Kathryn E Weaver, Emily V Dressler, Heidi D Klepin, Simon C Lee, Brian J Wells, Sydney Smith, W Gregory Hundley, Glenn J Lesser, Chandylen L Nightingale, Julie C Turner, Ian Lackey, Kevin Heard, Randi Foraker
{"title":"社区肿瘤学实践中针对癌症幸存者的心血管健康电子病历应用的有效性：WF-1804CD 的结果。","authors":"Kathryn E Weaver, Emily V Dressler, Heidi D Klepin, Simon C Lee, Brian J Wells, Sydney Smith, W Gregory Hundley, Glenn J Lesser, Chandylen L Nightingale, Julie C Turner, Ian Lackey, Kevin Heard, Randi Foraker","doi":"10.1200/JCO.24.00342","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Guidelines recommend cardiovascular (CV) risk assessment and counseling for cancer survivors. This study evaluated the automated heart-health assessment (AH-HA) clinical decision support tool to promote provider-patient CV health (CVH) discussions in outpatient oncology.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The AH-HA trial (WF-1804CD), coordinated by the Wake Forest National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program Research Base, randomized practices to the AH-HA tool or usual care (UC) and enrolled survivors receiving routine care ≥6 months after curative cancer treatment. The tool displayed American Heart Association Life's Simple 7 CVH factors (BMI, physical activity, diet, smoking status, blood pressure, cholesterol, and glucose), populated from the electronic health record (EHR), alongside cancer treatments received with cardiotoxic potential. The primary end point was survivor-reported discussion of nonideal or missing CVH factors. A mixed-effects logistic regression model assessed the effect of AH-HA on CVH discussions, adjusting for practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five UC and four AH-HA practices enrolled 645 survivors (82% breast, 8% endometrial, 5% colorectal, and 5% lymphoma, prostate, or multiple types) from October 1, 2020, to February 28, 2023. Most survivors were female (96%; 84% White/non-Hispanic, 8% Black; 3% Hispanic). Nearly all survivors (98%) in AH-HA practices reported a discussion for ≥1 nonideal or missing CVH factor compared with 55% in UC (<i>P</i> < .001). The average number of survivor-reported factors discussed was higher in AH-HA compared with UC (mean, 4.06 <i>v</i> 1.27; <i>P</i> < .001), as were EHR-documented discussions (3.83 <i>v</i> 0.77; <i>P</i> = .03). Survivors in AH-HA practices were also significantly more likely to report a recommendation to see a primary care provider (39%) compared with UC practices (25%, <i>P</i> = .02). Reported recommendations to see a cardiologist were low (approximately 6%) and did not differ between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The AH-HA tool was effective at promoting CVH discussions during routine follow-up care for survivors and recommendations to consult primary care.</p>","PeriodicalId":15384,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Oncology","volume":" ","pages":"JCO2400342"},"PeriodicalIF":42.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of a Cardiovascular Health Electronic Health Record Application for Cancer Survivors in Community Oncology Practice: Results From WF-1804CD.\",\"authors\":\"Kathryn E Weaver, Emily V Dressler, Heidi D Klepin, Simon C Lee, Brian J Wells, Sydney Smith, W Gregory Hundley, Glenn J Lesser, Chandylen L Nightingale, Julie C Turner, Ian Lackey, Kevin Heard, Randi Foraker\",\"doi\":\"10.1200/JCO.24.00342\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Guidelines recommend cardiovascular (CV) risk assessment and counseling for cancer survivors. This study evaluated the automated heart-health assessment (AH-HA) clinical decision support tool to promote provider-patient CV health (CVH) discussions in outpatient oncology.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The AH-HA trial (WF-1804CD), coordinated by the Wake Forest National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program Research Base, randomized practices to the AH-HA tool or usual care (UC) and enrolled survivors receiving routine care ≥6 months after curative cancer treatment. The tool displayed American Heart Association Life's Simple 7 CVH factors (BMI, physical activity, diet, smoking status, blood pressure, cholesterol, and glucose), populated from the electronic health record (EHR), alongside cancer treatments received with cardiotoxic potential. The primary end point was survivor-reported discussion of nonideal or missing CVH factors. A mixed-effects