Patient-Reported Outcomes in Thoracic Surgery

Early patient-reported outcomes after robotic-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) can achieve traditional clinical outcomes comparable to those of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). However, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) during the early period after RATS and VATS remain unclear. This study aimed to utilize longitudinal electronic PRO (ePRO) assessments to evaluate symptom burden and functional status between these approaches from patients' perspective.

METHODS

This study comprised patients who underwent lobectomy via RATS or VATS for non-small cell lung cancer. We collected multiple-time-point PROs data from the prospective longitudinal study via an ePRO system. Symptom severity and function status were assessed using the perioperative symptom assessment for patients undergoing lung surgery and were analyzed between groups using linear mixed-effects models.

RESULTS

Of the 164 patients, 42 underwent RATS and 122 underwent VATS. After propensity score matching (PSM), 42 RATS and 84 VATS exhibited similar baseline characteristics. During the 7-day postoperative period, participants underwent RATS reported milder pain (p = 0.014), coughing (p < 0.001), drowsiness (p = 0.001), and distress (p = 0.045) compared with those underwent VATS. Moreover, participants in RATS group showed less functional interference with walking (p < 0.001) and general activity (p < 0.001). RATS exhibited a shorter postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.021) but higher hospital cost (p < 0.001). Meanwhile, short-term clinical outcomes of operative time, dissected lymph node stations, chest tube drainage, and postoperative complication rates were comparable.

CONCLUSION

PROs are important metrics for assessing patients' recovery after lobectomy. Compared with VATS, RATS may induce less symptom burden and better functional status for patients in the early postoperative period.

Recovery of Patient-reported Quality of Life After Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy is an important, but potentially morbid, operation used to treat benign and malignant conditions that may significantly impact patient quality of life (QOL). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are measures of QOL that come directly from patient self-report. This study characterizes patterns of change and recovery in PROs in the first year after esophagectomy.

METHODS

Longitudinal QOL scores measuring physical function, pain, and dyspnea were obtained from esophagectomy patients during all clinic visits. PRO scores were obtained using the National Institutes of Health-sponsored Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System from April 2018 to February 2021. Mean PRO scores over 100 days after surgery were compared with baseline PRO scores using mixed-effects modeling with compound symmetry correlational structure.

RESULTS

One hundred three patients with PRO results were identified. Reasons for esophagectomy were malignancy (87.4%), achalasia (5.8%), stricture (5.8%), and dysplasia (1.0%). When comparing mean PRO scores at visits ≤ 50 days after surgery with preoperative PRO scores, physical function scores declined by 27.3% (P < .001), whereas dyspnea severity and pain interference scores had increased by 24.5% (P < .001) and 17.1% (P < .001), respectively. Although recovery occurred over the course of the 100 days after surgery, mean physical function scores and dyspnea scores were still 12.7% (P = .02) and 26.4% (P = .001) worse, respectively, than mean preoperative levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite declines in QOL scores immediately after esophagectomy, recovery back toward baseline was observed during the first 100 days. These findings are of considerable importance when counseling patients regarding esophagectomy, tracking recovery, and implementing quality improvement initiatives. Further long-term follow-up is needed to determine recovery beyond 100 days.

Routine Implementation of Patient-Reported Outcomes Assessment Into Thoracic Surgery Practice

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessment is a necessary component of surgical outcome assessment and patient care. This study examined the success of routine PROs assessment in an academic-based thoracic surgery practice.

METHODS

PROs, measuring pain intensity, physical function, and dyspnea, were routinely obtained using the National Institutes of Health-sponsored Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) on all thoracic surgery patients beginning in April 2018 through January 2021. Questionnaires were administered electronically through a web-based platform at home or during the office visit. Completion rates and barriers were measured.

RESULTS

A total of 9725 thoracic surgery office visits occurred during this time frame. PROs data were obtained in 6899 visits from a total of 3551 patients. The mean number of questions answered per survey was 22.4 ± 2.2. Overall questionnaire completion rate was 65.7%. A significant decline in survey completion was noted in April 2020, after which adjustments were made to allow for questionnaire completion through a mobile health platform. Overall monthly questionnaire completion rates ranged from 20% (April 2020) to 90% (October 2018). Mean T scores were dyspnea, 41.6 ± 12.3; physical function, 42.7 ± 10.5; and pain intensity, 52.8 ± 10.3.

