population.