logistic regression model assessed the effect of AH-HA on CVH discussions, adjusting for practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five UC and four AH-HA practices enrolled 645 survivors (82% breast, 8% endometrial, 5% colorectal, and 5% lymphoma, prostate, or multiple types) from October 1, 2020, to February 28, 2023. Most survivors were female (96%; 84% White/non-Hispanic, 8% Black; 3% Hispanic). Nearly all survivors (98%) in AH-HA practices reported a discussion for ≥1 nonideal or missing CVH factor compared with 55% in UC (<i>P</i> < .001). The average number of survivor-reported factors discussed was higher in AH-HA compared with UC (mean, 4.06 <i>v</i> 1.27; <i>P</i> < .001), as were EHR-documented discussions (3.83 <i>v</i> 0.77; <i>P</i> = .03). Survivors in AH-HA practices were also significantly more likely to report a recommendation to see a primary care provider (39%) compared with UC practices (25%, <i>P</i> = .02). Reported recommendations to see a cardiologist were low (approximately 6%) and did not differ between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The AH-HA tool was effective at promoting CVH discussions during routine follow-up care for survivors and recommendations to consult primary care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Oncology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"JCO2400342\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":42.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.24.00342\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.24.00342","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Effectiveness of a Cardiovascular Health Electronic Health Record Application for Cancer Survivors in Community Oncology Practice: Results From WF-1804CD.
Purpose: Guidelines recommend cardiovascular (CV) risk assessment and counseling for cancer survivors. This study evaluated the automated heart-health assessment (AH-HA) clinical decision support tool to promote provider-patient CV health (CVH) discussions in outpatient oncology.
Methods: The AH-HA trial (WF-1804CD), coordinated by the Wake Forest National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program Research Base, randomized practices to the AH-HA tool or usual care (UC) and enrolled survivors receiving routine care ≥6 months after curative cancer treatment. The tool displayed American Heart Association Life's Simple 7 CVH factors (BMI, physical activity, diet, smoking status, blood pressure, cholesterol, and glucose), populated from the electronic health record (EHR), alongside cancer treatments received with cardiotoxic potential. The primary end point was survivor-reported discussion of nonideal or missing CVH factors. A mixed-effects logistic regression model assessed the effect of AH-HA on CVH discussions, adjusting for practice.
Results: Five UC and four AH-HA practices enrolled 645 survivors (82% breast, 8% endometrial, 5% colorectal, and 5% lymphoma, prostate, or multiple types) from October 1, 2020, to February 28, 2023. Most survivors were female (96%; 84% White/non-Hispanic, 8% Black; 3% Hispanic). Nearly all survivors (98%) in AH-HA practices reported a discussion for ≥1 nonideal or missing CVH factor compared with 55% in UC (P < .001). The average number of survivor-reported factors discussed was higher in AH-HA compared with UC (mean, 4.06 v 1.27; P < .001), as were EHR-documented discussions (3.83 v 0.77; P = .03). Survivors in AH-HA practices were also significantly more likely to report a recommendation to see a primary care provider (39%) compared with UC practices (25%, P = .02). Reported recommendations to see a cardiologist were low (approximately 6%) and did not differ between groups.
Conclusion: The AH-HA tool was effective at promoting CVH discussions during routine follow-up care for survivors and recommendations to consult primary care.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Clinical Oncology serves its readers as the single most credible, authoritative resource for disseminating significant clinical oncology research. In print and in electronic format, JCO strives to publish the highest quality articles dedicated to clinical research. Original Reports remain the focus of JCO, but this scientific communication is enhanced by appropriately selected Editorials, Commentaries, Reviews, and other work that relate to the care of patients with cancer.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