CONCLUSIONS

PROs can be assessed effectively in a thoracic surgery clinic setting, with minimal disruption of clinical activities. Future efforts should focus on facilitating PROs collection from disadvantaged patient populations and scaling implementation across programs.

Longitudinal patient-reported outcomes 1 year after thoracoscopic segmentectomy versus lobectomy for early-stage lung cancer: a multicentre, prospective cohort study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Segmentectomy and lobectomy are the main surgical procedures for early-stage lung cancer. However, few studies have analysed patient-reported outcomes after segmentectomy versus lobectomy. This study aims to compare patient-reported outcomes-such as symptoms, daily functioning and quality of life-between thoracoscopic segmentectomy and lobectomy for early-stage lung cancer during the 1 year after surgery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Overall, 788 newly diagnosed patients with early-stage lung cancer (tumour size ≤2 cm), who are scheduled to undergo thoracoscopic segmentectomy or lobectomy, will be recruited in this multicentre, prospective cohort study. The patients will receive standardised care after surgery. The Perioperative Symptom Assessment for Lung Surgery-a validated lung cancer surgery-specific scale-will be used to assess the symptoms and functions at baseline, at discharge and monthly after discharge for 1 year. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and Lung Cancer module 29 will be used to assess the patients' quality of life at the same time points. The primary outcome will be the shortness of breath scores during the first year after thoracoscopic segmentectomy and lobectomy and will be compared using mixed-effects models. The secondary outcomes will include other symptoms, indicators of daily functioning, quality of life scores and traditional clinical outcomes. These will be compared using mixed-effects models and the Student's t-test, non-parametric test or Χ² test. Propensity score matching will be used to ensure an even distribution of known confounders between the groups.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Ethics Committee for Medical Research and New Medical Technology of Sichuan Cancer Hospital approved this study (approval number: SCCHEC-02-2022-002). All participants will be instructed to provide informed consent. The manuscript is based on protocol version 3.0. The study results will be presented at medical conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2200060753.

Translation and adaptation of the EORTC QLQ-LC 29 for use in Chinese patients with lung cancer

Background

The latest European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-Lung Cancer 29 (QLQ-LC29) has been translated and validated in several languages but not yet in simplified Chinese. This study aimed to translate this questionnaire into simplified Chinese and adapt it for use in Chinese patients with lung cancer.

Methods

The translation and adaptation process followed the EORTC translation procedure, and consisted of eight steps, namely, translation preparation, forward translations, reconciled translation, back translations, a back translation report, proofreading, pilot testing, and finalisation. The pilot testing included 10 patients with lung cancer.

Results

We obtained the permission to perform the EORTC QLQ-LC29 translation work on November 17, 2020. Thereafter, it took 3 weeks to complete the forward translations, reconciled translation, and back translations. After several rounds of discussion with the EORTC Translation Unit, 19 items used the existing translations from the EORTC Item Library (a database of EORTC questionnaire items and their translations), and 10 items were translated from scratch. The 10 patients included in the pilot testing phase had a median age of 64 years (range 31–69 years); five were male, five had an educational level of high school or above, and six had undergone surgery. Eight items received comments from patients (six items by one patient alone and the other two items by three patients). No patients commented on the instructions or the format used for responses. After discussion with the EORTC Translation Unit, we modified the Chinese wording in item 50 to ensure that the meaning of “lifeless” was clear. No changes were made to the remaining items.

Conclusions

The simplified Chinese version of the EORTC QLQ-LC29 is now available on the EORTC website. This translation may contribute to the application of the EORTC QLQ-LC29 scale in both research and clinical practice in the Chinese population with lung cancer. Further evaluation of the psychometric properties of the translated EORTC QLQ-LC29 is warranted.

