Key result
Text message engagement during chemotherapy is linked to ~39% more ED visits but similar inpatient admissions.
Why the study?
Chemotherapy patients face high risks of complications and healthcare utilization, prompting evaluation of demographic and clinical factors tied to engagement with a symptom-monitoring text message response system and their relationship to healthcare utilization.
What are the predictors of engagement with a text message response system and its association with healthcare resource utilization in chemotherapy patients?
What are the predictors of engagement with a text message response system and its association with healthcare resource utilization in chemotherapy patients?
In chemotherapy patients, engagement with a text message response system was higher among females and younger patients, and was associated with greater ED utilization primarily for pain and nausea.
Calls for enhanced symptom control in text-engaged chemotherapy patients to limit ED visits; leaves open whether these systems reduce overall healthcare utilization.
Background: Patients receiving chemotherapy face a high risk of treatment-related complications, often leading to increased healthcare resource utilization (HCRU). Mercy Hospital, St. Louis, implemented a text message response system (TRS) to proactively capture patient-reported symptoms and facilitate timely nursing interventions. We evaluated demographic and clinical factors associated with TRS engagement and their relationship to HCRU. Methods: We analyzed data from 3,899 patients across hospitals in three states (January-July 2025), including 2,750 TRS responders and 1,149 non-responders. Variables assessed included age, sex, ethnicity, comorbidities (cerebrovascular disease [CVD], chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], renal disease), cancer type, and HCRU (emergency department [ED] visits, inpatient [IP] admissions). Statistical analyses employed Welch t-tests, Pearson χ2 tests, odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and Holm correction for multiple comparisons. Results: Responders were slightly younger than non-responders (mean age 67.22 vs. 67.91 years, p=0.111). Female patients were more likely to respond (73.2% vs. 67.5%; OR=1.31, 95% CI 1.15-1.51, p=0.00010). Response rates did not differ significantly by ethnicity or comorbidities. Cancer type showed modest variation (χ2=19.77, p=0.011, Cramér’s V=0.065), though no pairwise differences remained after correction. ED utilization was higher among responders (14.33% vs. 10.71%; OR=1.39, 95% CI 1.12-1.73, p=0.0014), while IP admission rates were similar (15.96% vs. 16.10%, p=0.915). Leading IP diagnoses included sepsis (41.94%) and anemia (38.4%), while pain (48.41%) and nausea (14.96%) dominated ED visits. Conclusions: TRS engagement was higher among female and younger patients, while older adults were less likely to respond, suggesting the need for alternative outreach strategies such as direct telephone calls. Responders demonstrated greater ED utilization, primarily for pain and nausea, but comparable IP admission rates. These findings underscore the importance of targeted interventions—such as infusion center support and palliative care integration—to proactively manage chemotherapy-related symptoms and reduce HCRU in the outpatient setting. Citation Format: Suma Sri Chennapragada, Yang Wang, Jay Carlson, Aswanth Reddy. Predictors of engagement and healthcare resource utilization in chemotherapy patients using a text message response system [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2026; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2026 Apr 17-22; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2026;86(7 Suppl):Abstract nr 6304.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chennapragada et al. (2026) studied this question. Chemotherapy patients using a text message response system had higher emergency department utilization (14.33% vs 10.71%; OR=1.39) but similar inpatient admission rates compared to non-responders.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: