AVAHO

Background

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous malignancy at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and every year approximately 15,000 Veterans are diagnosed and treated. Many advanced prostate cancer cases harbor genetic mutations that significantly impact prognosis, treatment decisions, and familial screening. In February 2021, the Prostate Cancer Molecular Testing Pathway (PCMTP) flow map was developed to increase appropriate genetic testing.

Methods

VHA initiated the Oncology Clinical Pathways (OCP) program to standardize cancer care for Veterans. The PCMTP was developed by a multidisciplinary team that created interactive templates within the Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS), to facilitate identification of eligible Veterans for germline and comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP). Clinical decision-making for these tests is documented as Health Factors (HF), in CPRS, allowing for assessment of pathway adherence and overall uptake.

Results

The PCMTP has achieved success, as there is over 90% compliance to molecular testing among participating Veterans which exceeds the pathway benchmark of 80%. PCMTP has been utilized at 88 VA sites, by over 700 distinct VA providers, with over 7,000 Veterans participating. This implementation has yielded over 19,200 Health Factors within CPRS.

Conclusions

The PCMTP has markedly improved the documentation and application of germline and CGP testing among Veterans diagnosed with prostate cancer. By facilitating genomic testing in appropriate patients, the PCMTP aims to enhance patient outcomes and optimize the quality of care. Prior to PCMTP establishment, assessing the prevalence of germline and CGP testing in eligible Veterans posed significant challenges. Future work will concentrate on increasing PCMTP utilization, evaluating downstream outcomes from genomic testing, including the identification of pathogenic variants, utilization of genetic counseling services, referrals to clinical trials, and the genomic impact on treatment strategies.

Background

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous malignancy at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and every year approximately 15,000 Veterans are diagnosed and treated. Many advanced prostate cancer cases harbor genetic mutations that significantly impact prognosis, treatment decisions, and familial screening. In February 2021, the Prostate Cancer Molecular Testing Pathway (PCMTP) flow map was developed to increase appropriate genetic testing.

Methods

VHA initiated the Oncology Clinical Pathways (OCP) program to standardize cancer care for Veterans. The PCMTP was developed by a multidisciplinary team that created interactive templates within the Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS), to facilitate identification of eligible Veterans for germline and comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP). Clinical decision-making for these tests is documented as Health Factors (HF), in CPRS, allowing for assessment of pathway adherence and overall uptake.

Results

The PCMTP has achieved success, as there is over 90% compliance to molecular testing among participating Veterans which exceeds the pathway benchmark of 80%. PCMTP has been utilized at 88 VA sites, by over 700 distinct VA providers, with over 7,000 Veterans participating. This implementation has yielded over 19,200 Health Factors within CPRS.

Conclusions

The PCMTP has markedly improved the documentation and application of germline and CGP testing among Veterans diagnosed with prostate cancer. By facilitating genomic testing in appropriate patients, the PCMTP aims to enhance patient outcomes and optimize the quality of care. Prior to PCMTP establishment, assessing the prevalence of germline and CGP testing in eligible Veterans posed significant challenges. Future work will concentrate on increasing PCMTP utilization, evaluating downstream outcomes from genomic testing, including the identification of pathogenic variants, utilization of genetic counseling services, referrals to clinical trials, and the genomic impact on treatment strategies.

Background

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous malignancy at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and every year approximately 15,000 Veterans are diagnosed and treated. Many advanced prostate cancer cases harbor genetic mutations that significantly impact prognosis, treatment decisions, and familial screening. In February 2021, the Prostate Cancer Molecular Testing Pathway (PCMTP) flow map was developed to increase appropriate genetic testing.

Methods

VHA initiated the Oncology Clinical Pathways (OCP) program to standardize cancer care for Veterans. The PCMTP was developed by a multidisciplinary team that created interactive templates within the Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS), to facilitate identification of eligible Veterans for germline and comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP). Clinical decision-making for these tests is documented as Health Factors (HF), in CPRS, allowing for assessment of pathway adherence and overall uptake.

Results

The PCMTP has achieved success, as there is over 90% compliance to molecular testing among participating Veterans which exceeds the pathway benchmark of 80%. PCMTP has been utilized at 88 VA sites, by over 700 distinct VA providers, with over 7,000 Veterans participating. This implementation has yielded over 19,200 Health Factors within CPRS.

Conclusions

The PCMTP has markedly improved the documentation and application of germline and CGP testing among Veterans diagnosed with prostate cancer. By facilitating genomic testing in appropriate patients, the PCMTP aims to enhance patient outcomes and optimize the quality of care. Prior to PCMTP establishment, assessing the prevalence of germline and CGP testing in eligible Veterans posed significant challenges. Future work will concentrate on increasing PCMTP utilization, evaluating downstream outcomes from genomic testing, including the identification of pathogenic variants, utilization of genetic counseling services, referrals to clinical trials, and the genomic impact on treatment strategies.

Purpose

Biorepositories are critical to scientific research within the VA. They offer high-quality, well-characterized biospecimens linked to clinical, demographic, and molecular data. Biorepositories support studies on disease mechanisms, personalized therapies, and emerging infectious diseases by systematically collecting, processing, storing, and distributing biological materials, including tissue, blood, and DNA samples. Within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), biorepositories provide essential support to clinical and translational research on service- related conditions such as PTSD, traumatic brain injury, cancers, and toxic exposures. While the need for harmonized quality processes and resource allocation has long been acknowledged within the biorepository community (Siwek, 2015), each biorepository operates independently, limiting scalability and standardization. This quality improvement project describes a collaboration between two VA biorepository sites supporting a national genomic study investigating disease risk and treatment outcomes. The project aimed to expand capacity, improve processing times, and enhance quality control. Each site mirrors the other’s functions, including receiving, accessioning, processing, storing, and shipping biospecimens, and serves as a contingency site to strengthen operational resilience.

Methods

To address space limitations and improve processing efficiency, one site implemented a custom rack design, expanding storage capacity per freezer. Robotic workflows were optimized, reducing biospecimen processing time. An in-process quality control step was introduced to identify data discrepancies earlier in the workflow, reducing investigation time and supporting overall data integrity. Efficiency was measured by the increase in storage capacity and decreased processing time. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate changes in performance. Metrics were monitored over twelve months and compared against baseline data.

