Maximising the impact of patient reported outcome assessment for patients and society

Patient-centred outcome measures for oncological surgery: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Peri-operative medicine is becoming increasingly relevant in the context of managing frail patients with cancer. This paper outlines how demographic shifts in populations are affecting cancer incidence and frailty rates, the relevance this holds to the management of cancer care, and the outcome measures that should be used to gauge best clinical practice to ensure patient-centred care.

METHODS

A targeted literature review was conducted using the search terms 'surgical oncology', 'outcomes', 'frailty', 'quality of life' and 'end of life' from 10 to 17 June 2024. Articles were reviewed by all authors and core themes from the literature review were identified. Core themes were then discussed by the authors to construct a narrative review.

RESULTS

The review identified several core themes in relation to patient-centred outcome measures for oncological surgery. The UK population is ageing and consequently, the number of older people being diagnosed with cancer is increasing. There is much evidence to show that older patients have poorer outcomes in terms of mortality and postoperative complications across all types and severities of cancer. Traditional outcome measures such as 30-day mortality, duration of stay and recurrence rates fail to capture the outcomes that are most pertinent to this patient cohort. These include patient quality of life and treatment burden. We discuss the measurement of quality of life through the use of patient-reported outcome measures and their limitations. We also highlight the need for patient-centred, holistic care with the use of tools such as comprehensive geriatric assessment, which have been shown to improve patient outcomes.

DISCUSSION

There is need for a greater emphasis on quality-of-life measures alongside mortality and patient-reported outcome measures. We argue that holistic care approaches should play a greater role in enabling the measurement of outcome states beyond simply dead or alive.

Determinants of Dropping Out of Remote Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Follow-Up Among Patients With Epilepsy: Prospective Cohort Study

Background

The use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures is an emerging field in health care. In the Central Denmark Region, epilepsy outpatients can participate in remote PRO-based follow-up by completing a questionnaire at home instead of attending a traditional outpatient appointment. This approach aims to encourage patient engagement and is used in approximately half of all epilepsy outpatient consultations. However, dropout in this type of follow-up is a challenging issue.

Objective

This study aimed to examine the association between potential self-reported determinants and dropout in remote PRO-based follow-up for patients with epilepsy.

Methods

This prospective cohort study (n=2282) explored the association between dropout in remote PRO-based follow-up for patients with epilepsy and 9 potential determinants covering 3 domains: health-related self-management, general and mental health status, and patient satisfaction. The associations were examined using multiple logistic regression analyses with adjustment for sex, age, education, and cohabitation.

Results

A total of 770 patients (33.7%) dropped out of remote PRO-based follow-up over 5 years. Statistically significant associations were identified between all potential determinants and dropouts in PRO-based follow-up. Patients with low social support had an odds ratio of 2.20 (95% CI 1.38-3.50) for dropout. Patients with poor health ratings had an odds ratio of 2.17 (95% CI 1.65-2.85) for dropout. Similar estimates were identified for the remaining determinants in question.

Conclusions

Patients with reduced self-management, poor health status, and low patient satisfaction had higher odds of dropout in remote PRO-based follow-up. However, further research is needed to determine the reasons for dropout.

Patient-reported outcomes, postoperative pain and pain relief after day case surgery (POPPY): methodology for a prospective, multicentre observational study

BACKGROUND

In the UK, approximately 70% of surgical procedures are undertaken as day-cases. Little information exists about recovery from day-case surgery, yet international data highlights patients are at risk of developing significant longer-term health problems including chronic post-surgical pain and persistent postoperative opioid use. The Patient-reported Outcomes, Postoperative Pain and pain relief after daY case surgery (POPPY) study was a national prospective multicentre observational study, measuring short- and longer-term patient-reported outcomes, postoperative pain and pain relief after day-case surgery.

