The Impact of Measuring Patient-Reported Outcome Measures on Quality of and Access to Palliative Care

Dudgeon, Deborah

doi:10.1089/jpm.2017.0447

Cited by 53 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 42 publications

(50 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The number of studies is still reduced and the results are difficult to compare. 77,78 The inclusion of PROs as endpoints in clinical trials is encouraged by the FDA, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) 79 and scientific societies as the European Society of Medical Oncology. 80 US Food and Drug Administration has recently published guidelines on the review and evaluation of PROs to encourage their appropriate use in regulatory studies and decisions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

<p>Feasibility and Utility of Incorporating Patient-Reported Outcomes into Surveillance Strategies for Advanced Lung Cancer</p>

Cavanna¹,

Citterio²,

Orlandi³

2020

PROM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To identify and to describe patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in lung cancer patients and to evaluate the feasibility and utility of PROs into surveillance strategies, a review was carried out. Patients and Methods: A systematic search in bibliographic databases evaluating the instruments used in PROs of non-small-Cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients was done. Results: From August 2014 to August 2019, 33 studies were included in this review and 16,491 patients were evaluated. PROs were divided into 6 different categories: 1) PROs as a guide in therapeutic choice, 2) PROs as indicator of disease progression, 3) agreement between PROs and the evaluated parameters, 4) PROs to evaluate the effects of immunotherapy, 5) need to deepen the knowledge of PROs, and 6) use of new electronic PROs. Conclusion: The most frequently used instruments are EORTC QLQ-30 (16, 50%) and EORTC LC-13 (14, 43.75%) and in some studies (37.5%) they are used together. For different reasons (disease progression, adverse event, death, incomplete participation, etc.), the completion of these instruments decreased over time from baseline to subsequent measurements. This review demonstrates that PROs can play an important role as part of health care, and that routine use implementation could improve patient management in addition to the traditionally collected outcome.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

<p>Feasibility and Utility of Incorporating Patient-Reported Outcomes into Surveillance Strategies for Advanced Lung Cancer</p>

Cavanna¹,

Citterio²,

Orlandi³

2020

PROM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In clinical trials, PROMs serve as HRQoL outcome measures [44][45][46], that consequently influence clinical decision making, health care policy [47], and guideline development [48,49]. In clinical practice, PROMs enable patient monitoring and facilitate patient-doctor communication [50], resulting in the identification of previously unrecognized symptoms, and improvement of patient satisfaction and outcomes [51][52][53][54].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In clinical trials, PROMs serve as HRQoL outcome measures [ 44 – 46 ], that consequently influence clinical decision making, health care policy [ 47 ], and guideline development [ 48 , 49 ]. In clinical practice, PROMs enable patient monitoring and facilitate patient–doctor communication [ 50 ], resulting in the identification of previously unrecognized symptoms, and improvement of patient satisfaction and outcomes [ 51 – 54 ]. Our research team has obtained experience with a combination of several PROMs in a comprehensive outcome set for pituitary care [ 21 ], which harmonizes outcomes, and enables systematic assessment of HRQoL of all patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

SF-12 or SF-36 in pituitary disease? Toward concise and comprehensive patient-reported outcomes measurements

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Pituitary diseases severely affect patients’ health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The most frequently used generic HRQoL questionnaire is the Short Form-36 (SF-36). The shorter 12-item version (SF-12) can improve efficiency of patient monitoring. This study aimed to determine whether SF-12 can replace SF-36 in pituitary care. Methods In a longitudinal cohort study (August 2016 to December 2018) among 103 endoscopically operated adult pituitary tumor patients, physical and mental component scores (PCS and MCS) of SF-36 and SF-12 were measured preoperatively, and 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively. Chronic care was assessed with a cross-sectional study (N = 431). Mean differences and agreement between SF-36 and SF-12 change in scores (preoperative vs. 6 months) were assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and limits of agreement, depicting 95% of individual patients. Results In the longitudinal study, mean differences between change in SF-36 and SF-12 scores were 1.4 (PCS) and 0.4 (MCS) with fair agreement for PCS (ICC = 0.546) and substantial agreement for MCS (ICC = 0.931). For 95% of individual patients, the difference between change in SF-36 and SF-12 scores varied between −14.0 and 16.9 for PCS and between −7.8 and 8.7 for MCS. Cross-sectional results showed fair agreement for PCS (ICC = 0.597) and substantial agreement for MCS (ICC = 0.943). Conclusions On a group level, SF-12 can reliably reproduce MCS in pituitary patients, although PCS is less well correlated. However, individual differences between SF-36 and SF-12 can be large. For pituitary diseases, alternative strategies are needed for concise, but comprehensive patient-reported outcome measurement.

show abstract

“…La mayoría de países e instituciones que han adoptado este modelo reportan resultados positivos y costoefectivos en la provisión de servicios de salud (1,(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12). Sin embargo, también se han identificado importantes barreras que afectan su implementación, siendo las más recurrentes la falta de recursos tecnológicos, el poco personal disponible para apoyar el proceso, los bajos niveles de comprensión y entrenamiento en la medición de los resultados en salud alcanzados por el paciente y el cálculo de los costos totales producto de la atención (1,6,8,9,(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18). Asimismo, sobresalen las dificultades en la articulación y compromiso por parte de los diferentes actores del sistema y los grupos interdisciplinarios de atención.…”

Section: Principios Retos Y Oportunidadesunclassified

“…Si bien hasta acá Porter & Thomas (3) presentan una serie de principios valiosos para la adecuada implementación de la atención en salud basada en valor, la evidencia reportada por quienes han implementado este modelo sugiere tener en cuenta otros aspectos como el trabajo en equipo, la promoción de una atención centrada en el paciente y la planeación adecuada de las tareas a llevar a cabo, las cuales solo logran dimensionarse después de haber entendido claramente el modelo y sus implicaciones a nivel operativo (1,6,8,9,(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18).…”

Section: Aspectos Complementarios a Considerarunclassified

Atención en salud basada en el valor: retos y oportunidades

Valencia-Mayer

2019

Rev. Sal. Bosq

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

La atención en salud basada en el valor es un modelo de atención innovador que está dirigido a garantizar mejores resultados en la salud de la población atendida y un uso óptimo de los recursos. Para su implementación se propone una serie de principios que se analizan en el presente documento, análisis en el que se tienen en cuenta las características fundamentales, la factibilidad, las posibles barreras y las oportunidades que pueda generar este modelo. Los principios revisados son: unidades integradas de atención, medición de resultados en salud y costos, plataformas tecnológicas, modelos de pago centrados en la generación de valor, sistemas/redes integradas de atención y expansión geográfica. Además, se incluyen la atención centrada en el paciente y el trabajo en equipo como componentes fundamentales de este modelo.

show abstract

The Impact of Measuring Patient-Reported Outcome Measures on Quality of and Access to Palliative Care

Abstract: Measurement of quality palliative and end-of-life care is very complex. It requires that both administrative data and PROMs be assessed to reflect outcomes that are important to patients and families. Australia's national initiative is a promising exemplar for continued work in this area.

Cited by 53 publications

References 42 publications

<p>Feasibility and Utility of Incorporating Patient-Reported Outcomes into Surveillance Strategies for Advanced Lung Cancer</p>

<p>Feasibility and Utility of Incorporating Patient-Reported Outcomes into Surveillance Strategies for Advanced Lung Cancer</p>

SF-12 or SF-36 in pituitary disease? Toward concise and comprehensive patient-reported outcomes measurements

Atención en salud basada en el valor: retos y oportunidades

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About