Results

Following implementation, storage capacity per freezer increased by 20%, and specimen processing time decreased by 30%. The new quality control checkpoint reduced investigation times by 98%, resulting in a more streamlined workflow. These improvements enhanced coordination between sites and improved support for ongoing studies.

Conclusions

This effort demonstrates that collaboration between biorepositories can significantly enhance efficiency, reduce turnaround times, and support high-quality research. Strengthening infrastructure through joint initiatives enables more effective support of large-scale clinical studies and contributes to improved outcomes for Veterans. These findings may also inform process improvements at other VA research facilities.

Purpose

Biorepositories are critical to scientific research within the VA. They offer high-quality, well-characterized biospecimens linked to clinical, demographic, and molecular data. Biorepositories support studies on disease mechanisms, personalized therapies, and emerging infectious diseases by systematically collecting, processing, storing, and distributing biological materials, including tissue, blood, and DNA samples. Within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), biorepositories provide essential support to clinical and translational research on service- related conditions such as PTSD, traumatic brain injury, cancers, and toxic exposures. While the need for harmonized quality processes and resource allocation has long been acknowledged within the biorepository community (Siwek, 2015), each biorepository operates independently, limiting scalability and standardization. This quality improvement project describes a collaboration between two VA biorepository sites supporting a national genomic study investigating disease risk and treatment outcomes. The project aimed to expand capacity, improve processing times, and enhance quality control. Each site mirrors the other’s functions, including receiving, accessioning, processing, storing, and shipping biospecimens, and serves as a contingency site to strengthen operational resilience.

Methods

To address space limitations and improve processing efficiency, one site implemented a custom rack design, expanding storage capacity per freezer. Robotic workflows were optimized, reducing biospecimen processing time. An in-process quality control step was introduced to identify data discrepancies earlier in the workflow, reducing investigation time and supporting overall data integrity. Efficiency was measured by the increase in storage capacity and decreased processing time. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate changes in performance. Metrics were monitored over twelve months and compared against baseline data.

Results

Following implementation, storage capacity per freezer increased by 20%, and specimen processing time decreased by 30%. The new quality control checkpoint reduced investigation times by 98%, resulting in a more streamlined workflow. These improvements enhanced coordination between sites and improved support for ongoing studies.

Conclusions

This effort demonstrates that collaboration between biorepositories can significantly enhance efficiency, reduce turnaround times, and support high-quality research. Strengthening infrastructure through joint initiatives enables more effective support of large-scale clinical studies and contributes to improved outcomes for Veterans. These findings may also inform process improvements at other VA research facilities.

Purpose

Biorepositories are critical to scientific research within the VA. They offer high-quality, well-characterized biospecimens linked to clinical, demographic, and molecular data. Biorepositories support studies on disease mechanisms, personalized therapies, and emerging infectious diseases by systematically collecting, processing, storing, and distributing biological materials, including tissue, blood, and DNA samples. Within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), biorepositories provide essential support to clinical and translational research on service- related conditions such as PTSD, traumatic brain injury, cancers, and toxic exposures. While the need for harmonized quality processes and resource allocation has long been acknowledged within the biorepository community (Siwek, 2015), each biorepository operates independently, limiting scalability and standardization. This quality improvement project describes a collaboration between two VA biorepository sites supporting a national genomic study investigating disease risk and treatment outcomes. The project aimed to expand capacity, improve processing times, and enhance quality control. Each site mirrors the other’s functions, including receiving, accessioning, processing, storing, and shipping biospecimens, and serves as a contingency site to strengthen operational resilience.

Methods

To address space limitations and improve processing efficiency, one site implemented a custom rack design, expanding storage capacity per freezer. Robotic workflows were optimized, reducing biospecimen processing time. An in-process quality control step was introduced to identify data discrepancies earlier in the workflow, reducing investigation time and supporting overall data integrity. Efficiency was measured by the increase in storage capacity and decreased processing time. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate changes in performance. Metrics were monitored over twelve months and compared against baseline data.

Results

Following implementation, storage capacity per freezer increased by 20%, and specimen processing time decreased by 30%. The new quality control checkpoint reduced investigation times by 98%, resulting in a more streamlined workflow. These improvements enhanced coordination between sites and improved support for ongoing studies.

Conclusions

This effort demonstrates that collaboration between biorepositories can significantly enhance efficiency, reduce turnaround times, and support high-quality research. Strengthening infrastructure through joint initiatives enables more effective support of large-scale clinical studies and contributes to improved outcomes for Veterans. These findings may also inform process improvements at other VA research facilities.

Background

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) faces a landscape of increasingly complex practice, especially in Hematology/Oncology (H/O), and a nationwide shortage of healthcare providers, while serving more Veterans than ever before. To understand current and future staffing needs, the VA National Oncology Program performed an assessment of H/O staffing, including attending physicians, residents/ fellows, licensed independent practitioners (LIPs) (nurse practitioners/physician assistants), and nurses for fiscal years (FY) 19–24.

Methods

Using VA Corporate Data Warehouse, we identified H/O visits in VA from 10/01/2018 through 09/30/2024 using stop codes. No-show (< 0.00001%) and National TeleOncology appointments (1%) were removed. We retrieved all notes associated with resulting visits and used area-ofspecialization and provider-type data to identify all attending physicians, trainees, LIPs, and nurses who authored or cosigned these notes. We identified H/O staff as 1. those associated with H/O clinic locations, 2. physicians who consistently cosigned H/O notes authored by fellows and LIPs associated with H/O locations, 3. fellows and LIPs authoring notes that were then cosigned by H/O physicians, and 4. nurses authoring notes associated with H/O visits.

Analysis

For each FY, we obtained total numbers of visits, unique patients, and care-providing staff by type. For validation, collaborating providers at several sites reviewed visit information, and a colleague also performed an independent, parallel data extraction. We adjusted FY totals to account for the growing patient population by dividing unique staff count by number of unique patients and multiplying by 200,000 (the approximate number of unique patients in FY19).

Results

From FY19 through FY24, VA Hematology/ Oncology saw a 14.6% rise in unique patients (from 232,084 to 265,926) and a 15.4% rise in visits (from 923,175 to 1,065,186). The absolute number of attendings rose by 4 (0.6%); of LIPs, by 138 (14.4%); and of nurses, by 142 (4.9%); trainees fell by 102 (4.3%). Adjusted to 200,000 patients, the number of attendings fell by 76 (12.3%); LIPs, by 1 (0.1%); trainees, by 335 (16.5%); and nurses, by 211 (8.4%).