METHODS

This was a collaborative project led by resident anaesthetists under the Research and Audit Federation of Trainees umbrella. Adult day-case surgical patients were recruited on the day of surgery. Baseline data including patient characteristics; procedure details; pre-operative analgesic use; pre-existing pain; and quality of life scores were recorded. Patients were followed up through automated short message service messages. Short-term (postoperative days 1, 3 and 7) outcomes included: quality of recovery; pain severity; impact of pain on function; and analgesic use. Longer-term outcomes (postoperative day 97) included: quality of life; analgesic use; incidence of chronic post-surgical pain; and incidence persistent postoperative opioid use. Additional outcomes were completed by those patients with chronic post-surgical pain and persistent postoperative opioid use, with 30 patients recruited to a qualitative semi-structured interview study exploring postoperative expectations, recovery, postoperative pain and opioid use.

RESULTS

An embedded pilot study at four sites recruited 129 patients. Responses to the automated short message service were gained from 129 patients (100%) at day 1; 116 (89.9%) at day 3; 108 (83.7%) at day 7; and 77 (59.7%) at day 97 postoperatively. The pilot enabled refinement of the methods and processes before the national roll out.

CONCLUSION

This paper outlines the methods for the POPPY study, the largest UK multicentre prospective observational study considering short- and longer-term outcomes following day-case surgery.

Using voice recognition and machine learning techniques for detecting patient-reported outcomes from conversational voice in palliative care patients

AIM

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used in palliative care to evaluate patients' symptoms and conditions. Healthcare providers often collect PROMs through conversations. However, the manual entry of these data into electronic medical records can be burdensome for healthcare providers. Voice recognition technology has been explored as a potential solution for alleviating this burden. However, research on voice recognition technology for palliative care is lacking. This study aimed to verify the use of voice recognition and machine learning to automatically evaluate PROMs using clinical conversation voice data.

METHODS

We recruited 100 home-based palliative care patients from February to May 2023, conducted interviews using the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale (IPOS), and transcribed their voice data using an existing voice recognition tool. We calculated the recognition rate and developed a machine learning model for symptom detection. Model performance was primarily evaluated using the F1 score, harmonic mean of the model's positive predictive value, and recall.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 80.6 years (SD, 10.8 years), and 34.0% were men. Thirteen patients had cancer, and 87 did not. The patient voice recognition rate of 55.6% (SD, 12.1%) was significantly lower than the overall recognition rate of 76.1% (SD, 6.4%). The F1 scores for the five total symptoms ranged from 0.31 to 0.46.

CONCLUSION

Although further improvements are necessary to enhance our model's performance, this study provides valuable insights into voice recognition and machine learning in clinical settings. We expect our findings will reduce the burden of recording PROMs on healthcare providers, increasing the wider use of PROMs.

Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Chinese version of the IBD-Control questionnaire: A patient-reported outcome measure in inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

A demand exists for user-friendly patient-reported outcome measures for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The IBD-Control Questionnaire has been recently developed to assess overall disease control from the patient's view but has not been available in China.

METHODS

Translation and cultural adaption of the IBD-Control into Chinese was conducted through four steps (forward translation, backward translation, expert panel, and pilot testing). Afterwards, a prospective validation study was conducted from February 2022 to February 2023. The translated IBD-Control, Short Health Scale, EQ-5D-5L, and disease activity measurements using either the Physician Global Assessment and Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index or the Crohn's Disease Activity Index were used. Acceptability, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, content validity, convergent validity, structural validity, discriminant ability, and receiver operating characteristic curves were analyzed.