Early Postoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes After Thoracoscopic Segmentectomy Versus Lobectomy for Small-Sized Peripheral Non-small-cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes are critical for obtaining valuable patient insight into different surgical treatment options with comparable clinical outcomes. This study aimed to compare early postoperative patient-reported symptoms and functioning between thoracoscopic segmentectomy and lobectomy for small-sized (≤ 2 cm) peripheral non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study included 110 patients who underwent thoracoscopic segmentectomy or lobectomy for peripheral NSCLC ≤ 2 cm in a multicenter prospective longitudinal study (CN-PRO-Lung 1). Symptom severity, functional status, and short-term clinical outcomes were compared between the groups. Symptom severity and functional status were measured using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Lung Cancer at baseline, daily post-surgery, and weekly post-discharge for up to 4 weeks. Both the proportion of moderate-to-severe scores and mean scores on a 0-10 scale were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

Overall, 48 and 62 patients underwent thoracoscopic segmentectomy and lobectomy, respectively. No significant between-group differences were found in the severity of the top five symptoms (coughing, shortness of breath, pain, fatigue, and disturbed sleep) or in the impairment of all six function items (work, walking, general activity, enjoyment of life, mood, and relations with others) during both the 6-day postoperative hospitalization and the 4-week post-discharge (all p > 0.05). Short-term clinical outcomes of postoperative hospital stay, operative time, drainage time, postoperative in-hospital oral morphine equivalent dose, and complication rate were also comparable (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with peripheral NSCLC ≤ 2 cm, thoracoscopic segmentectomy and lobectomy might produce comparable symptom burden and functional impairment during the early postoperative period.

Anesthetic Management for Pulmonary Resection: Current Concepts and Improving Safety of Anesthesia

Increasingly complex procedures are routinely performed using minimally invasive approaches, allowing cancers to be resected with short hospital stays, minimal postsurgical discomfort, and improved odds of cancer-free survival. Along with these changes, the focus of anesthetic management for lung resection surgery has expanded from the provision of ideal surgical conditions and safe intraoperative patient care to include preoperative patient training and optimization and postoperative pain management techniques that can impact pulmonary outcomes as well as patient lengths of stay.

Early Patient-Reported Outcomes After Uniportal Versus Multiportal Thoracoscopic Lobectomy

BACKGROUND

Uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (U-VATS) can achieve comparable traditional clinical outcomes as those of multiportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (M-VATS). This study aimed to compare patient-reported outcomes between U-VATS and M-VATS for lung cancer lobectomy in the early postoperative period.

METHODS

This comparative analysis used data from a longitudinal prospective study (CN-PRO-Lung 1). Symptom severity, functional status, and quality of life were compared between groups using generalized estimation equation models. Symptom severity and functional status were reported as proportion of patients with clinically meaningful severe scores on 0-10-point scales assessed using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Lung Cancer module.

RESULTS

Of the 174 patients included, 102 (58.6%) underwent U-VATS lobectomy and 72 (41.4%) underwent M-VATS lobectomy. After adjusting for confounders, patients in the U-VATS group reported less severe pain (p = 0.02), fatigue (p = 0.001), constipation (p = 0.01), coughing (p = 0.003), shortness of breath (p < 0.001), and disturbed sleep (p = 0.007) during the 6-day postoperative hospitalization than those in the M-VATS group. Moreover, fewer patients reported severe impairment to walking (p = 0.033) or their capacity to enjoy life (p = 0.027) in the U-VATS group. Meanwhile, there were no significant between-group differences in the quality of life scores, operative time, chest tube duration, length of hospital stay, or early complication rate (≥ grade II) (all p ˃ 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

U-VATS might produce fewer severe symptoms and better functional status than M-VATS for lung cancer lobectomy in the early postoperative period.

Meaningful Patient-centered Outcomes 1 Year Following Cardiac Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate meaningful, patient-centered outcomes including alive-at-home status and patient-reported quality of life 1 year after cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND

Long-term patient-reported quality of life after cardiac surgery is not well understood. Current operative risk models and quality metrics focus on short-term outcomes.

METHODS

In this combined retrospective/prospective study, cardiac surgery patients at an academic institution (2014-2015) were followed to obtain vital status, living location, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at 1 year using the NIH Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). We assessed the impact of cardiac surgery, discharge location, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons perioperative predicted risk of morbidity or mortality on 1-year outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 782 patients were enrolled; 84.1% (658/782) were alive-at-home at 1 year. One-year PROMIS scores were global physical health (GPH) = 48.8 ± 10.2, global mental health (GMH) = 51.2 ± 9.6, and physical functioning (PF) = 45.5 ± 10.2 (general population reference = 50 ± 10). All 3 PROMIS domains at 1 year were significantly higher compared with preoperative scores (GPH: 41.7 ± 8.5, GMH: 46.9 ± 7.9, PF: 39.6 ± 9.0; all P < 0.001). Eighty-two percent of patients discharged to a facility were alive-at-home at 1 year. These patients, however, had significantly lower 1-year scores (difference: GPH = -5.1, GMH = -5.1, PF = -7.9; all P < 0.001). Higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons perioperative predicted risk was associated with significantly lower PRO at 1 year (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiac surgery results in improved PROMIS scores at 1 year, whereas discharge to a facility and increasing perioperative risk correlate with worse long-term PRO. One-year alive-at-home status and 1-year PRO are meaningful, patient-centered metrics that help define long-term quality and the benefit of cardiac surgery.