Conclusions

Adjusted to number of Veterans, there are 10.4% fewer staff in Hematology/Oncology in FY24 compared to FY19.

Background

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) faces a landscape of increasingly complex practice, especially in Hematology/Oncology (H/O), and a nationwide shortage of healthcare providers, while serving more Veterans than ever before. To understand current and future staffing needs, the VA National Oncology Program performed an assessment of H/O staffing, including attending physicians, residents/ fellows, licensed independent practitioners (LIPs) (nurse practitioners/physician assistants), and nurses for fiscal years (FY) 19–24.

Methods

Using VA Corporate Data Warehouse, we identified H/O visits in VA from 10/01/2018 through 09/30/2024 using stop codes. No-show (< 0.00001%) and National TeleOncology appointments (1%) were removed. We retrieved all notes associated with resulting visits and used area-ofspecialization and provider-type data to identify all attending physicians, trainees, LIPs, and nurses who authored or cosigned these notes. We identified H/O staff as 1. those associated with H/O clinic locations, 2. physicians who consistently cosigned H/O notes authored by fellows and LIPs associated with H/O locations, 3. fellows and LIPs authoring notes that were then cosigned by H/O physicians, and 4. nurses authoring notes associated with H/O visits.

Analysis

For each FY, we obtained total numbers of visits, unique patients, and care-providing staff by type. For validation, collaborating providers at several sites reviewed visit information, and a colleague also performed an independent, parallel data extraction. We adjusted FY totals to account for the growing patient population by dividing unique staff count by number of unique patients and multiplying by 200,000 (the approximate number of unique patients in FY19).

Results

From FY19 through FY24, VA Hematology/ Oncology saw a 14.6% rise in unique patients (from 232,084 to 265,926) and a 15.4% rise in visits (from 923,175 to 1,065,186). The absolute number of attendings rose by 4 (0.6%); of LIPs, by 138 (14.4%); and of nurses, by 142 (4.9%); trainees fell by 102 (4.3%). Adjusted to 200,000 patients, the number of attendings fell by 76 (12.3%); LIPs, by 1 (0.1%); trainees, by 335 (16.5%); and nurses, by 211 (8.4%).

Conclusions

Adjusted to number of Veterans, there are 10.4% fewer staff in Hematology/Oncology in FY24 compared to FY19.

Background

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) faces a landscape of increasingly complex practice, especially in Hematology/Oncology (H/O), and a nationwide shortage of healthcare providers, while serving more Veterans than ever before. To understand current and future staffing needs, the VA National Oncology Program performed an assessment of H/O staffing, including attending physicians, residents/ fellows, licensed independent practitioners (LIPs) (nurse practitioners/physician assistants), and nurses for fiscal years (FY) 19–24.

Methods

Using VA Corporate Data Warehouse, we identified H/O visits in VA from 10/01/2018 through 09/30/2024 using stop codes. No-show (< 0.00001%) and National TeleOncology appointments (1%) were removed. We retrieved all notes associated with resulting visits and used area-ofspecialization and provider-type data to identify all attending physicians, trainees, LIPs, and nurses who authored or cosigned these notes. We identified H/O staff as 1. those associated with H/O clinic locations, 2. physicians who consistently cosigned H/O notes authored by fellows and LIPs associated with H/O locations, 3. fellows and LIPs authoring notes that were then cosigned by H/O physicians, and 4. nurses authoring notes associated with H/O visits.

Analysis

For each FY, we obtained total numbers of visits, unique patients, and care-providing staff by type. For validation, collaborating providers at several sites reviewed visit information, and a colleague also performed an independent, parallel data extraction. We adjusted FY totals to account for the growing patient population by dividing unique staff count by number of unique patients and multiplying by 200,000 (the approximate number of unique patients in FY19).

Results

From FY19 through FY24, VA Hematology/ Oncology saw a 14.6% rise in unique patients (from 232,084 to 265,926) and a 15.4% rise in visits (from 923,175 to 1,065,186). The absolute number of attendings rose by 4 (0.6%); of LIPs, by 138 (14.4%); and of nurses, by 142 (4.9%); trainees fell by 102 (4.3%). Adjusted to 200,000 patients, the number of attendings fell by 76 (12.3%); LIPs, by 1 (0.1%); trainees, by 335 (16.5%); and nurses, by 211 (8.4%).

Conclusions

Adjusted to number of Veterans, there are 10.4% fewer staff in Hematology/Oncology in FY24 compared to FY19.

Background

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous malignancy diagnosis within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Prostate Cancer Clinical Pathways (PCCP) were developed to enable providers to treat all Veterans with prostate cancer at subject matter expert level.

Methods

The PCCP was launched in February 2021; however, provider documentation of PCCP is variable across the VA healthcare system and within the PCCP, specific flow maps have differential use. To increase urology specific flow map use, a collaboration between the National Surgery Office and National Oncology Program was established to develop a Urology Prostate Cancer Note (UPCN). The UPCN was designed by urologists with assistance from a medical oncologist and a clinical applications coordinator.

Results

The UPCN functions as a working clinical note for urologists and has the PCCPs embedded into reminder dialog templates, which when completed generate health factors. The health factors that are generated from the UPCN are data mined to record PCCP use and to perform data analytics. Since the UPCN national deployment on 9/6/24, documentation of high risk prostate cancer pathway utilization has increased 75% from 226 unique Veterans prior to launch to 395 unique Veterans after launch.

Conclusions

This collaborative effort did improve pathway utilization and documentation however other tools will need to be developed to improve provider PCCP documentation.

Background

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous malignancy diagnosis within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Prostate Cancer Clinical Pathways (PCCP) were developed to enable providers to treat all Veterans with prostate cancer at subject matter expert level.

Methods

The PCCP was launched in February 2021; however, provider documentation of PCCP is variable across the VA healthcare system and within the PCCP, specific flow maps have differential use. To increase urology specific flow map use, a collaboration between the National Surgery Office and National Oncology Program was established to develop a Urology Prostate Cancer Note (UPCN). The UPCN was designed by urologists with assistance from a medical oncologist and a clinical applications coordinator.

