TY - JOUR
T1 - Effectiveness of a Cardiovascular Health Electronic Health Record Application for Cancer Survivors in Community Oncology Practice
T2 - Results From WF-1804CD
AU - AH-HA Study Team
AU - Weaver, Kathryn E.
AU - Dressler, Emily V.
AU - Klepin, Heidi D.
AU - Lee, Simon C.
AU - Wells, Brian J.
AU - Smith, Sydney
AU - Hundley, W. Gregory
AU - Lesser, Glenn J.
AU - Nightingale, Chandylen L.
AU - Turner, Julie C.
AU - Lackey, Ian
AU - Heard, Kevin
AU - Foraker, Randi
AU - Foraker, Randi
AU - Wells, Brian
AU - Hundley, W. Gregory
AU - Klepin, Heidi
AU - Payne, Philip
AU - Lai, Albert
AU - Lee, Simon Craddock
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.
PY - 2025/1
Y1 - 2025/1
N2 - 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 5 .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 5 .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.
AB - 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 5 .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 5 .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.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85213596929&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1200/JCO.24.00342
DO - 10.1200/JCO.24.00342
M3 - Article
C2 - 39571113
AN - SCOPUS:85213596929
SN - 0732-183X
VL - 43
SP - 46
EP - 56
JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology
JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology
IS - 1
ER -