Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as a routine measure for cancer inpatients: the final missing piece of the puzzle?

Brandt, Juliane; Scotté, Florian; Jordan, Karin

doi:10.1093/annonc/mdy524

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Clinicians have reported that PRO measures are useful in assessing patients' views regarding changes in their health status and prompting difficult and sensitive conversations about topics, such as depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation [23][24][25]. Furthermore, a previous study reported that compared to patients with cancer in the usual care group, those in the intervention group using PROs as routine measure experienced more days with lower psychological stress [26].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of the Korean Version of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Information System® Emotional Distress Measures

Choi

Kim

2021

J Korean Acad Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This methodological study aimed to translate the Korean version of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System ® item bank-emotional distress (i.e., depression, anxiety, and anger) for adults and evaluate its psychometric properties. Methods: Translation involved forward translation, back translation, expert review, harmonization and quality assurance, and cognitive testing. Psychometric properties were evaluated with a community sample of 201 adults. To assess the unidimensionality of the measures, we used factor analysis to examine construct validity. Results: All items of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System item bank-emotional distress measures were translated through a rigorous translation process, and semantic, conceptual, and normative equivalences between the original and Korean version were ensured. Exploratory factor analysis revealed that all items loaded on one dominant factor. The Korean Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System measures demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties and unidimensionality. Conclusion:The Korean version of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System item bank-emotional distress (i.e., depression, anxiety, and anger) for adults is reliable and valid. Hence, it may be utilized extensively in clinical and research settings and contribute to patient-centered care.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of the Korean Version of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Information System® Emotional Distress Measures

Choi

Kim

2021

J Korean Acad Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…PROMs are one way to support such relationships by assessing the nature and severity of the physical, psychosocial and functional disabilities [ 13 , 14 ] which patients may encounter during and/or over time with a disease [ 10 , 13 ]. The identification of such disabilities can lead to alleviation of the burdens caused by the illness or its treatment [ 4 , 15 ]. Ultimately, the use of PROMs may help improve the quality of life for patients diagnosed with haematological disorders [ 4 , 13 , 16 ], who are a heterogeneous and challenging population.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

User experiences on implementation of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in a Haematological outpatient clinic

Hansen

Kjerholt

Christensen

et al. 2020

J Patient Rep Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background PROMs can help healthcare professionals gain an improved understanding of patients’ physical burdens, functional levels, and (health-related) quality of life throughout disease and medical treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the barriers and potential opportunities PROMs may present in a haematological outpatient clinic from three different perspectives: patients, nurses and haematologists. Methods The present study synthesizes three previously published studies that separately explored the experiences of patients, nurses and haematologists when implementing PROMs. The studies were all guided by the qualitative methodology Interpretive Description, including a focused ethnographic approach, to develop implications for future practice. Results The overall themes that emerged from the analysis were “Structural similarities influence the adoption of PROMs” and “Different perspectives on the potential of PROMs.” Conclusion Across the different user groups in the haematological outpatient clinic, the use of PROMs was thwarted due to an unquestioned commitment to biomedical knowledge and the system’s rationality and norms: PROM data was not used in patient consultations. Nurses and haematologists expressed different preferences related to potential future PROMs and different objectives for PROMs in clinical practice. From the different perspectives of the patients, nurses and haematologists, PROMs were not compatible with clinical practice. Further research is recommended to develop PROMs validated for use in haematological outpatient clinics. Moreover, implementation strategies adjusted to the structural barriers of the system are crucial.

show abstract

“…The increasing use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in cancer care shows promising results, especially within clinical care [25], [26], [27]. Thus, one way to complement cancer registrations could be to routinely collect PROMs at specific time points [26], [28].…”

Section: Interpretation and Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Under 40 (0,4) 0 (0,0) 40-49 (7,8) 381 (8,5) <0.001 50-59 (17,3) 941 (20,9) 60-69 (28,8) 1550 (34,4) 70-79 (28,4) 1168 (25,9) (22,9) 1186 (26,3) III (20,0) 1114 (24,7) IV (20,6) 527 (11,7) Missing (6,7) 177 (3,9) Analysis of milestone dates 27) 54 ( 24) 89 ( 32) 56 ( 22) 76 ( 37) 47 ( 29) 65 ( 31) 22 ( 28) High 1 (0.6) 1 ( 1) 4 ( 1) 3 ( 1) 0 (0) 0 (0) 2 ( 1) 0 (0) Missing 0 (0) 1 ( 1) 1 ( 1) 1 ( 1) 0(0) 7 ( 4) 0 (0) 0 (0) 4) 7 ( 4) 1 ( 1 54) 73 ( 53) 78 ( 55) 93 ( 60) 51 (…”

Section: Fundingunclassified

Agreement between questionnaires and registry data on routes to diagnosis and milestone dates of the cancer diagnostic pathway

Falborg¹,

Vedsted²,

Menon

et al. 2020

Cancer Epidemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The routes to diagnosis and the time intervals along the diagnostic pathway affect cancer outcomes. Some data on routes to diagnosis and milestone dates can be extracted from registries or databases. When this data is incomplete, inaccurate or non-existing, other data sources are needed. This study investigates the agreement between multiple data sources on routes to diagnosis and milestone dates of cancer pathway.Methods: Information on routes to diagnosis and milestone dates were compared across four data sources (cancer patients, general practitioners, cancer specialists and registries) for breast, colorectal, lung and ovarian cancers across the UK, Scandinavia, Canada and Australia. Agreement on routes to diagnosis and milestone dates was assessed by Kappa and AC1 coefficients and Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC).Results: 4,502 patients were included in the analysis of routes to diagnosis. The agreement was almost perfect (kappa=0.15-0.88, AC1=0.86-0.91) for breast cancer, substantial to almost perfect (kappa=0.07-0.86, AC1=0.74-0.93) for colorectal and ovarian cancers, and substantial (kappa=0.09-0.11, AC1=0.65-0.74) for lung cancer. 2,287 patients were included in the analysis of milestone dates. The agreement was adequate for all cancer types (CCC=0.88-0.99); highest agreement was seen for date of diagnosis (CCC=0.94-0.99). Conclusion:We found a reasonable agreement between patient/physician questionnaires and registry data for routes to diagnosis and milestone dates. The agreement on routes to diagnosis was generally higher for breast cancer than for colorectal, ovarian and lung cancers. Lower agreement was seen on date of first presentation to primary care and date of treatment initiation compared to date of diagnosis.

show abstract

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as a routine measure for cancer inpatients: the final missing piece of the puzzle?

Cited by 12 publications

References 21 publications

Validation of the Korean Version of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Information System® Emotional Distress Measures

Validation of the Korean Version of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Information System® Emotional Distress Measures

User experiences on implementation of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in a Haematological outpatient clinic

Agreement between questionnaires and registry data on routes to diagnosis and milestone dates of the cancer diagnostic pathway

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About