Results

The UPCN functions as a working clinical note for urologists and has the PCCPs embedded into reminder dialog templates, which when completed generate health factors. The health factors that are generated from the UPCN are data mined to record PCCP use and to perform data analytics. Since the UPCN national deployment on 9/6/24, documentation of high risk prostate cancer pathway utilization has increased 75% from 226 unique Veterans prior to launch to 395 unique Veterans after launch.

Conclusions

This collaborative effort did improve pathway utilization and documentation however other tools will need to be developed to improve provider PCCP documentation.

Background

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous malignancy diagnosis within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Prostate Cancer Clinical Pathways (PCCP) were developed to enable providers to treat all Veterans with prostate cancer at subject matter expert level.

Methods

The PCCP was launched in February 2021; however, provider documentation of PCCP is variable across the VA healthcare system and within the PCCP, specific flow maps have differential use. To increase urology specific flow map use, a collaboration between the National Surgery Office and National Oncology Program was established to develop a Urology Prostate Cancer Note (UPCN). The UPCN was designed by urologists with assistance from a medical oncologist and a clinical applications coordinator.

Results

The UPCN functions as a working clinical note for urologists and has the PCCPs embedded into reminder dialog templates, which when completed generate health factors. The health factors that are generated from the UPCN are data mined to record PCCP use and to perform data analytics. Since the UPCN national deployment on 9/6/24, documentation of high risk prostate cancer pathway utilization has increased 75% from 226 unique Veterans prior to launch to 395 unique Veterans after launch.

Conclusions

This collaborative effort did improve pathway utilization and documentation however other tools will need to be developed to improve provider PCCP documentation.

Background

Accurate clinical coding that reflects all diagnoses and problems addressed during a patient encounter is essential for the cancer program’s data quality, research initiatives, and securing VERA (Veterans Equitable Resource Allocation) funding. However, providers often face barriers such as limited time during patient visits and difficulty navigating Electronic health record (EHR) systems. These challenges lead to inaccurate coding, which undermines downstream data integrity. This quality improvement (QI) study aimed to identify these barriers and implement an intervention to improve coding accuracy, while also assessing the financial implications of improved documentation.

Methods

This QI study was conducted at the Albany Stratton VA Medical Center, focusing on hematology/ oncology outpatient encounters. A baseline chart audit of diagnosis codes from June 2023 revealed an accuracy rate of 69.8%. To address this, an intervention was implemented in which dedicated coders were assigned to support attending physicians in coding for over a two-week period. These coders reviewed and corrected diagnosis codes in real-time. A follow-up audit conducted after the intervention showed an improved coding accuracy of 82%.

Discussion/Implications

Coding remains a timeconsuming task for providers, made more difficult by EHR systems that are not user-friendly. This study demonstrated that involving dedicated coders significantly improves documentation accuracy—from 69% to 82%. In addition to data quality, the financial benefits are notable. A projected annual return on investment of $216,094 was calculated, based on an internal analysis showing that in a sample of 124 patients, 10% could have qualified for higher VERA funding based on accurate coding, generating an estimated $17,427 in additional reimbursement per patient. This cost-benefit ratio supports the recommendation to staff dedicated coders. Other interventions were also utilised, such as updating the national encounter form and auto-populating documentation in Dragon software, but had limited impact and did not directly address diagnosis accuracy respectively.

Conclusions

Targeted interventions improved coding accuracy, but sustainability remains a challenge due to time and system limitations. Future efforts should focus on hiring full-time coders. These steps can further enhance coding quality and potentially increase hospital revenue.

Background

Accurate clinical coding that reflects all diagnoses and problems addressed during a patient encounter is essential for the cancer program’s data quality, research initiatives, and securing VERA (Veterans Equitable Resource Allocation) funding. However, providers often face barriers such as limited time during patient visits and difficulty navigating Electronic health record (EHR) systems. These challenges lead to inaccurate coding, which undermines downstream data integrity. This quality improvement (QI) study aimed to identify these barriers and implement an intervention to improve coding accuracy, while also assessing the financial implications of improved documentation.

Methods

This QI study was conducted at the Albany Stratton VA Medical Center, focusing on hematology/ oncology outpatient encounters. A baseline chart audit of diagnosis codes from June 2023 revealed an accuracy rate of 69.8%. To address this, an intervention was implemented in which dedicated coders were assigned to support attending physicians in coding for over a two-week period. These coders reviewed and corrected diagnosis codes in real-time. A follow-up audit conducted after the intervention showed an improved coding accuracy of 82%.

Discussion/Implications

Coding remains a timeconsuming task for providers, made more difficult by EHR systems that are not user-friendly. This study demonstrated that involving dedicated coders significantly improves documentation accuracy—from 69% to 82%. In addition to data quality, the financial benefits are notable. A projected annual return on investment of $216,094 was calculated, based on an internal analysis showing that in a sample of 124 patients, 10% could have qualified for higher VERA funding based on accurate coding, generating an estimated $17,427 in additional reimbursement per patient. This cost-benefit ratio supports the recommendation to staff dedicated coders. Other interventions were also utilised, such as updating the national encounter form and auto-populating documentation in Dragon software, but had limited impact and did not directly address diagnosis accuracy respectively.

Conclusions

Targeted interventions improved coding accuracy, but sustainability remains a challenge due to time and system limitations. Future efforts should focus on hiring full-time coders. These steps can further enhance coding quality and potentially increase hospital revenue.

Background

Accurate clinical coding that reflects all diagnoses and problems addressed during a patient encounter is essential for the cancer program’s data quality, research initiatives, and securing VERA (Veterans Equitable Resource Allocation) funding. However, providers often face barriers such as limited time during patient visits and difficulty navigating Electronic health record (EHR) systems. These challenges lead to inaccurate coding, which undermines downstream data integrity. This quality improvement (QI) study aimed to identify these barriers and implement an intervention to improve coding accuracy, while also assessing the financial implications of improved documentation.

Methods

This QI study was conducted at the Albany Stratton VA Medical Center, focusing on hematology/ oncology outpatient encounters. A baseline chart audit of diagnosis codes from June 2023 revealed an accuracy rate of 69.8%. To address this, an intervention was implemented in which dedicated coders were assigned to support attending physicians in coding for over a two-week period. These coders reviewed and corrected diagnosis codes in real-time. A follow-up audit conducted after the intervention showed an improved coding accuracy of 82%.

