From trigger to consultation: feasibility of the patient-reported ONCOlogical ROUTinE Screening (ONCO-ROUTES) across a comprehensive cancer center network

Abstract Purpose The German oncological certification program requires multi-domain routine screening for supportive care needs. However, most centers operate separate single-domain instruments, and published implementations rarely track how screening results are acted upon. Therefore, we piloted the ONCOlogical ROUTinE Screening (ONCO-ROUTES), a 47-item patient-reported multi-domain screening, and followed each trigger through to the documented consultation. Methods We conducted a prospective multicenter feasibility study (April–June 2026) at four hospitals of a comprehensive cancer center network. Three hospitals used a paper-based workflow (n = 345), one a fully digital workflow (n = 169). Realization of screening results was defined as a documented consultation within 30 days, captured from the hospital information system or consultation checkboxes. Results Of 570 distributed screenings, 514 were returned (90.2%; paper-based 92.7–97.8%, digital 79.3%). Median digital completion time was 12 minutes (n = 175); staff effort was 1–5 minutes per screening. The screenings yielded 963 trigger-positive findings (1.9 per screening); realization ranged from 83–89% (inpatient maximum) to 4–23% (outpatient medical care center, MVZ). Realization depended on direct access: in outpatient (MVZ) units without in-house consultation authority, 88–98% of trigger-positive findings were addressed (performed or recommended). Time to consultation was structure-dependent (median 1 vs. 8.5 days); consultation realization was higher in certification-relevant primary cases (45% vs. 27%, p < 0.001). Conclusion A single multi-domain patient-reported screening is feasible in routine care across heterogeneous hospital settings. Translation of identified needs into consultations depends on organizational structures and sectoral boundaries rather than the screening instrument.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Research Square
Published
2026-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-11374985/v1
Primary Topic
Cancer survivorship and care
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

From trigger to consultation: feasibility of the patient-reported ONCOlogical ROUTinE Screening (ONCO-ROUTES) across a comprehensive cancer center network

Madeleine Hetterich, Oliver Kölbl, Bernhard Heilmeier, Michael Ried et al.
2 links
Research Square
Cancer survivorship and care
preprint

From trigger to consultation: feasibility of the patient-reported ONCOlogical ROUTinE Screening (ONCO-ROUTES) across a comprehensive cancer center network

Madeleine Hetterich, Oliver Kölbl, Bernhard Heilmeier, Michael Ried, Jochen Grassinger, Olaf Ortmann, Susanne Leipelt, Karolina Müller, Florian Zeman, Gunnar Huppertz, Julia Maurer, Michael T Koller, Tobias Pukrop, Fabian Pöhl, Stephan Seitz, Vanessa Busch, Stefanie Wolf, Veronika Fichtl, Selina Mühln, Anna Resch, Peter Hau
preprint en

Abstract

Abstract Purpose The German oncological certification program requires multi-domain routine screening for supportive care needs. However, most centers operate separate single-domain instruments, and published implementations rarely track how screening results are acted upon. Therefore, we piloted the ONCOlogical ROUTinE Screening (ONCO-ROUTES), a 47-item patient-reported multi-domain screening, and followed each trigger through to the documented consultation. Methods We conducted a prospective multicenter feasibility study (April–June 2026) at four hospitals of a comprehensive cancer center network. Three hospitals used a paper-based workflow (n = 345), one a fully digital workflow (n = 169). Realization of screening results was defined as a documented consultation within 30 days, captured from the hospital information system or consultation checkboxes. Results Of 570 distributed screenings, 514 were returned (90.2%; paper-based 92.7–97.8%, digital 79.3%). Median digital completion time was 12 minutes (n = 175); staff effort was 1–5 minutes per screening. The screenings yielded 963 trigger-positive findings (1.9 per screening); realization ranged from 83–89% (inpatient maximum) to 4–23% (outpatient medical care center, MVZ). Realization depended on direct access: in outpatient (MVZ) units without in-house consultation authority, 88–98% of trigger-positive findings were addressed (performed or recommended). Time to consultation was structure-dependent (median 1 vs. 8.5 days); consultation realization was higher in certification-relevant primary cases (45% vs. 27%, p < 0.001). Conclusion A single multi-domain patient-reported screening is feasible in routine care across heterogeneous hospital settings. Translation of identified needs into consultations depends on organizational structures and sectoral boundaries rather than the screening instrument.

Research Square
University Hospital Regensburg (DE), Barmherzige Brüder Klinikum St. Elisabeth in Straubing (DE), Krankenhaus Barmherzige Brüder (DE), University of Regensburg (DE)
Good health and well-being
Cancer survivorship and care
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon