Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Remote symptom monitoring with clinical alerts following lumpectomy : do alerts predict 30-day re-operation or re-admission rates?

Wang, Jennifer ; Bayard, Solange ; Assel, Melissa ; Kim, Minji ; Moo, Tracy Ann ; Vickers, Andrew J. ; Carlsson, Sigrid V. LU ; Mehrara, Babak ; Morrow, Monica and Nelson, Jonas A. , et al. (2026) In Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 216(1).
Abstract

Purpose: Electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) are used postoperatively to detect complications through real-time symptom monitoring. This study examines whether alerts triggered through the “Recovery Tracker” (RT), an ePRO system, predict 30-day re-admission or re-operation after lumpectomy. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed breast cancer patients who underwent lumpectomy at a single institution between August 2018 and May 2024. Patients who completed RT surveys on postoperative days 1–5 were included. Symptom alerts categorized as red (urgent) and yellow (less urgent) were analyzed using generalized additive and univariable logistic regression models. Results: Among 8723 included patients, 2552 (29%) triggered at least one... (More)

Purpose: Electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) are used postoperatively to detect complications through real-time symptom monitoring. This study examines whether alerts triggered through the “Recovery Tracker” (RT), an ePRO system, predict 30-day re-admission or re-operation after lumpectomy. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed breast cancer patients who underwent lumpectomy at a single institution between August 2018 and May 2024. Patients who completed RT surveys on postoperative days 1–5 were included. Symptom alerts categorized as red (urgent) and yellow (less urgent) were analyzed using generalized additive and univariable logistic regression models. Results: Among 8723 included patients, 2552 (29%) triggered at least one alert. Yellow alerts were more common than red across all days. Most red alerts were related to pain or vomiting; most yellow alerts were related to pain or wound redness. Overall, symptom severity and interference decreased over time. Triggering an alert was associated with increased risk of 30-day re-admission or re-operation (odds ratio [OR] 2.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.64–5.03; p < 0.001). However, absolute event rates were low (re-admission 0.3%, re-operation 0.2%), and the absolute risk increase associated with any alert was minimal (0.7%, 95% CI 0.2%–1.1%). Conclusion: Although triggering at least one ePRO alert is associated with an increased relative risk for re-admission or re-operation, the absolute risk increase of re-admission and re-operation is very small. With enhanced follow-up by the clinical team among patients who trigger an alert, patients can be reassured that most symptoms will resolve on their own or can be treated with outpatient intervention.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and , et al. (More)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and (Less)
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Breast cancer, Lumpectomy, Patient-reported outcomes, Remote symptom monitoring
in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
volume
216
issue
1
article number
9
publisher
Springer
external identifiers
  • pmid:41689671
  • scopus:105030225215
ISSN
0167-6806
DOI
10.1007/s10549-026-07905-9
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
559e2d2a-017c-474e-9b89-50725473137d
date added to LUP
2026-03-03 14:51:58
date last changed
2026-06-10 04:24:57
@article{559e2d2a-017c-474e-9b89-50725473137d,
  abstract     = {{<p>Purpose: Electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) are used postoperatively to detect complications through real-time symptom monitoring. This study examines whether alerts triggered through the “Recovery Tracker” (RT), an ePRO system, predict 30-day re-admission or re-operation after lumpectomy. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed breast cancer patients who underwent lumpectomy at a single institution between August 2018 and May 2024. Patients who completed RT surveys on postoperative days 1–5 were included. Symptom alerts categorized as red (urgent) and yellow (less urgent) were analyzed using generalized additive and univariable logistic regression models. Results: Among 8723 included patients, 2552 (29%) triggered at least one alert. Yellow alerts were more common than red across all days. Most red alerts were related to pain or vomiting; most yellow alerts were related to pain or wound redness. Overall, symptom severity and interference decreased over time. Triggering an alert was associated with increased risk of 30-day re-admission or re-operation (odds ratio [OR] 2.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.64–5.03; p &lt; 0.001). However, absolute event rates were low (re-admission 0.3%, re-operation 0.2%), and the absolute risk increase associated with any alert was minimal (0.7%, 95% CI 0.2%–1.1%). Conclusion: Although triggering at least one ePRO alert is associated with an increased relative risk for re-admission or re-operation, the absolute risk increase of re-admission and re-operation is very small. With enhanced follow-up by the clinical team among patients who trigger an alert, patients can be reassured that most symptoms will resolve on their own or can be treated with outpatient intervention.</p>}},
  author       = {{Wang, Jennifer and Bayard, Solange and Assel, Melissa and Kim, Minji and Moo, Tracy Ann and Vickers, Andrew J. and Carlsson, Sigrid V. and Mehrara, Babak and Morrow, Monica and Nelson, Jonas A. and Tadros, Audree B.}},
  issn         = {{0167-6806}},
  keywords     = {{Breast cancer; Lumpectomy; Patient-reported outcomes; Remote symptom monitoring}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{1}},
  publisher    = {{Springer}},
  series       = {{Breast Cancer Research and Treatment}},
  title        = {{Remote symptom monitoring with clinical alerts following lumpectomy : do alerts predict 30-day re-operation or re-admission rates?}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-026-07905-9}},
  doi          = {{10.1007/s10549-026-07905-9}},
  volume       = {{216}},
  year         = {{2026}},
}