[The benefits of using patient-reported outcomes in cancer treatment: an overview]

Evaluation by electronic patient-reported outcomes of cancer survivors' needs and the efficacy of inpatient cancer rehabilitation in different tumor entities

OBJECTIVE

We investigated cancer survivors' health-related quality of life (HRQOL), specific deficiencies related to underlying disease or treatment, and benefits of rehabilitation in a large variety of cancer entities.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Electronic patient-reported outcomes were performed as clinical routine procedures. Cancer survivors underwent a 3-week multidisciplinary inpatient rehabilitation. Twenty-one different cancer entities were analyzed separately before (T0) and by the end (T1) of rehabilitation. HRQOL, symptoms, and functions were assessed with EORTC-QLQ-C30 questionnaire, psychological distress with Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS).

RESULTS

Four thousand four hundred one of 5912 rehabilitants were evaluable, having completed both questionnaires at T0 and T1. All function mean scores and HRQOL were lower than in Austrian normal population, while levels of anxiety, depression, and all symptom scores were higher. HRQOL was particularly low in lung, liver, and bladder cancer patients. Maximum anxiety levels were observed in patients with breast and thyroid cancer patients, the highest levels of depression in liver and brain cancer patients. Fatigue was severe in patients with lung, liver, esophageal, bladder cancer, and myeloma patients. Mean scores were also high for pain and insomnia. In the group of all rehabilitants, a highly significant improvement of global HRQOL, anxiety, depression, and all function and symptom scores was observed at T1 (p < 0.001). We noted significant improvement of HRQOL, anxiety, depression, fatigue, emotional, social, role, and physical functions in each cancer entity with medium to large effect sizes. Other recorded symptoms were reduced in the majority of cancers.

CONCLUSION

Rehabilitation effectively improves psychological distress and HRQOL as a part of treatment for various cancers.

RAPP-children: A new tool for assessing quality of life in patients with asthma and rhinitis

BACKGROUND

RhinAsthma Patient Perspective (RAPP) is a short, validated questionnaire for assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adult patients with comorbid asthma and rhinitis, while a paediatric version is still not available.

OBJECTIVE

The current study aimed to develop and validate the RAPP-children questionnaire.

METHODS

RAPP-children was derived by combining RhinAsthma-children subscales into five unique items. At baseline (T0) and after 30 days (T1), 150 children (6-11 years) with comorbid asthma (predominantly intermittent or mild persistent) and rhinitis were given the following: RAPP-children, RhinAsthma-children, Paediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (PAQLQ, age >6 years), Paediatric Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (PRQLQ), Childhood Asthma Control Test (CACT), KiddyKindl^® (age 6 years) or KidKindl^® (age >6 years), and a Visual Analogue Scale for nasal symptoms (VAS). At the final visit, a Global Rating of Change (GRC) scale was administered. The approved study was registered on the central registration system ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT03276416).

RESULTS

RAPP-children fairly reproduced RhinAsthma-children scores (concordance correlation coefficients between 0.91 and 0.95). RAPP-children showed adequate convergent validity (absolute Spearman's rho larger than 0.5 with PAQLQ, PRQLQ, CACT, KiddyKindl/KidKindl, and VAS), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha > 0.70), repeatability (intra-cluster correlation coefficient between 0.61 and 0.8) in the presence of clinical stability (GRC = 0), discriminant validity (sensitivity to asthma control status and rhinitis severity), and sensitivity to symptom improvements (GRC > 1). The minimal important difference (MID) was -20. Floor and ceiling effects were minimal. RAPP-children showed fair usability also in younger children (6-8 years).

CONCLUSION & CLINICAL RELEVANCE

RAPP-children is a valid, five-item questionnaire for assessing HRQoL in children aged 6 to 11 years with concomitant asthma and rhinitis. Although further investigation is required in moderate and severe asthmatics, this tool can be useful in clinical trials and in routine medical practice for improving the management of respiratory allergy in children.

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the RhinAsthma Patient Perspective (RAPP) in the Polish population

Introduction

The RhinAsthma Patient Perspective (RAPP) was developed in Italian to assess the Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) impairment in patients with asthma and allergic rhinitis (AR) in daily practice.

Aim

To cross-culturally validate the Polish version.

Material and methods

The Polish version was administered to patients suffering from asthma and rhinitis in a prospective observational study. Polish RAPP, along with SF-12, ACT, and a Symptomatologic VAS was filled in twice, with a 4-week interval between visits. At visit 2, a Global Rating Scale (GRS) was completed to assess any change in health status. Internal consistency, validity, reliability, discriminant ability and responsiveness to change as well as Minimal Important Difference were determined.