Discussion/Implications

Coding remains a timeconsuming task for providers, made more difficult by EHR systems that are not user-friendly. This study demonstrated that involving dedicated coders significantly improves documentation accuracy—from 69% to 82%. In addition to data quality, the financial benefits are notable. A projected annual return on investment of $216,094 was calculated, based on an internal analysis showing that in a sample of 124 patients, 10% could have qualified for higher VERA funding based on accurate coding, generating an estimated $17,427 in additional reimbursement per patient. This cost-benefit ratio supports the recommendation to staff dedicated coders. Other interventions were also utilised, such as updating the national encounter form and auto-populating documentation in Dragon software, but had limited impact and did not directly address diagnosis accuracy respectively.

Conclusions

Targeted interventions improved coding accuracy, but sustainability remains a challenge due to time and system limitations. Future efforts should focus on hiring full-time coders. These steps can further enhance coding quality and potentially increase hospital revenue.

Purpose

The Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry (VACCR) is a data management system for cancer surveillance and epidemiologic-based efforts, seeking to reduce the overall cancer burden. In 2024, the local VACCR successfully implemented a Structured Query Language (SQL) code, created to identify documents in the electronic medical record (EMR) with associated ICD-10 codes matching reportable cancer cases in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) list. In 2025, code application expansion began at four additional VISN9 sites.

Outcomes Studied

Accuracy and usefulness of SQL code application in a significantly larger population and a diagnosis-specific population.

Methods

Local Cancer Program leadership collaborated with VISN9 leadership to expand the SQL code to the four sites’ EMR, identifying the Veteran’s name, social security number, location by city/state/county, and visit-associated data including location, ICD-10 code, and visit year. Data validation focused on ICD- 10-specific data and quality replication.

Results

After SQL code application to Mt Home TN VACCR data, 750 unique, randomized charts from 2015-2025 were selected for accuracy review. Data validation found that 90.5% (679) had a reportable cancer; 14.9% (112) were not entered into VACCR. 9.5% (71) were not reportable. The SQL code was applied to Lexington data to identify colorectal cancer (CRC) (ICD-10 codes C17-C21.9). 746 charts from 2015-2025 were identified. 88.9% (663) had a reportable CRC; 14.9% (111) of those were not entered into VACCR, and 11% (83) were not reportable. Most cases not entered into VACCR at both sites were cases in which the majority of care was provided through Care in the Community (CITC). Historically, identification of CITC-provided oncologic care has been manual and notoriously difficult.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated the feasibility and accuracy of the SQL code in the identification of Veterans with diagnoses matching the SEER list in a large population and at a diagnosis-specific level. VISN-wide use of the report will increase efficiency and timeliness of data entry into VACCR, especially related to care provided through CITC. An improved understanding of oncologic care in the VISN would provide critical data to VISN executive leadership, enabling them to advocate for resources, targeted interventions, and access to care.

Purpose

The Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry (VACCR) is a data management system for cancer surveillance and epidemiologic-based efforts, seeking to reduce the overall cancer burden. In 2024, the local VACCR successfully implemented a Structured Query Language (SQL) code, created to identify documents in the electronic medical record (EMR) with associated ICD-10 codes matching reportable cancer cases in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) list. In 2025, code application expansion began at four additional VISN9 sites.

Outcomes Studied

Accuracy and usefulness of SQL code application in a significantly larger population and a diagnosis-specific population.

Methods

Local Cancer Program leadership collaborated with VISN9 leadership to expand the SQL code to the four sites’ EMR, identifying the Veteran’s name, social security number, location by city/state/county, and visit-associated data including location, ICD-10 code, and visit year. Data validation focused on ICD- 10-specific data and quality replication.

Results

After SQL code application to Mt Home TN VACCR data, 750 unique, randomized charts from 2015-2025 were selected for accuracy review. Data validation found that 90.5% (679) had a reportable cancer; 14.9% (112) were not entered into VACCR. 9.5% (71) were not reportable. The SQL code was applied to Lexington data to identify colorectal cancer (CRC) (ICD-10 codes C17-C21.9). 746 charts from 2015-2025 were identified. 88.9% (663) had a reportable CRC; 14.9% (111) of those were not entered into VACCR, and 11% (83) were not reportable. Most cases not entered into VACCR at both sites were cases in which the majority of care was provided through Care in the Community (CITC). Historically, identification of CITC-provided oncologic care has been manual and notoriously difficult.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated the feasibility and accuracy of the SQL code in the identification of Veterans with diagnoses matching the SEER list in a large population and at a diagnosis-specific level. VISN-wide use of the report will increase efficiency and timeliness of data entry into VACCR, especially related to care provided through CITC. An improved understanding of oncologic care in the VISN would provide critical data to VISN executive leadership, enabling them to advocate for resources, targeted interventions, and access to care.

Purpose

The Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry (VACCR) is a data management system for cancer surveillance and epidemiologic-based efforts, seeking to reduce the overall cancer burden. In 2024, the local VACCR successfully implemented a Structured Query Language (SQL) code, created to identify documents in the electronic medical record (EMR) with associated ICD-10 codes matching reportable cancer cases in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) list. In 2025, code application expansion began at four additional VISN9 sites.

Outcomes Studied

Accuracy and usefulness of SQL code application in a significantly larger population and a diagnosis-specific population.

Methods

Local Cancer Program leadership collaborated with VISN9 leadership to expand the SQL code to the four sites’ EMR, identifying the Veteran’s name, social security number, location by city/state/county, and visit-associated data including location, ICD-10 code, and visit year. Data validation focused on ICD- 10-specific data and quality replication.