An Assessment of Patient, Caregiver, and Clinician Perspectives on the Post-discharge Phase of Care

OBJECTIVE

We sought to elicit patients', caregivers', and health care providers' perceptions of home recovery to inform care personalization in the learning health system.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Postsurgical care has shifted from the hospital into the home. Daily care responsibilities fall to patients and their caregivers, yet stakeholder concerns in these heterogeneous environments, especially as they relate to racial inequities, are poorly understood.

METHODS

Surgical oncology patients, caregivers, and clinicians participated in freelisting; an open-ended interviewing technique used to identify essential elements of a domain. Within 2 weeks after discharge, participants were queried on 5 domains: home independence, social support, pain control, immediate, and overall surgical impact. Salience indices, measures of the most important words of interest, were calculated using Anthropac by domain and group.

RESULTS

Forty patients [20 whites and 20 African-Americans (AAs)], 30 caregivers (17 whites and 13 AAs), and 20 providers (8 residents, 4 nurses, 4 nurse practitioners, and 4 attending surgeons) were interviewed. Patients and caregivers attended to the personal recovery experience, whereas providers described activities and individuals associated with recovery. All groups defined surgery as life-changing, with providers and caregivers discussing financial and mortality concerns. Patients shared similar thoughts about social support and self-care ability by race, whereas AA patients described heterogeneous pain management and more hopeful recovery perceptions. AA caregivers expressed more positive responses than white caregivers.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients live the day-to-day of recovery, whereas caregivers and clinicians also contemplate more expansive concerns. Incorporating relevant perceptions into traditional clinical outcomes and concepts could enhance the surgical experience for all stakeholders.

Effect of Cardiac Surgery on One-Year Patient-Reported Outcomes: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Current cardiac surgery risk algorithms and quality measures focus on perioperative outcomes. However, delivering high-value, patient-centered cardiac care will require a better understanding of long-term patient-reported quality of life after surgery. Our objective was to prospectively assess the effect of cardiac surgery on long-term patient-reported outcomes.

METHODS

Patients undergoing cardiac surgery at an academic medical center (2016 to 2017) were eligible for enrollment. Patient-reported outcomes were measured using the National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively across five domains: mental health, physical health, physical functioning, social satisfaction, and applied cognition. Baseline data and perioperative outcomes were obtained from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database. The effect of cardiac surgery on long-term patient-reported quality of life was assessed.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight patients were enrolled and underwent cardiac surgery, with 92.9% (91 of 98) successful follow-up. The most common operation was coronary artery bypass graft surgery at 63.3% (62 of 98), with 60.2% (59 of 98) undergoing an elective operation. One-year all-cause mortality was 5.1% (5 of 98). Rate of major morbidity was 11.2% (11 of 98). Cardiac surgery significantly improved patient-reported outcomes at 1 year across four domains: mental health (preoperative 47.3 ± 7.7 vs postoperative 51.1 ± 8.9, P < .001), physical health (41.2 ± 8.2 vs 46.3 ± 9.3, P < .001), physical functioning (39.8 ± 8.6 vs 44.8 ± 8.5, P < .001), and social satisfaction (46.8 ± 10.9 vs 50.7 ± 10.8, P = .023). Hospital discharge to a facility did not affect 1-year patient-reported outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiac surgery improves long-term patient-reported quality of life. Mental, physical, and social well-being scores were significantly higher 1 year postoperatively. Data collection with the National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System provides meaningful, quantifiable results that may improve delivery of patient-centered care.