Results

The factor and confirmatory analysis revealed a unidimensional structure of RAPP. Internal consistency was satisfactory with Cronbach’s α (visit 1 = 0.85, visit 2 = 0.89). High reliability (ICC = 0.89 and a CCC = 0.94) was found. Validity analyses showed good correlations of the Polish RAPP with Physical and Mental Component Scores of SF-12. In addition, RAPP adequately discriminated patients on the basis of the asthma control level and rhinitis severity (p < 0.03 for all the analyses), and demonstrated to be sensitive to change. MID value was 1 point.

Conclusions

The study confirmed the reliability and validity of the Polish version of RAPP demonstrating that it is a useful tool in the assessment of HRQoL in patients with asthma and comorbid allergic rhinitis, in clinical practice.

Implementation analysis of patient reported outcomes (PROs) in oncological routine care: an observational study protocol

BACKGROUND

The successful implementation of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical routine faces many challenges, first and foremost the lack of consideration thereof in the patient care process. The aim of this study will be to first identify relevant barriers and facilitators and then design suitable implementation strategies which will be evaluated to improve the effectiveness of a PRO measure assessment in inpatient and outpatient cancer routine care.

METHODS

During the preparation phase, interviews with oncological patients (N = 28) and medical staff (N = 4) as well as focus groups with medical staff (N = 18) across five different departments caring for cancer patients were conducted. On the basis of these, qualitative content analysis revealed relevant barriers and facilitators for implementation of PROs in cancer care. Subsequently, implementation strategies and a model of implementation were developed. In the study phase, implementation strategies will be evaluated based on nine different implementation outcomes in five different oncological clinics. Evaluation of the implementation process will take place during three months in each clinic and data will be conducted pre, while and post implementation of the PRO measure. Therefore a sample size of 60 participants of whom 30 staff members and 30 participants will be questioned using existing and newly developed implementation outcome evaluation instruments.

DISCUSSION

Key to improving the effectiveness of PRO assessment in the time-critical clinical environment is the utilization of easy-to-use, electronic PRO questionnaires directly linked to patients' records thereby improving consideration of PROs in patient care. In order to validate the effectiveness of this implementation process further, an evaluation parallel to implementation following an observational study design with a mixed-methods approach will be conducted. This study could contribute to the development of adequate evaluation processes of implementation of PROs to foster sustainable integration of PRO measures into routine cancer care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered at Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/y7xce/).

Chronic Condition Measurement Requires Engagement, Not Measurement Alone

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have great promise, but evidence of success is mixed. This study uses data from Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center and Kaiser-Permanente Colorado to evaluate providing PROMs directly to the primary care physician. We compared changes over time in urinary incontinence, falls, and mental and physical health between clinics providing augmented PROMs (N = 202 patients) and control clinics (N = 102 patients). Both the control and treatment groups exhibited improvements, but there was no significant difference in outcomes over time. These results suggest that measuring and printing out PROMs for primary care physicians will not result in better patient outcomes without physician clinical engagement.

Patient reported outcomes - experiences with implementation in a University Health Care setting

AIM

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have traditionally been implemented through a manual process of paper and pencil with little standardization throughout a Healthcare System. Each practice has asked patients specific questions to understand the patient's health as it pertains to their specialty. These data were rarely shared and there has not been a comparison of patient's health across different specialty domains. We sought to leverage interoperable electronic systems to provide a standardization of PRO assessments across sites of care.

METHODS

University of Utah Health is comprised of four hospitals, 12 community clinics, over 400,000 unique annual patients, and more than 5000 providers. The enterprise wide implementation of PROs started in November of 2015. Patients can complete an assessment at home via email, or within the clinic on a tablet. Each specialty has the opportunity to add additional specialty-specific instruments. We customized the interval with which the patient answers the assessments based on specialty preference in order to minimize patient burden, while maximizing relevant data for clinicians.

RESULTS

Barriers and facilitators were identified in three phases: Pre-implementation, Implementation, and Post-implementation. Each phase was further broken down into technical challenges, content inclusion and exclusion, and organizational strategy. These phases are unique and require collaboration between several groups throughout the organization with support from executive leadership.

DISCUSSION

We are deploying system-wide standard and customized PRO collection with the goals of providing better patient care, improving physician-patient communication, and ultimately improving the value of the care given. Standardized assessment provides any clinician with information to quickly evaluate the overall, physical and mental health of a patient. This information is available real time to aid in patient communication for the clinician.