Results

After SQL code application to Mt Home TN VACCR data, 750 unique, randomized charts from 2015-2025 were selected for accuracy review. Data validation found that 90.5% (679) had a reportable cancer; 14.9% (112) were not entered into VACCR. 9.5% (71) were not reportable. The SQL code was applied to Lexington data to identify colorectal cancer (CRC) (ICD-10 codes C17-C21.9). 746 charts from 2015-2025 were identified. 88.9% (663) had a reportable CRC; 14.9% (111) of those were not entered into VACCR, and 11% (83) were not reportable. Most cases not entered into VACCR at both sites were cases in which the majority of care was provided through Care in the Community (CITC). Historically, identification of CITC-provided oncologic care has been manual and notoriously difficult.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated the feasibility and accuracy of the SQL code in the identification of Veterans with diagnoses matching the SEER list in a large population and at a diagnosis-specific level. VISN-wide use of the report will increase efficiency and timeliness of data entry into VACCR, especially related to care provided through CITC. An improved understanding of oncologic care in the VISN would provide critical data to VISN executive leadership, enabling them to advocate for resources, targeted interventions, and access to care.

Purpose

The aim of this study is to quantify the frequency of Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) Precision Oncology Knowledge Base (OncoKB) Level 1 genetic alterations in Veterans with various solid organ malignancies and evaluate the clinical benefit and impact of testing on treatment of these patients.

Background

The VA National Precision Oncology Program (NPOP) facilitates comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) testing of Veterans with advanced cancer. While CGP is increasingly utilized and routinely ordered in patients with advanced solid organ malignancies, the clinical utility and value has not been proven in certain cancers. We present data from 5,979 patients with head and neck (H&N), pancreatic, hepatocellular (HCC), esophageal and kidney cancers who underwent CGP.

Methods

Our cohort consists of Veterans that received CGP testing to identify somatic variants between 1/1/2019 and 4/2/2025. Identified variants and biomarkers were formatted for use with oncoKB-annotator, a publicly available tool to annotate genomic variants with FDA approved drug recommendations stored as Level 1 annotations in OncoKB, and prescribed drugs were extracted from the Veteran Health Administration’s (VHA) Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW). Cancers were grouped by MSK’s OncoTree codes, and summary counts of Veterans tested, Veterans recommended, Veterans prescribed recommended FDA approved drugs were determined. Percentages were calculated using the total number of Veterans tested as the denominator.

Results

Level 1 OncoKB alterations were infrequent in H&N (0.94%), kidney (0.45%), HCC(0.28%), and pancreatic adenocarcinomas (1%). The frequency of Level 1 alterations in esophageal adenocarcinomas (EAC) was 20%. Approximately 98% of the Level 1 alterations in EAC patients were HER2 positivity or MSI-High status, which can be determined by other diagnostic methodologies such as IHC. The remaining 2% of EAC patients with level 1 alterations had BRAF V600E or NTRK rearrangements.

Conclusions

The incidence of level 1 genetic variants in H&N, kidney, HCC and pancreatic adenocarcinoma is very low and would very uncommonly result in clinical benefit. Although there is an expanding number of precision oncology-based therapies available, the proportion of patients with the aforementioned solid organ malignancies who benefitted from CGP was low, suggesting CGP has minimal impact on the treatment of Veterans with these malignancies.

Purpose

The aim of this study is to quantify the frequency of Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) Precision Oncology Knowledge Base (OncoKB) Level 1 genetic alterations in Veterans with various solid organ malignancies and evaluate the clinical benefit and impact of testing on treatment of these patients.

Background

The VA National Precision Oncology Program (NPOP) facilitates comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) testing of Veterans with advanced cancer. While CGP is increasingly utilized and routinely ordered in patients with advanced solid organ malignancies, the clinical utility and value has not been proven in certain cancers. We present data from 5,979 patients with head and neck (H&N), pancreatic, hepatocellular (HCC), esophageal and kidney cancers who underwent CGP.

Methods

Our cohort consists of Veterans that received CGP testing to identify somatic variants between 1/1/2019 and 4/2/2025. Identified variants and biomarkers were formatted for use with oncoKB-annotator, a publicly available tool to annotate genomic variants with FDA approved drug recommendations stored as Level 1 annotations in OncoKB, and prescribed drugs were extracted from the Veteran Health Administration’s (VHA) Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW). Cancers were grouped by MSK’s OncoTree codes, and summary counts of Veterans tested, Veterans recommended, Veterans prescribed recommended FDA approved drugs were determined. Percentages were calculated using the total number of Veterans tested as the denominator.

Results

Level 1 OncoKB alterations were infrequent in H&N (0.94%), kidney (0.45%), HCC(0.28%), and pancreatic adenocarcinomas (1%). The frequency of Level 1 alterations in esophageal adenocarcinomas (EAC) was 20%. Approximately 98% of the Level 1 alterations in EAC patients were HER2 positivity or MSI-High status, which can be determined by other diagnostic methodologies such as IHC. The remaining 2% of EAC patients with level 1 alterations had BRAF V600E or NTRK rearrangements.

Conclusions

The incidence of level 1 genetic variants in H&N, kidney, HCC and pancreatic adenocarcinoma is very low and would very uncommonly result in clinical benefit. Although there is an expanding number of precision oncology-based therapies available, the proportion of patients with the aforementioned solid organ malignancies who benefitted from CGP was low, suggesting CGP has minimal impact on the treatment of Veterans with these malignancies.

Purpose

The aim of this study is to quantify the frequency of Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) Precision Oncology Knowledge Base (OncoKB) Level 1 genetic alterations in Veterans with various solid organ malignancies and evaluate the clinical benefit and impact of testing on treatment of these patients.

Background

The VA National Precision Oncology Program (NPOP) facilitates comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) testing of Veterans with advanced cancer. While CGP is increasingly utilized and routinely ordered in patients with advanced solid organ malignancies, the clinical utility and value has not been proven in certain cancers. We present data from 5,979 patients with head and neck (H&N), pancreatic, hepatocellular (HCC), esophageal and kidney cancers who underwent CGP.

Methods

Our cohort consists of Veterans that received CGP testing to identify somatic variants between 1/1/2019 and 4/2/2025. Identified variants and biomarkers were formatted for use with oncoKB-annotator, a publicly available tool to annotate genomic variants with FDA approved drug recommendations stored as Level 1 annotations in OncoKB, and prescribed drugs were extracted from the Veteran Health Administration’s (VHA) Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW). Cancers were grouped by MSK’s OncoTree codes, and summary counts of Veterans tested, Veterans recommended, Veterans prescribed recommended FDA approved drugs were determined. Percentages were calculated using the total number of Veterans tested as the denominator.