Association Between Patient Physical Function and Length of Stay After Thoracoscopic Lung Cancer Surgery

Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) are an ideal method for measuring patient functional status. We sought to evaluate whether preoperative PRO were associated with resource utilization. We hypothesize that higher preoperative physical function PRO scores, measured via the NIH-sponsored Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS), are associated with shorter length of stay (LOS). Preoperative physical function scores were obtained using NIH PROMIS in a prospective observational study of patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery for lung cancer. Poisson regression models were constructed to estimate the association between the length of stay and PROMIS physical function T-score, adjusting for extent of resection, age, gender, and race. Due to the significant interaction between postoperative complications and physical function T-score, the relationship between physical function and LOS was described separately for each complication status. A total of 123 patients were included; 88 lobectomy, 35 sublobar resections. Mean age was 67 years, 35% were male, 65% were Caucasian. Among patients who had a postoperative complication, a lower preoperative physical function T-score was associated with progressively increasing LOS (P  value = 0.006). In particular, LOS decreased by 18% for every 10-point increase in physical function T-score. Among patients without complications, T-score was not associated with LOS (P = 0.86). Preoperative physical function measured via PRO identifies patients who are at risk for longer LOS following thoracoscopic lung cancer surgery. In addition to its utility for preoperative counseling and planning, these data may be useful in identifying patients who may benefit from risk-reduction measures.

Preoperative Lung Function Is Associated With Patient-Reported Outcomes After Lung Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

Patient quality of life (QOL) is a critical outcomes measure in lung cancer surgery. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide valuable insight into the patient experience and allow measurement of preoperative and postoperative QOL. Our objective was to determine which clinical factors predict differences in QOL, as measured by patient-reported physical function and pain intensity among patients undergoing minimally invasive lung cancer surgery.

METHODS

PRO surveys assessing physical function and pain intensity were conducted using instruments from the National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System. PRO surveys were administered to patients undergoing minimally invasive lung cancer resections at preoperative, 1-month, and 6-month postoperative time points, in an academic institution. Linear mixed-effects regression models were constructed to assess the association between clinical variables on PRO scores over time.

RESULTS

A total of 123 patients underwent a thoracoscopic lung resection for cancer. Mean age of the cohort was 67 ± 9.6 years, 43% were male, and 80% were White. When comparing clinical variables with PRO scores after surgery, lower diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (Dlco) was associated with significantly worse physical function (P < .01) and greater pain intensity scores (P < .01) at 6 months, with no differences identified at 1 month. No other studied clinical factor was associated with significant differences in PRO scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Low preoperative Dlco was associated with significant decreases in PRO after minimally invasive lung cancer surgery. Dlco may be of utility in identifying patients who experience greater decline in QOL after surgery and for guiding surgical decision making.

Healthcare systems approach to patient reported outcomes-benefits and challenges in thoracic surgery

Quality outcomes are the ultimate goal for our thoracic surgery patients. The collection of data to measure the outcomes have been in place for many years and yet are insufficient. The inclusion of patient reported outcomes (PROs) into data reporting, collection and analysis will help to truly understand what matters most to patients and allow us to provide value-based care every time. It is the responsibility of the healthcare system to provide the resources in order to leverage the patient voice and collect meaningful PROs that can influence the best outcomes possible.

Choosing the right survey-patient reported outcomes in esophageal surgery

Patient reported outcomes (PROs) fulfill a crucial and unique niche in patient management, providing health-care providers a glimpse into their patients’ health experience. This is of utmost importance in patients with benign and malignant disorders of esophagus requiring surgery, which carries significant morbidity, in part due to a high burden of symptoms affecting health-related quality of life (HRQOL). There are a variety of generic and disease-specific patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) available for use in esophageal surgery. This article provides a broad overview of commonly used HRQOL instruments in esophageal surgery, including their utility in comparative effectiveness research, prognostication and shared decision-making for patients undergoing surgery for benign and malignant disorders of the esophagus.

Patient reported outcomes: integration into clinical practices

Patient-centered care is a growing focus of research and modern surgical practice. To this end, there has been an ever-increasing utilization of patient reported outcomes (PRO) and health-related quality of life metrics (HR-QOL) in thoracic surgery research. Here we describe reasons and methods for integration of PRO measurement into routine thoracic surgical practice, commonly utilized PRO measurement instruments, and several examples of successful integration.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Surgical Oncology: An Overview of Instruments and Scores

Traditional measures of quality and effectiveness in surgical oncology have focused on morbidity, mortality, and when available, recurrence rates. Measuring patient-reported outcomes (PROs) has become more widely accepted during the last decade. This article reviews instruments commonly used in the surgical treatment of cancer patients to evaluate PROs. In addition, it discusses the linkage of PROs and health-related quality of life measures with traditional surgical complications and highlights future directions related to the expanding use of PROs in the surgical care of cancer patients.

