Search

OBJECTIVES: To explore the utility of brief financial screening items to facilitate the implementation of routine financial toxicity screening. SAMPLE & SETTING: 50 women with breast cancer completed a one-time survey that included the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST): A FACIT Measure of Financial Toxicity, a visual analog scale, and a brief sociodemographic questionnaire. METHODS & VARIABLES: Survey responses were examined to assess the psychometric properties of individual COST items and the visual analog scale by calculating Cronbach's alpha and Pearson's correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The mean COST was 21.4, and 27 respondents met criteria for financial toxicity (a COST lower than 22). As expected, all items correlated strongly to the overall COST, but four items (items 3, 6, 8, and 10) performed strongest (r > 0.8). IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: This study provides evidence for individual COST items to be used as brief screening items. Future research should test the utility of these items in larger sample sizes with a more diverse representation of patients by age, race, ethnicity, and tumor type and stage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE Oral anticancer drug (OACD) prescriptions require extensive coordination between providers and payers, which can delay drug receipt. Specialty pharmacies facilitate communication between multiple entities. In 2018, our cancer center partnered with a freestanding organization to implement a hospital-based specialty pharmacy (HB-SP). We evaluated the time to drug receipt (TTR) before and after HB-SP implementation. METHODS Data were prospectively collected on all new OACD prescriptions for adult oncology patients from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019. In fall 2018, a HB-SP was initiated. We collected patient sociodemographic, clinical, and prescription data. TTR was the number of days from OACD prescription to drug receipt. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine factors associated with TTR ≤ 7 days before and after HB-SP implementation. RESULTS In total, 954 patients were included, representing 1,102 new OACDs. The majority of prescribed drugs were targeted OACDs (56%, n = 617), and 71% (n = 779) required prior authorization. Of all prescriptions, 84% (n = 960) were successfully received with an overall median TTR of 7 days. In unadjusted analysis, HB-SP implementation, drug class, race and ethnicity, and prior authorization requirement were significantly associated with TTR. Adjusted analyses found that patients were more likely to receive their drugs ≤ 7 days after HB-SP implementation (53% v 47%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.29; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.68; P = .05). CONCLUSION The implementation of a HB-SP in partnership with a collaborative care model contributed to a decrease in TTR for OACDs. This difference is in part attributable to improved care coordination and communication. A centralized approach may improve overall efficiency due to fewer practice disruptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE: COVID-19 has altered healthcare delivery. Previous work has focused on patients with cancer and COVID-19, but little has been reported on healthcare system changes among patients without COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients with breast cancer (BC) in New York City between February 1, 2020, and April 30, 2020. New patients were included as were patients scheduled to receive intravenous or injectable therapy. Patients with COVID-19 were excluded. Demographic and treatment information were obtained by chart review. Delays and/or changes in systemic therapy, surgery, radiation, and radiology related to the pandemic were tracked, along with the reasons for delay and/or change. Univariate and multivariable analysis were used to identify factors associated with delay and/or change. RESULTS: We identified 350 eligible patients, of whom 149 (42.6%) experienced a delay and/or change, and practice reduction (51.0%) was the most common reason. The patients who identified as Black or African American, Asian, or Other races were more likely to experience a delay and/or change compared with White patients (Black, 44.4%; Asian, 47.1%; Other, 55.6%; White, 31.4%; P = .001). In multivariable analysis, Medicaid compared with commercial insurance (odds ratio [OR], 3.04; 95% CI, 1.32 to 7.27) was associated with increased odds of a delay and/or change, whereas stage II or III BC compared with stage I (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.95; and OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.092, respectively) was associated with decreased odds of a delay and/or change. CONCLUSION: Almost half of the patients with BC without COVID-19 had a delay and/or change. We found racial and socioeconomic disparities in the likelihood of a delay and/or change. Further studies are needed to determine the impact these care alterations have on BC outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Routine screening for financial hardship may identify patients at risk of financial crisis, such as bankruptcy or inability to afford food or medication and facilitate mitigation of financial toxicity. We describe our implementation of systematic financial hardship screening using the electronic health record (EHR) in an outpatient cancer center in New York City. Our process was developed previously with stakeholder input to screen all breast cancer patients for financial hardship risk using 2 items (Qi and Q3) from the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity. Patients complete the 2 items either through: online patient portal during appointment check-in; or English or Spanish paper form distributed to patients by front desk staff during check-in and entered into the EHR during vital signs assessment. The EHR prompts survey completion again after 1 month. Using descriptive statistics, we evaluate implementation feasibility as the rate of completion; and we describe the financial hardship and worry experienced by respondents. From March to July 2021, 1,109 patients were seen in the breast oncology clinic, 23% were Hispanic/Latino and 14% were Black/African American; the mean age was 58 years (s=14). These patients represented 2,678 clinical encounters with an average of 2.6 visits per patient, and 864 (78%) patients completed at least one assessment using the online portal. There were 1,106 (41%) responses to Q1: "I know that I have enough money in savings, retirement, or assets to cover the costs of my treatment;" and 1,109 (41%) to Q2: "I worry about the financial problems I will have in the future as a result of my illness or treatment." For Qi, 517 (47%) responded "not at all" or "a little bit." For Q2, 455 (34%) responded "quite a bit" or "very much." Our study highlights two findings: first, implementing systematic financial screening in oncology clinics is complex; and second, financial hardship and worry are prevalent and require interventions to mitigate this devastating adverse effect of cancer care. Future research will focus on assessing patient perspectives to improve acceptability of current procedures, and developing interventions and referrals for patients most in need. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]