Results

Level 1 OncoKB alterations were infrequent in H&N (0.94%), kidney (0.45%), HCC(0.28%), and pancreatic adenocarcinomas (1%). The frequency of Level 1 alterations in esophageal adenocarcinomas (EAC) was 20%. Approximately 98% of the Level 1 alterations in EAC patients were HER2 positivity or MSI-High status, which can be determined by other diagnostic methodologies such as IHC. The remaining 2% of EAC patients with level 1 alterations had BRAF V600E or NTRK rearrangements.

Conclusions

The incidence of level 1 genetic variants in H&N, kidney, HCC and pancreatic adenocarcinoma is very low and would very uncommonly result in clinical benefit. Although there is an expanding number of precision oncology-based therapies available, the proportion of patients with the aforementioned solid organ malignancies who benefitted from CGP was low, suggesting CGP has minimal impact on the treatment of Veterans with these malignancies.

Background

Due to risk for infusion-related reactions (IRR), administration of iron dextran requires an initial test dose with an extended monitoring period and subsequent doses given as a slow infusion over 2-3 hours. Safe use of a 60-minute iron dextran infusion protocol has been demonstrated previously at fully staffed academic teaching institutions. This study sought to determine the impact on patient safety and infusion clinic efficiency after implementing a 60-minute iron dextran administration protocol at a small, rural facility utilizing a decentralized clinical model.

Methods

This single-site, prospective, interventional study was conducted at a rural level 1C Veterans Affairs secondary care facility. The Hematology/Oncology clinic staffing includes one onsite clinical pharmacy practitioner (CPP) and advanced practice nurse. Remote providers complete patient encounters through video and telehealth modalities. A 60-minute iron dextran infusion service line agreement was designed by the Hematology/Oncology CPP and approved by the facility prior to data collection. The protocol included administration of a test dose and 15-minute monitoring period for treatment naïve patients. Pre-medications were allowed at the discretion of the ordering providers. All patients who received iron dextran between May 31, 2024 and April 14, 2025 per protocol were included in data analysis and results were stratified by treatment naïve and pre-treated patients. Outcomes included the proportion of patients experiencing any grade of IRR based on the Common Criteria for Adverse Events Version 5.0, and the average duration of administration. Descriptive statistics were used for safety and efficiency outcomes.

Results

Eighty patients received 103 iron dextran infusions and were included for analysis. Pre-medications were administered for 16 of the 103 (15.5%) included infusions. Two patients experienced grade 1 IRR (nausea) on 4 occasions (3.8%) which quickly resolved with intravenous ondansetron, and full iron dextran doses were received. The mean infusion time was 94 minutes in the treatment naïve cohort vs 71 minutes in the pre-treated cohort.

Conclusions

This study suggests a Hematology/ Oncology CPP developed iron dextran 60-minute infusion protocol may be safely and efficiently administered for qualifying patients in a decentralized, rural healthcare setting.

Background

Due to risk for infusion-related reactions (IRR), administration of iron dextran requires an initial test dose with an extended monitoring period and subsequent doses given as a slow infusion over 2-3 hours. Safe use of a 60-minute iron dextran infusion protocol has been demonstrated previously at fully staffed academic teaching institutions. This study sought to determine the impact on patient safety and infusion clinic efficiency after implementing a 60-minute iron dextran administration protocol at a small, rural facility utilizing a decentralized clinical model.

Methods

This single-site, prospective, interventional study was conducted at a rural level 1C Veterans Affairs secondary care facility. The Hematology/Oncology clinic staffing includes one onsite clinical pharmacy practitioner (CPP) and advanced practice nurse. Remote providers complete patient encounters through video and telehealth modalities. A 60-minute iron dextran infusion service line agreement was designed by the Hematology/Oncology CPP and approved by the facility prior to data collection. The protocol included administration of a test dose and 15-minute monitoring period for treatment naïve patients. Pre-medications were allowed at the discretion of the ordering providers. All patients who received iron dextran between May 31, 2024 and April 14, 2025 per protocol were included in data analysis and results were stratified by treatment naïve and pre-treated patients. Outcomes included the proportion of patients experiencing any grade of IRR based on the Common Criteria for Adverse Events Version 5.0, and the average duration of administration. Descriptive statistics were used for safety and efficiency outcomes.

Results

Eighty patients received 103 iron dextran infusions and were included for analysis. Pre-medications were administered for 16 of the 103 (15.5%) included infusions. Two patients experienced grade 1 IRR (nausea) on 4 occasions (3.8%) which quickly resolved with intravenous ondansetron, and full iron dextran doses were received. The mean infusion time was 94 minutes in the treatment naïve cohort vs 71 minutes in the pre-treated cohort.

Conclusions

This study suggests a Hematology/ Oncology CPP developed iron dextran 60-minute infusion protocol may be safely and efficiently administered for qualifying patients in a decentralized, rural healthcare setting.

Background

Due to risk for infusion-related reactions (IRR), administration of iron dextran requires an initial test dose with an extended monitoring period and subsequent doses given as a slow infusion over 2-3 hours. Safe use of a 60-minute iron dextran infusion protocol has been demonstrated previously at fully staffed academic teaching institutions. This study sought to determine the impact on patient safety and infusion clinic efficiency after implementing a 60-minute iron dextran administration protocol at a small, rural facility utilizing a decentralized clinical model.

Methods

This single-site, prospective, interventional study was conducted at a rural level 1C Veterans Affairs secondary care facility. The Hematology/Oncology clinic staffing includes one onsite clinical pharmacy practitioner (CPP) and advanced practice nurse. Remote providers complete patient encounters through video and telehealth modalities. A 60-minute iron dextran infusion service line agreement was designed by the Hematology/Oncology CPP and approved by the facility prior to data collection. The protocol included administration of a test dose and 15-minute monitoring period for treatment naïve patients. Pre-medications were allowed at the discretion of the ordering providers. All patients who received iron dextran between May 31, 2024 and April 14, 2025 per protocol were included in data analysis and results were stratified by treatment naïve and pre-treated patients. Outcomes included the proportion of patients experiencing any grade of IRR based on the Common Criteria for Adverse Events Version 5.0, and the average duration of administration. Descriptive statistics were used for safety and efficiency outcomes.

