Development and psychometric evaluation of the Quality of Patient-Centered Cancer Care measure with hematological cancer survivors

Exploration of the factors that influence perceived quality of patient centered care among cancer survivors: A systematic review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was the estimation of the quality of patient centered care among cancer survivors.

METHODS

Following the PRISMA guidelines, MEDLINE and Google Scholar were systematically searched using the keywords "quality of patient centered care" and "cancer" from 2012 to 2022.

RESULTS

In this systematic review 7 articles were included, from which 5557 patients were derived, 3050 of them being females. The majority of them (2553 patients) suffered from haematological malignancies, while a considerable amount of them suffered from breast cancer. Three studies were conducted in Australia and four studies in Mexico. Factors, such as respect to patients' values and preferences, emotional support, management of psychological needs and integrated and coordinated care received a lower score. The characteristics that were statistically significantly related to the dimensions of person-centered care were numerous and were grouped into two major categories: a) socio-demographic such as gender, age, marital status, professional status, level of education, place of residence, type of insurance and b) clinical factors such as type of malignancy, psychiatric comorbidities, time interval of diagnosis, follow-up center, type of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature showed that there is a lack of comparative data regarding the perceived quality of patient centered care among cancer survivors. More psychometric tools of quality of patient centered care, or validation of the existed ones among all types of cancer survivors are needed, in order to identify and further improve the aspects of care that are not delivered successfully.

CONTACT-Patient-Centred Care Questionnaire to assess care for patients treated with oral anticancer drugs: Development and psychometric validation

OBJECTIVE

Instruments to measure quality of patient-centred care (PCC) for the rapidly growing population of patients treated with oral anticancer drugs (OACD) are lacking. The aim of this study was to develop a valid and reliable instrument to assess PCC in the context of OACD.

METHODS

The CONTACT-Patient-Centred Care Questionnaire (CONTACT-PCCQ) was developed based on a validated set of key elements (KEs) for patient-centred education and counselling in patients taking OACD, and face validity was evaluated by means of cognitive interviews. In 16 Belgian hospitals, adult patients treated with OACD were asked to complete the questionnaire. Construct validity was investigated through exploratory factor analyses (EFAs) and internal consistency of the subscales was examined using Cronbach's alpha.

RESULTS

The initial 86-item instrument was completed by 464 patients. Each EFA confirmed the a priori PCC-based structure of the subscales. However, EFA revealed more than one factor for two of the subscales. Therefore, multiple subsections within these subscales were created. Based on factor loadings and item content, six items were removed. This resulted in a final 80-item instrument with seven subscales and five subsections. Cronbach's alpha for the subscales and subsections ranged between 0.732 and 0.918, which implies adequate internal consistency.

CONCLUSION

A final instrument with 80 items divided into seven subscales, covering all six dimensions of PCC, was obtained. The CONTACT-PCCQ has acceptable psychometric properties, supporting its use as a measure to assess care experiences of patients treated with OACD.

Patient Participation and the Environment: A Scoping Review of Instruments

Patient participation and the environment are critical factors in achieving qualitative healthcare. We conducted a systematic scoping review using Arksey and O'Malley's framework to identify instruments intended to measure patient participation. We assessed those instruments' characteristics, which areas of the healthcare continuum they target, and whether environmental factors are considered. Instruments were considered eligible if they represented the patient perspective and measured patient participation in healthcare. The search was limited to articles written in English and published in the last 10 years. We extracted concepts (i.e., patient empowerment, patient participation, and patient-centeredness) based on the framework developed by Castro et al. and outcomes of significance regarding the review questions and specific objectives. The search was conducted in PsycINFO, CINHAL/EBSCO, and PubMed in September 2019 and July 2020. Of 4802 potential titles, 67 studies reported on a total of 45 instruments that met the inclusion criteria for this review. The concept of patient participation was represented most often in these studies. Although some considered the social environment, no instrument was found to incorporate and address the physical environment. Thirteen instruments were generic and the remaining instruments were intended for specific diagnoses or healthcare contexts. Our work is the first to study instruments from this perspective, and we conclude that there is a lack of instruments that measure aspects of the social and physical environment coherently as part of patient participation.

Defining a patient-centered approach to cancer survivorship care: development of the patient centered survivorship care index (PC-SCI)

Purpose

This study presents the validation of an index that defines and measures a patient-centered approach to quality survivorship care.

Methods

We conducted a national survey of 1,278 survivors of breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers to identify their priorities for cancer survivorship care. We identified 42 items that were “very important or absolutely essential” to study participants. We then conducted exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA/CFA) to develop and validate the Patient-Centered Survivorship Care Index (PC-SCI).