Developing and validating utility parameters to establish patient-reported outcome-based perioperative symptom management in patients with lung cancer: a multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported outcome-based symptom monitoring and alerting have been attractive for patient care after a tumour-removal surgery. However, the implementation parameters of this patient-centred symptom management system in perioperative patients with lung cancer are still lacking. We aim to develop a perioperative symptom scale (PSS) for monitoring, to determine the optimal time points for symptom assessment and to define the alert thresholds for medical intervention.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study will prospectively recruit 300 patients undergoing lung cancer surgery in six hospitals. The MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Lung Cancer Module (MDASI-LC) is used to collect longitudinal symptom data preoperatively, daily postoperatively during in-hospital stay and weekly after discharge until 4 weeks or the start of postoperative oncological therapy. Symptoms that change significantly over time will be generated as the PSS. We will determine the optimal time points for follow-up using the generalised linear mixed-effects models. The MDASI-LC interference-measured functional status will be used as the anchor for the alert thresholds.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics Committee of Sichuan Cancer Hospital approved this study on 16 October 2017 (No. SCCHEC-02-2017-042). The manuscript is based on the latest protocol of Version 3.0, 15 September 2019. The results of this study will be presented at medical conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03341377.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Cardiothoracic Surgery

BACKGROUND

Current studies in cardiothoracic clinical research frequently fail to use end points that are most meaningful to patients, including measures associated with quality of life. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) represent an underused but important component of high-quality patient-centered care. Our objective was to highlight important principles of PRO measurement, describe current use in cardiothoracic operations, and discuss the potential for and challenges associated with integration of PROs into large clinical databases.

METHODS

We performed a literature review by using the PubMed/EMBASE databases. Clinical articles that focused on the use of PROs in cardiothoracic surgical outcomes measurement or clinical research were included in this review.

RESULTS

PROs measure the outcomes that matter most to patients and facilitate the delivery of patient-centered care. When effectively used, PRO measures have provided detailed and nuanced quality-of-life data for comparative effectiveness research. However, further steps are needed to better integrate PROs into routine clinical care.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporation of PROs into routine clinical practice is essential for delivering high-quality patient-centered care. Future integration of PROs into prospectively collected registries and databases, including that The Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database, has the potential to enrich comparative effectiveness research in cardiothoracic surgery.

Using patient-reported outcomes to manage postoperative symptoms in patients with lung cancer: protocol for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Surgery is one of the primary treatments for lung cancer. The postoperative symptom burden experienced by patients with lung cancer is substantial, seriously delaying their recovery from surgery and impairing their quality of life. Patient-reported outcome (PRO)-based symptom management is increasingly regarded as an optimal model for patient-centred care. Currently, clinical trial-based evidence involving early-phase (immediately after surgery for up to 1 month) symptom management of lung cancer is lacking. We propose a randomised trial to evaluate the effect of a PRO-based symptom-monitoring programme with overthreshold alerts and responses for postoperative recovery in patients with lung cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study will recruit 160 patients with lung cancer from six hospitals. The patients will be randomly allocated to the intervention group or control group in a ratio of 1:1. Patients in the intervention group will receive PRO-based symptom management from the specialists when their reported target symptom (pain, coughing, fatigue, disturbed sleep and shortness of breath) scores reach the preset threshold (score ≥4). Patients in the control group will not generate alerts and will follow the standard procedures for symptom management. All patients will receive symptom assessments via the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-lung cancer module on the day before surgery, daily after surgery and twice a week after discharge until 4 weeks or the start of postoperative oncological treatment. The primary outcome-mean symptom threshold events-will be compared between the intervention and control group via independent sample Student's t-test.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Sichuan Cancer Hospital on 22 November 2018 (No. SCCHEC-02-2018-045). This manuscript is based on V.2.0, 9 May 2019 of the protocol. The study results will be disseminated in publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at academic conferences.

TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR1900020846.