Results

Eighty patients received 103 iron dextran infusions and were included for analysis. Pre-medications were administered for 16 of the 103 (15.5%) included infusions. Two patients experienced grade 1 IRR (nausea) on 4 occasions (3.8%) which quickly resolved with intravenous ondansetron, and full iron dextran doses were received. The mean infusion time was 94 minutes in the treatment naïve cohort vs 71 minutes in the pre-treated cohort.

Conclusions

This study suggests a Hematology/ Oncology CPP developed iron dextran 60-minute infusion protocol may be safely and efficiently administered for qualifying patients in a decentralized, rural healthcare setting.

Purpose/Background

Palliative care referrals are recommended for patients with advanced or metastatic cancer to enhance patient and caregiver outcomes. However, challenges like delays or lack of referrals hinder implementation. This study identified rate of palliative care referrals at James A. Haley Veterans’ Hospital in Tampa, Florida; explored potential barriers to referral, and implemented targeted interventions to improve referral rates and patient outcomes.

Methods

A Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle was used for this quality improvement project. Data was collected from electronic medical record, focusing on consult dates, patient demographics, and reasons for seeking palliative care. Pre-intervention surveys were administered to Hematology-Oncology fellows at the institution to identify barriers to referral. Following a root cause analysis, a targeted intervention was developed, focusing on educational programs for fellows for streamlined referral processes.

Results

Before the intervention, monthly average for palliative care consults was low (3-8, typically 5). Pre-intervention surveys revealed that fellows lacked knowledge about palliative care resources, which contributed to low referral rates. To address this issue, a didactic session led by a palliative care specialist was conducted for the fellows in the fellowship program. This session provided education on the role of palliative care, how to initiate referrals, and the benefits of early involvement of palliative care teams in oncology patient management. Post-intervention surveys showed a marked improvement in fellows’ confidence regarding identification of patients suitable for palliative care. Following the session, 90% (9/10) of fellows reported being “very likely” to consult palliative care more often and 80% (8/10) indicated they were “very likely” to initiate palliative care discussions earlier in patient’s disease trajectory, with the remaining 20% (2/10) reporting a neutral stance. All fellows (100%) agreed that earlier palliative care involvement improves patient outcomes.

Implications/Significance

This PDSA cycle demonstrated that targeted education for fellows can increase awareness of palliative care resources and improve referral rates. Future work will focus on reassessing usage of palliative care consults post-intervention to evaluate effects of fellows’ education of appropriate palliative care consultation, make necessary interventions based on data and further evaluate the long-term impact on patient outcomes at James A. Haley Veterans’ Hospital.

Purpose/Background

Palliative care referrals are recommended for patients with advanced or metastatic cancer to enhance patient and caregiver outcomes. However, challenges like delays or lack of referrals hinder implementation. This study identified rate of palliative care referrals at James A. Haley Veterans’ Hospital in Tampa, Florida; explored potential barriers to referral, and implemented targeted interventions to improve referral rates and patient outcomes.

Methods

A Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle was used for this quality improvement project. Data was collected from electronic medical record, focusing on consult dates, patient demographics, and reasons for seeking palliative care. Pre-intervention surveys were administered to Hematology-Oncology fellows at the institution to identify barriers to referral. Following a root cause analysis, a targeted intervention was developed, focusing on educational programs for fellows for streamlined referral processes.

Results

Before the intervention, monthly average for palliative care consults was low (3-8, typically 5). Pre-intervention surveys revealed that fellows lacked knowledge about palliative care resources, which contributed to low referral rates. To address this issue, a didactic session led by a palliative care specialist was conducted for the fellows in the fellowship program. This session provided education on the role of palliative care, how to initiate referrals, and the benefits of early involvement of palliative care teams in oncology patient management. Post-intervention surveys showed a marked improvement in fellows’ confidence regarding identification of patients suitable for palliative care. Following the session, 90% (9/10) of fellows reported being “very likely” to consult palliative care more often and 80% (8/10) indicated they were “very likely” to initiate palliative care discussions earlier in patient’s disease trajectory, with the remaining 20% (2/10) reporting a neutral stance. All fellows (100%) agreed that earlier palliative care involvement improves patient outcomes.

Implications/Significance

This PDSA cycle demonstrated that targeted education for fellows can increase awareness of palliative care resources and improve referral rates. Future work will focus on reassessing usage of palliative care consults post-intervention to evaluate effects of fellows’ education of appropriate palliative care consultation, make necessary interventions based on data and further evaluate the long-term impact on patient outcomes at James A. Haley Veterans’ Hospital.

Purpose/Background

Palliative care referrals are recommended for patients with advanced or metastatic cancer to enhance patient and caregiver outcomes. However, challenges like delays or lack of referrals hinder implementation. This study identified rate of palliative care referrals at James A. Haley Veterans’ Hospital in Tampa, Florida; explored potential barriers to referral, and implemented targeted interventions to improve referral rates and patient outcomes.

Methods

A Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle was used for this quality improvement project. Data was collected from electronic medical record, focusing on consult dates, patient demographics, and reasons for seeking palliative care. Pre-intervention surveys were administered to Hematology-Oncology fellows at the institution to identify barriers to referral. Following a root cause analysis, a targeted intervention was developed, focusing on educational programs for fellows for streamlined referral processes.

Results

Before the intervention, monthly average for palliative care consults was low (3-8, typically 5). Pre-intervention surveys revealed that fellows lacked knowledge about palliative care resources, which contributed to low referral rates. To address this issue, a didactic session led by a palliative care specialist was conducted for the fellows in the fellowship program. This session provided education on the role of palliative care, how to initiate referrals, and the benefits of early involvement of palliative care teams in oncology patient management. Post-intervention surveys showed a marked improvement in fellows’ confidence regarding identification of patients suitable for palliative care. Following the session, 90% (9/10) of fellows reported being “very likely” to consult palliative care more often and 80% (8/10) indicated they were “very likely” to initiate palliative care discussions earlier in patient’s disease trajectory, with the remaining 20% (2/10) reporting a neutral stance. All fellows (100%) agreed that earlier palliative care involvement improves patient outcomes.

Implications/Significance

This PDSA cycle demonstrated that targeted education for fellows can increase awareness of palliative care resources and improve referral rates. Future work will focus on reassessing usage of palliative care consults post-intervention to evaluate effects of fellows’ education of appropriate palliative care consultation, make necessary interventions based on data and further evaluate the long-term impact on patient outcomes at James A. Haley Veterans’ Hospital.