Results

A seven-factor structure was identified based on EFA on a randomly split half sample and then validated by CFA based on the other half sample. The seven factors include: (1) information and support in survivorship (7 items), (2) having a medical home (10 items) (3) patient engagement in care (3 items), (4) care coordination (5 items), (5) insurance navigation (3 items), (6) care transitions from oncologist to primary care (3 items), and (7) prevention and wellness services (5 items). All factors have excellent composite reliabilities (Cronbach’s alpha 0.84-0.94, Coefficient of Omega: 0.81-0.94).

Conclusions

Providing quality post-treatment care is critical for the long-term health and well-being of survivors. The PC-SCI defines a patient-centered approach to survivorship care to complement clinical practice guidelines. The PC-SCI has acceptable composite reliability, providing the field with a valid instrument of patient-centered survivorship care. The PC-SCI provides cancer centers with a means to guide, measure and monitor the development of their survivorship care to align with patient priorities of care.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02362750, 13 February 2015

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-07356-6.

Cancer Care Evaluation Scale (CCES): measuring the quality of the structure and process of cancer care from the perspective of patients with cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the quality of the structure and process of cancer care from the perspective of patients with cancer, we developed a Cancer Care Evaluation Scale.

METHODS

Two anonymous online surveys of patients with cancer in Japan were conducted using a convenience sample of 400 adult cancer outpatients.

RESULTS

In total, 162 patients participated in the online surveys. Factor analysis revealed that the Cancer Care Evaluation Scale had the following 12 domains: (i) relationship with physician, (ii) relationship with nurse, (iii) physical care by physician, (iv) physical care by nurse, (v) psycho-existential care, (vi) help with decision-making for patients, (vii) coordination and consistency, (viii) environment, (ix) cost, (x) availability, (xi) care for the side effects of cancer treatment by a physician, and (xii) care for the side effects of cancer treatment by a nurse. The Cancer Care Evaluation Scale was correlated with overall care satisfaction (r = 0.75), but not with the quality of life (r = 0.40). In regard to rest-retest reliability, most items showed an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.7 or higher.

CONCLUSION

The validity and reliability of the Cancer Care Evaluation Scale were confirmed, suggesting that this tool is useful for evaluating the quality of cancer care from the perspective of patients with cancer.

Social inequalities in supportive care needs and quality of patient-centered care of cancer patients in Mexico

PURPOSE

To evaluate educational and health insurance-related inequalities in supportive care (SC) needs and quality of patient-centered care (PCC) for cancer patients in Mexico.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey in one Mexican Institute of Social Security (IMSS) and one Ministry of Health (MoH) oncology hospital in Mexico City. Formal labor market workers and their families have access to social health insurance that IMSS provides, while unemployed and informal workers receive care at the MoH. The study population comprised breast, colorectal, prostate, and hematologic cancer patients, aged ≥ 18 years, who attended outpatient consultations. Patients responded a short-form SC-needs questionnaire and a quality of PCC questionnaire. We used multiple logistic regression models to determine the independent association between educational attainment and high SC-needs and quality of PCC after controlling for sociodemographic and clinical covariates.

RESULTS

We included 1058 IMSS and 606 MoH cancer patients. MoH patients perceived higher SC-needs and lower quality of PCC than IMSS patients. MoH patients with low education had a greater probability of high psychological and health system SC needs and lower likelihood of being informed for treatment decision-making and care for their biopsychosocial needs. IMSS patients with low educational levels had lower probability of receiving timely care and clarity of information than those with high education. Receiving high-quality PCC was associated with decreased SC needs.

CONCLUSION

Uninsured cancer patients with low educational attainment have higher SC-needs and receive lower quality of PCC than their counterparts. Health services should face these challenges to reduce inequalities in Mexico.

Psychometric validation of a Patient-Centred Quality of Cancer Care Questionnaire in Mexico

OBJECTIVES

To develop and validate a Patient-Centred Quality of Cancer Care Questionnaire in Spanish (PCQCCQ-S) appropriate to the Mexican context.

DESIGN

Psychometric validation of a questionnaire.

SETTING

Two public oncology hospitals in Mexico City.

PARTICIPANTS

1809 patients with cancer aged ≥18 years.

SOURCE OF INFORMATION

Cross-sectional survey.

METHODS

The validation procedures comprised (1) content validity through a group of experts and patients; (2) item reduction and evaluation of the factor structure, through an exploratory factor analysis based on the polychoric correlation matrix; (3) internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha; (4) convergent validity between the PCQCCQ-S and supportive care needs scale; (5) correlation analysis between the PCQCCQ-S and quality of life scale by calculating Spearman's rank-correlation coefficient; and (6) differentiation by 'known groups' through the Wilcoxon rank-sum test.

