2706 - Impact of a Digital Education Platform on Patient Understanding of Prostate Cancer Treatment Options and Provider Communication: A Prospective Multi-Provider Pilot Study
Presenter(s)
I. Bustillos1, D. Fjerstad1, S. A. Polce2, M. E. Tharp II3, G. D. D. Grass3, D. C. Fernandez3, K. Yamoah3, and A. Rishi2; 1University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine, Tampa, FL, 2H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Department of Radiation Oncology, Tampa, FL, 3Department of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL
Purpose/Objective(s): Oncology consultations for prostate cancer can be overwhelming with discussions regarding disease risk stratification, treatment options, and toxicity that may limit patient comprehension and shared decision-making. Building on prior work evaluating digital visual education tools in oncology, we prospectively evaluated whether a structured digital communication platform improves patient-reported understanding and improves the quality of the prostate cancer radiation oncology consultation.
Materials/Methods: In this IRB-approved, prospective pilot study, patients (and caregivers) with prostate cancer underwent initial consult using the digital visual education platform. Following consultation, patients and caregivers completed a 6-item survey evaluating perceived understanding of diagnosis, treatment options, and overall experience. Providers completed a 7-item survey assessing usability and communication effectiveness. Patients with =4 affirmative responses and providers with =5 affirmative responses were prospectively defined as meeting criteria. The study was designed as a pilot feasibility assessment powered to detect whether the proportion of satisfied patients exceeded 50%, assuming an anticipated satisfaction rate of 75% (90% power, one-sided a=0.05), with a planned enrollment of at least 30 patients.
Results: Seventy-six prostate cancer patients were enrolled across four providers. Patient-reported outcomes demonstrated uniformly high perceived educational benefit, with 100% of respondents indicating improved understanding of their disease and treatment options and reported they would review the information again if available online. Among patients who completed the consultation-experience question (75/76), all reported that the digital platform enhanced their visit and would recommend it to other patients. Provider-reported outcomes demonstrated positive responses (100%) across all survey domains, including easier communication of complex information, improved perceived patient understanding of disease and treatment options, enhanced patient engagement and a more effective consultation compared with standard practice, while integrating smoothly into clinical workflow.
Conclusion: The use of the digital education platform during prostate cancer consultation was associated with markedly improved patient-reported understanding and an enhanced consultation experience, with uniformly positive responses observed across a multi-provider cohort of 76 patients. These findings support integration of structured visual education tool to enhance patient-provider communication during complex treatment discussions. Future studies are warranted to evaluate overall treatment experience, adherence, and long-term clinical impact.