Implementation of financial toxicity screening and a novel financial navigation program.

290 Background: “Financial Toxicity” is the financial burden and stress imposed on a patient due to a disease and its associated treatment. About 50% of patients with gynecologic cancer experience financial toxicity. The aim of the study is to evaluate implementation of financial toxicity screening and a novel financial navigation program for patients with gynecologic oncology. Methods: Patients presenting for initial consultation with a gynecologic oncology provider from July 2022 to January 2023 were included. A new financial navigation program began in July 2022. On October 17, 2022, a financial toxicity screening question was added to new patient intake forms. We quantified patient referrals to the navigator before and after screening implementation, along with needs identified, action taken by the navigator and institutional support services utilized. Results: We included 458 new patients, 49% before and 51% after introduction of screening. The majority were white (61%) and had private insurance (59%) followed by Medicare (31%); median age was 59 (IQR 47-69). Following screening, a higher proportion of patients were referred to the financial navigator (15%) than before screening (4%, p<0.001). Additionally, referrals to other hospital social support services decreased from 9% before screening to 3% after (p<0.001). Uterine and cervical cancers were more prevalent in the 29 patients (12%) who screened positive (31% and 14% respectively) compared to those who screened negative (17% and 1%) or did not respond (24% and 4%). Referrals to the navigator included 59% of those who screened positive, 8% who screened negative and 10% who did not respond. Over six months, 62 patients (new and follow-up) were referred to the navigator. The most common need was transportation (21%) followed by financial assistance (16%) and emotional support (16%). The navigator assisted 11% of patients with transportation and referred 13% to financial counseling/billing and 27% to other resources. Conclusions: Implementing a financial toxicity screening question on intake forms was feasible, and increased identification of patients with financial toxicity and referrals to our financial navigator. Further investigation is needed to understand screening barriers and evaluate the program.