RESULTS

The PCQCCQ-S has 30 items with the following five factors accounting for 96.5% of the total variance: (1) timely care; (2) clarity of the information; (3) information for treatment decision-making; (4) activities to address biopsychosocial needs; and (5) respectful and coordinated care. Cronbach's alpha values ranged from 0.73 to 0.90 among the factors. PCQCCQ-S has moderate convergent validity with supportive care needs scale, revealing that higher quality is correlated with lower patient needs. PCQCCQ-S has acceptable ability to differentiate by 'known groups', showing that older patients and those with low levels of education perceived lower total quality of care as compared with their counterparts.

CONCLUSION

PCQCCQ-S has acceptable psychometric properties and can be used to measure quality of patient-centred cancer care in Mexico and serve as a reference to develop PCQCCQ-S in other Spanish-speaking countries.

Exploratory Factor Analysis of a Patient-Centered Cancer Care Measure to Support Improved Assessment of Patients' Experiences

OBJECTIVE

To increase the understanding of patient-centered care (PCC) and address the need for cross-cutting quality cancer care measures that are relevant to both patients and providers.

METHODS

An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed on a short version of the Patients and the Cancer Care Experience Survey, a patient-reported measure of perceived importance of social, emotional, physical, and informational aspects of care, administered to adult patients (n = 104) at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center. Relationships between PCC dimensions and patient characteristics were also assessed. Principal axis factoring was applied and bivariate analyses were performed using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests.

RESULTS

Most of our sample was over 60 years old (63.4%), female (57.4%), and white (74.2%), with either breast (41.2%) or prostate cancer (27.5%). A 5-factor model was identified: (1) quality of life (α = .91), (2) provider social support (α = .83), (3) psychosocial needs (α = .91), (4) nonprovider social support (α = .79), and (5) health information and decision-making support (α = .88). No statistically significant associations were found between these factors and patients' characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

A preliminary factor structure for a cancer PCC measure was identified. Our findings reinforce the interrelated nature of PCC dimensions. The lessons learned from this study may be used to develop a single PCC measure that identifies patient priorities across the cancer care continuum. Data collected from such a measure can be used to support patient engagement in treatment planning and decision-making.

Development of the concept of patient-centredness - A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Patient-centredness is often linked to high-quality patient care, but the concept is not well-defined. This study aims to provide an overview of how patient-centredness has been defined in the literature since Mead and Bower's review in 2000, and to provide an updated definition of the concept.

METHOD & DESIGN

We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed to identify original articles with a sufficient definition of patient-centredness. We analysed extracted data defining patient-centredness.

RESULTS

Eighty articles were included. The dimensions "biopsychosocial", "patient-as-person", "sharing power and responsibility" and "therapeutic alliance" corresponded to four of five dimensions described by Mead and Bower. "Coordinated care" was a new dimension.

CONCLUSION

The identified dimensions are encompassed by three elements: the patient, the doctor-patient relationship and the framework of care i.e. the health care system. The additional focus on coordinated care could reflect increasing complexity of the health care system.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Narrowing down the understanding of patient-centredness to these three focus areas, viz. 1) understanding of the patients' experience of the illness in their life situation, 2) the professional's relationship with the patient, and 3) coordination of care in the system, could make the operationalisation and implementation of a patient-centred approach more manageable.

Quality of Patient-Centered Care Provided to Patients Attending Hematological Cancer Treatment Centers

The Institute of Medicine has recommended that improvements are needed in patient-centered care. This study examined hematological cancer patients' perceptions of which aspects of cancer care were being delivered well and areas that required improvement, and whether patient characteristics, or the treatment center they attended, were associated with quality of patient-centered care. Participants were recruited via three Australian hematological cancer treatment centers and completed a paper-and-pen survey assessing sociodemographic, disease, and psychological and treatment characteristics at recruitment. A second survey that contained the Quality of Patient-Centered Cancer Care measure was completed one month after recruitment (n = 215). The most frequently delivered feature of patient-centered cancer care was hospital staff showing respect for patients (91.0%). The area of care reported most commonly as not being delivered was hospital staff helping the patient find other cancer patients to talk to (29.8%). Patients without depression reported higher perceived quality of treatment decision-making, co-ordinated and integrated care, emotional support, follow-up care, respectful communication, and cancer information than patients with depression. The treatment center that was attended was associated only with the quality of cancer information patients received. Privacy issues may hinder staff connecting patients directly but this could be overcome via referrals to cancer organizations that offer peer support services.

