Learning Outcomes of "GetSMART," Education for Diagnostics and Targeted Treatment for HER2+ Metastatic Gastric and Colorectal Cancers.

The treatment landscape for patients affected by gastric and colorectal cancer (G&CRC) has significantly broadened over the past decade. Molecular diagnostic methods have improved with a precision oncology-driven approach to the development of treatment options tailored to specific molecular targets, including the human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2). While scientific evidence on the role of HER2 in G&CRC has improved, there has been a lag in general understanding and applications of testing for HER2+ G&CRC and resulting targeting treatment in the wider oncology community. To better understand and address the root causes of this gap, a needs assessment deployed among 85 oncology care providers was conducted and informed the development of an accredited online educational program entitled "GetSMART." The program consisted of four modules developed and narrated by experts in gastrointestinal oncology. The educational content and assessment metrics were guided by a confidence-based assessment (CBA) model and the Moore, Green, and Gallis outcomes framework. Assessment methods consisted of quantitative pre- and post-activity tests, an evaluation embedded within the education (n = 163), and semi-structured interviews (n = 5) post-activity completion. Findings indicated that "GetSMART" enhanced participants' knowledge, confidence, and intent to change practice in relation to their (1) identification of HER2 aberrations, (2) selection of appropriate treatments for HER2+ G&CRC, and (3) ability to engage patients in shared decision-making and management of adverse events. "GetSMART" can therefore be a valuable educational resource for oncology HCPs caring for patients affected by HER2+ metastatic G&CRC, offering strategies to ensure an optimal team and patient-centered approach to the care being delivered.

Identifying the Needs of Health Care Providers in Advanced First-Line Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Mixed-Methods Research.

INTRODUCTION: Systemic treatments for metastatic or unresectable renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are rapidly evolving. This study aimed at investigating challenges in the care of mRCC to inform future educational interventions for health care providers (HCPs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The sequential mixed-method design consisted of a qualitative phase (semistructured interviews) followed by a quantitative phase (online surveys). Participants included US-based medical oncologists, nephrologists, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and registered nurses. Interview transcripts were thematically analyzed. Survey data was descriptively and inferentially analyzed. RESULTS: Forty interviews and 265 surveys were completed. Analysis revealed four challenges in the care of mRCC patients. A challenge in staying current with emerging evidence and treatment recommendations was found with 33% of surveyed HCPs reporting suboptimal skills interpreting published evidence on the efficacy and safety of emerging agents. A challenge weighing patient health and preferences in treatment decisions was found, especially among HCPs with 3 to 10 years of practice (37%) who reported suboptimal skills in assessing patients' tolerance to side effects. Promoting a collaborative care approach to the management of immune-related adverse events was a challenge, specifically related to barriers involving nephrologists (eg, diverging treatment goals). Breakdowns in communication were reported (46% of HCPs), especially in the monitoring of side effects and treatment adherence. CONCLUSION: This study revealed key challenges faced by HCPs when treating and managing patients with mRCC across multiple providers. Future interventions (eg, community of practice) should aim to address the identified gaps and promote a team-based approach to care that strengthens the complementary competencies of HCPs involved.

Clinical care in hepatocellular carcinoma: A mixed methods assessment of experiences and challenges of oncology professionals.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare providers (HCPs) may face numerous dilemmas in optimally screening, diagnosing, and treating patients with, and/or at risk for, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study aimed to achieve a greater understanding of the challenges in HCC care which in turn could delineate HCP educational opportunities within this oncologic sub-specialty. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach was used to identify practice gaps and clinical barriers experienced by US-based medical oncologists, hepatologists, oncology physician assistants, oncology nurse practitioners, and interventional radiologists involved in HCC care. The qualitative (semi-structured interview) and quantitative (survey) data collection approaches were deployed sequentially with findings subsequently triangulated. RESULTS: A total of 214 HCPs participated in this study. Analysis revealed challenges related to screening and diagnosing HCC, specifically in applying appropriate screening guidelines, and the optimal use and decisions related to diagnostic imaging and biopsy. Issues related to treatment selection included the application of existing HCC guidelines in treatment decision-making, weighing risk/benefit ratios of various antineoplastics regimens (i.e., tyrosine kinase inhibitors-TKIs, immunotherapy agents, chemotherapy), sequencing therapies, potential toxicity management, and optimally educating patients about their HCC. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the educational needs of those involved in HCC care and provide a starting point for clinicians to both reflect on their practice and identify opportunities to enhance communication within the HCC team and between provider and patient. There is an opportunity to optimize continuing professional development interventions that address the identified gaps in clinical practice specifically related to teamwork and interdisciplinary communication.

Clinical practice gaps and challenges in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis care: An international physician needs assessment.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Even as several pharmacological treatments for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) are in development, the incidence of NASH is increasing on an international scale. We aim to assess clinical practice gaps and challenges of hepatologists and endocrinologists when managing patients with NASH in four countries (Germany/Italy/United Kingdom/United States) to inform educational interventions. METHODS: A sequential mixed-method design was used: qualitative semi-structured interviews followed by quantitative online surveys. Participants were hepatologists and endocrinologists practising in one of the targeted countries. Interview data underwent thematic analysis and survey data were analysed with chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests. RESULTS: Most interviewees (n = 24) and surveyed participants (89% of n = 224) agreed that primary care must be involved in screening for NASH, yet many faced challenges involving and collaborating with them. Endocrinologists reported low knowledge of which blood markers to use when suspecting NASH (56%), when to order an MRI (65%) or ultrasound/FibroScan® (46%), and reported sub-optimal skills interpreting alanine aminotransferase (ALT, 37%) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST, 38%) blood marker test results, causing difficulty during diagnosis. Participants believed that more evidence is needed for upcoming therapeutic agents; yet, they reported sub-optimal knowledge of eligibility criteria for clinical trials. Knowledge and skill gaps when managing comorbidities, as well as skill gaps facilitating patient lifestyle changes were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Educational interventions are needed to address the knowledge and skill gaps identified and to develop strategies to optimize patient care, which include implementing relevant care pathways, encouraging referrals and testing, and multidisciplinary collaboration, as suggested by the recent Global Consensus statement on NAFLD.

A 16-month community-based intervention to increase aspirin use for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular diseases are the leading causes of disability and death in the United States. Primary prevention of these events may be achieved through aspirin use. The ability of a community-based intervention to increase aspirin use has not been evaluated. The objective of this study was to evaluate an educational intervention implemented to increase aspirin use for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in a small city in Minnesota. METHODS: A community-based intervention was implemented during 16 months in a medium-sized community in Minnesota. Messages for aspirin use were disseminated to individuals, health care professionals, and the general population. Independent cross-sectional samples of residents (men aged 45-79, women aged 55-79) were surveyed by telephone to identify candidates for primary prevention aspirin use, examine their characteristics, and determine regular aspirin use at baseline and after the campaign at 4 months and 16 months. RESULTS: In primary prevention candidates, regular aspirin use rates increased from 36% at baseline to 54% at 4 months (odds ratio = 2.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-3.88); the increase was sustained at 52% at 16 months (odds ratio = 1.89; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-3.49). The difference in aspirin use rates at 4 months and 16 months was not significant (P = .77). CONCLUSION: Aspirin use rates for primary prevention remain low. A combined public health and primary care approach can increase and sustain primary prevention aspirin use in a community setting.