ERAS and patient reported outcomes in thoracic surgery: a review of current data

Quality-focused, cost-effective, patient-centered care is at the forefront of current healthcare reform. Recent data show that enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) results in improved surgical outcomes and decreased hospital costs. As a result, ERAS has been widely accepted among multiple surgical subspecialties as a modality for increasing the value of healthcare delivered to our patients. While this objective data is convincing for practitioners and administrators alike, how ERAS directly impacts the patient experience is unclear. Patient reported outcomes (PRO) are starting to drive patterns of healthcare delivery and influence surgical decision-making. In order to improve surgical outcomes and deliver patient-centered care, it is imperative that clinicians start reviewing objective metrics contained within morbidity and mortality data alongside subjective data regarding patients' experience. This article reviews the current data surrounding both ERAS and PROs within thoracic surgery and investigates how the two concepts are ultimately related.

[Evaluation Index of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: Status and Progress of Patient Report Outcomes in Thoracic Surgery]

加速康复外科临床应用的良好效果体现在降低围手术期并发症的发生率并缩短住院时间，但对围术期的患者症状管理及术后患者生活质量的关注不够高。从患者报告的资料角度评估临床疗效越来越受到重视。结合目前国内外关于病人报告结局的研究成果，本文系统论述了病人报告结局的概念内涵、研究意义及在胸外科的临床应用现状，提出借鉴国外病人报告的临床结局研究模式，开展有中国特色的结合学科特点的相关研究，并对已有的文献报告进行总结及分析。

Patient-reported outcomes in lung and esophageal cancer

Carcinomas of the lung and esophagus are associated with significant disease and treatment related morbidity. Measuring patients' self-perceived notion of their health-related quality of life (HRQOL), throughout the course of illness, is central to the delivery of comprehensive, patient-centered care. This article reviews commonly used HRQOL instruments in thoracic surgery and discusses the integral role of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in comparative effectiveness research and prognostication in the realm of lung and esophageal cancer. We also highlight challenges and future directions for widespread implementation of PROs into clinical and research practice.

Patient-reported outcome domains for the esophageal CONDUIT report card: a prospective trial to establish domains

Background

Health-related quality of life (QoL) deteriorates immediately after esophagectomy. Patients may benefit from periodic assessments to detect increased morbidity on the basis of subjective self-reports. Using input from patients and health care providers, we developed a brief prototype for the esophageal conduit questionnaire (Mayo Clinic Esophageal Conduit Outcomes Noting Dysphagia/Dumping, and Unknown outcomes with Intermittent symptoms over Time after esophageal reconstruction [CONDUIT] Report Card) and previously used it in comparative research. The present study aimed to expand its content and establish health-related QoL and symptom domains of a patient-reported postesophagectomy conduit evaluation tool.

Methods

We expanded tool content by selecting items measuring patient-reported symptoms from existing questionnaires or written de novo. A multidisciplinary group of clinician content-matter experts approved the draft tool, together with a designated patient advocate. The expanded tool was administered to patients postesophagectomy from March 1 to November 30, 2016. We established domains of conduit performance for score reporting through data analysis with exploratory factor analyses. We assessed psychometric properties such as dimensionality, internal consistency, and inter-item correlations in each domain and compared content coverage with other existing measures intended for this patient population. For data that were missing less than 50% of patient responses, the missing values were imputed.

Results

Five multi-item domains were established from data of 76 patients surveyed after esophagectomy; single items were used to assess stricture and conduit emptying. For every multi-item domain, dominance of 1 factor was present. Internal consistency reliability estimates for the domains were 0.87, 0.78, 0.75, 0.80, and 0.83 and average inter-item correlations were 0.40, 0.50, 0.40, 0.33, and 0.73 for dysphagia, reflux, dumping-gastrointestinal symptoms, dumping-hypoglycemia, and pain, respectively. Some items observed to have lower inter-item correlation were reworded or flagged for removal at future validation. For reflux and dumping-related hypoglycemia, additional items were written after these analyses.

Conclusions

The CONDUIT Report Card is a novel questionnaire for assessing QoL and symptoms of patients after esophageal reconstruction. It covers major symptoms of these patients and has good content validity and psychometric properties. The tool can be used to help direct patient care, guide intervention, and compare efficacy of different treatment options.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier No. 02530983 on 8/18/2015.