Patient empowerment: a systematic review of questionnaires measuring empowerment in cancer patients

BACKGROUND

There is an increased attention to and demand for patient empowerment in cancer treatment and follow-up programs. Patient empowerment has been defined as feeling in control of or having mastery in relation to cancer and cancer care. This calls for properly developed questionnaires assessing empowerment from the user perspective. The aim of this review was to identify questionnaires and subscales measuring empowerment and manifestations of empowerment among cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of the PubMed, PsycINFO and CINAHL databases. Empowerment and multiple search terms associated with empowerment were included. We included peer-reviewed articles published in English, which described questionnaires measuring empowerment or manifestations of empowerment in a cancer setting. In addition, the questionnaire had to be a patient-reported outcome measure for adult cancer patients.

RESULTS

Database searches identified 831 records. Title and abstract screening resulted in 482 records being excluded. The remaining 349 full text articles were retrieved and assessed for eligibility. This led to the inclusion of 33 individual instruments measuring empowerment and manifestations of empowerment. Of these, only four were specifically developed to measure empowerment, and two were originally developed for the cancer setting, whereas the remaining two were developed elsewhere, but adapted to the cancer setting. The other 29 questionnaires were not intended to measure the concept of empowerment, but focused on patient-centered care, patient competence, self-efficacy, etc. However, they were included because part of the instrument (at least five items) was considered to measure empowerment or manifestations of empowerment.

CONCLUSION

Our study provides an overview of the available questionnaires, which can be used by researchers and practitioners who wish to measure the concept of empowerment among cancer patients. Very few questionnaires were explicitly developed to explore empowerment, and the review brings to light a significant lack of questionnaires that measure patient empowerment comprehensively.

How Does Caregiver Well-Being Relate to Perceived Quality of Care in Patients With Cancer? Exploring Associations and Pathways

Purpose Perceived quality of care (QOC) is an increasingly important metric of care quality and can be affected by such factors among patients with cancer as quality of life and physician trust. This study sought to evaluate whether informal caregiver well-being was also associated with perceived QOC among patients with cancer and assessed potential pathways that link these factors. Methods This study used data from the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) consortium. Patients with lung and colorectal cancer enrolled in CanCORS (N = 689) nominated an informal caregiver to participate in a caregiving survey. Both groups self-reported sociodemographic, psychosocial, and caregiving characteristics; cancer characteristics were obtained from the CanCORS core data set. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association between caregiver psychosocial factors and subsequent patient-perceived QOC, controlling for earlier patient-perceived QOC and covariates. Secondary analysis examined potential pathways that link these factors. Results Patients whose informal caregiver had higher levels of depressive symptoms were significantly more likely to report fair or poor QOC (odds ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.13). When caregivers reported fair or poor self-rated health, patients were more than three times more likely to report fair or poor perceived QOC (odds ratio, 3.76; 95% CI, 1.76 to 9.55). Controlling for patient psychosocial factors and physician communication and coordination of medical care reduced the effect size and/or statistical significance of these relationships. Conclusion Informal caregivers are an important part of the care team and their well-being is associated with patient-perceived QOC. Engaging informal cancer caregivers as part of the care team and conducting ongoing risk stratification screening and intervention to optimize their health may improve patient-reported outcomes and QOC.

Improving Communication in Adolescent Cancer Care: A Multiperspective Study

BACKGROUND

Professionals treating adolescents with cancer must communicate well with them and their parents. Evidence suggests that the communication needs of this population are rarely met. Skills training can improve professional communication, but has been criticized for not being based on the experience of the participants in the clinical encounter. We took a multiperspective approach, drawing on perspectives of former adolescents with cancer, patients' parents, physicians, and nurses with the aim to provide suggestions for improvement in communication in adolescent cancer care.

METHODS

Adolescent cancer survivors (n = 16), parents (n = 8), pediatric oncologists (n = 12), and pediatric oncology nurses (n = 18) participated in 11 focus groups. They discussed their experiences communicating with each other. Transcripts were analyzed by thematic analysis.

RESULTS

We identified themes within the following sections: (1) The framework in which professionals communicate with adolescents with cancer (regression in a time of detachment, adolescents' perception and knowledge of illness, cognitive versus legal maturity, "lost in transition" between pediatric and adult oncology); (2) communication difficulties between professionals and patients and parents (professionals and patients/parents identified the other party as the source of difficulties), and (3) effective professional communication (there was some overlap on how doctors and nurses should communicate, along with substantially different expectations for the two professions).

CONCLUSIONS

The framework within which professionals communicate, the different perspectives on the factors that make communication difficult, and the different expectations regarding good communication by doctors and nurses should be considered when communication skills training courses are developed for professionals who work in adolescent oncology.