Willingness of Patients with Breast Cancer in the Adjuvant and Metastatic Setting to Use Electronic Surveys (ePRO) Depends on Sociodemographic Factors, Health-related Quality of Life, Disease Status and Computer Skills

Introduction: Because of the often unfavorable prognosis, particularly for patients with metastases, health-related quality of life is extremely important for breast cancer patients. In recent years, data on patient-relevant endpoints is being increasingly collected electronically; however, knowledge on the acceptance and practicability of, and barriers to, this form of data collection remains limited. Material and Methods: A questionnaire was completed by 96 patients to determine to what extent existing computer skills, disease status, health-related quality of life and sociodemographic factors affect patients' potential willingness to use electronics methods of data collection (ePRO). Results: 52 of 96 (55 %) patients reported a priori that they could envisage using ePRO. Patients who a priori preferred a paper-based survey (pPRO) tended to be older (ePRO 53 years vs. pPRO 62 years; p = 0.0014) and typically had lower levels of education (p = 0.0002), were in poorer health (p = 0.0327) and had fewer computer skills (p = 0.0003). Conclusion: Barriers to the prospective use of ePRO were identified in older patients and patients with a lower quality of life. Given the appropriate conditions with regard to age, education and current health status, opportunities to participate should be provided to encourage patients' willingness to take part and ensure the validity of survey results. Focusing on ease of use of ePRO applications and making applications more patient-oriented and straightforward appears to be the way forward.

Validation of the Patient Global Impression of Improvement for Penile Prosthesis

BACKGROUND

No consensus on the preferred means of evaluating patients after surgical placement of an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) currently exists. Many self-assessment questionnaires are available, but none specifically targets patients with IPPs. The purpose of this study was to assess the construct validity of the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) for evaluating patient satisfaction after placement of an IPP.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter prospective trial and enrolled patients who elected to have a 3-piece IPP surgically implanted. Postoperatively, patients completed the Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM), Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction (EDITS), and PGI-I at 3, 6, and 12 months. The Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC) was used to compare scores over time.

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients were enrolled, and complete data were available for 39 patients. At 3 months, the PGI-I correlated with the EDITS (PCC=0.83, P<0.01) and with the SHIM (PCC=0.73, P<0.01). At 6 months, the PGI-I correlated with the EDITS (PCC=0.74, P<0.01). At 6 months, the PCC between the PGI-I and the SHIM was 0.41 (P<0.05). At 12 months, the PCC between the PGI-I and the EDITS was 0.83 (P<0.01), and the PCC between the PGI-I and the SHIM was 0.61 (P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the PGI-I appears to correlate with both the SHIM and EDITS and is a valid evaluation tool for use with patients after IPP placement.

Evaluation of electronic patient-reported outcome assessment with cancer patients in the hospital and at home

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) provide a more comprehensive picture of patients' quality of life than do mere physicians' ratings. Electronic data collection of PRO offers several advantages and allows assessments at patients' homes as well. This study reports on patients' personal internet use, their attitudes towards electronic and web-based PRO assessment (clinic-ePRO and home-ePRO) and the feasibility of these two assessment modes.

METHODS

At the Medical University of Innsbruck and Kufstein County Hospital, cancer patients who participated in clinic-ePRO/home-ePRO were asked to complete a comprehensive evaluation form on their personal internet usage, attitudes towards and the feasibility of routine clinic-ePRO/home-ePRO with the Computer-based Health Evaluation System (CHES) software.

RESULTS

In total, 113 patients completed the evaluation form for clinic-ePRO (Ø 45 years, SD 14) and 45 patients for home-ePRO (Ø 58 years, SD 10; 33.1 per cent inclusion rate for this sample). Most patients expressed willingness to complete routine clinic-ePRO assessments in the future (94.7 per cent of clinic-ePRO patients and 84.4 per cent of home-ePRO patients) and to discuss their data with attending physicians (82.2 per cent, home-ePRO patients only). Overall, patients preferred the software over paper-pencil questionnaires (67.2 per cent of clinic-ePRO patients and 60 per cent of home-ePRO patients) and experienced it as easy to use. Only a few minor suggestions for improvement were made (e.g. adjustable font sizes).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of clinic-ePRO/home-ePRO was in general shown to be feasible and well accepted. However, to be more inclusive in the implementation of clinic-ePRO/home-ePRO, educational programs concerning their particular benefit in oncology practice potentially could enhance patients' attitudes towards, and consequently their acceptance of and compliance with electronic PRO assessments.

[Self-monitoring in inflammatory rheumatic diseases]

BACKGROUND

Active involvement of patients in their care has led to better treatment and outcomes. Tight control concepts emphasize the need for regular assessments including patients' active involvement by self-monitoring.

METHODS

The literature was screened with respect to published experiences of self-monitoring of rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthritides. The use of "patient-reported outcome" (PRO) instruments can facilitate self-monitoring. Potentially applicable PROs and their correlations to clinical parameters as well as modern data acquisition modes are presented.

RESULTS

Some experiences for self-monitoring have been reported. Recommendations from national and international professional rheumatology societies do not yet consider self-monitoring; however, PROs might be used for self-monitoring but instructions for patients on "how to deal with self-monitored PRO values" are missing.

CONCLUSION

Self-monitoring of inflammatory rheumatic diseases seems feasible. Further evaluation studies are warranted to guarantee an optimized direct patient involvement in their management beyond outpatient care in hospitals and private practices so that they can thus contribute to a better outcome.