RESULTS

Questionnaires were completed by 150 participants with IBD (31 with Crohn's disease [CD] and 119 with ulcerative colitis [UC]). The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.823 for the IBD-Control-8 scale. The correlations between individual item and total score varied from 0.485 to 0.892 among CD patients and from 0.588 to 0.712 among UC patients. The S-CVI/Ave was 0.98. Convergent validity analyses exhibited moderate to strong correlations between other measurements and IBD-Control-8-subscore (0.555-0.675) or IBD-Control VAS (0.503-0.671). Test-retest analysis showed that the mean scores were 75.23±17.33 versus 72.10±14.99 (r = 0.894, p<0.01) for VAS scores and 12.75±3.49versus 12.80±3.29 for IBD-Control-8 subscore (r = 0.963, p<0.01), respectively. The IBD-Control-8-subscore and IBD-Control-VAS exhibited significant discriminative capability among the PGA categories (ANOVA, p < .001). The ROC analysis revealed an optimal cut-off point for the IBD-Control-8 subscore of 14 points (sensitivity: 70.9%, specificity 83.5%), versus a cut-off of 70 on the IBD-Control VAS score (sensitivity: 84.4%, specificity 69.3%).

CONCLUSION

The Chinese IBD-Control proves to be a disease-specific, reliable, and valid tool for revealing overall disease control from the patient's viewpoint. Both healthcare professionals and patients may find it to be a useful patient-reported outcome measurement for triaging IBD patients in China or complementing routine care.

Patient-Reported Outcome Scale for Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: Development and Validation in China

PURPOSE

To develop and validate the patient-reported outcome scale for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF-PRO) to provide a reliable and scientific measure for clinical trials on idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF).

METHODS

We analyzed the relevant literature and medical records and conducted interviews and panel discussions to develop the conceptual framework and generate the item pool. We subjected the collected items to removal, mergence, or modification to form the initial scale through a qualitative review by experts and patients. Subsequently, we conducted two field surveys to select items for the final scale based on the classical test theory and item response theory (IRT). Finally, we conducted a formal survey to assess the measurement properties of the IPF-PRO.

RESULTS

The IPF-PRO included 18 items across four domains, namely physiology, psychology, environment, and satisfaction. The Cronbach's α coefficient and generalized coefficient of the IPF-PRO were 0.917 and 0.931, respectively. The content validity, structural validity, criterion validity, and discriminant validity all met relevant standards. The results of the item analysis based on IRT were considered acceptable. The ordinal logistic regression analysis findings showed that all items' p values were greater than 0.01 when the domain scores matched variables. The IPF-PRO response and completion rates were both 100%. The median completion time was 7 min [IRQ = 3.7 min (Q3 = 9.0 min, Q1 = 5.3 min)].

CONCLUSION

The 18-item IPF-PRO developed in this study has demonstrated good reliability and validity, indicating that it is a reliable and scientific measure for IPF clinical trials.

Clinical relevance of current patient-reported outcome measures for ankle fracture: surgeons' perspective

Objectives

Determine the relevance of the most frequently used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for monitoring patient recovery after ankle fracture, from the clinical perspective of orthopaedic trauma surgeons, given lack of validated PROMs.

Design

Prospective cohort.

Setting

Orthopaedic Trauma Association committee meetings, electronic correspondence.

Patients/Participants

Orthopaedic trauma surgeons.

Intervention

Delphi method for consensus activities.

Level of Evidence

IV.

Main Outcome Measurements

Most clinically relevant PROMs for ankle fracture recovery.

Results

Several English-language PROMs were identified based on use in literature and relevance to ankle fractures. 7 were selected by expert consensus. These are the Ankle Fracture Outcome of Rehabilitation Measure (A-FORM), Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS), Foot and Ankle Disability Index (FADI) Score, Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS), Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS), and Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS PF). The most clinically relevant PROM is the A-FORM, followed by the AAOS, LEFS, PROMIS PF, FADI, and OMAS, and the least clinically relevant overall, the FAAM.

Conclusions

Understanding which PROM best matches physician expectations for tracking recovery is an important step toward a robust, evidence-based approach to patient care. The A-FORM was identified as the most clinically relevant among the most used PROMs. These results will aid surgeons, clinicians, and scientists to identify a uniformly, clinically relevant PROM for the treatment and study of outcomes and recovery after isolated ankle fracture.

Collecting Real-Time Patient-Reported Outcome Data During Latent Labor: Feasibility Study of the MyCap Mobile App in Prospective Person-Centered Research

BACKGROUND

The growing emphasis on patient experience in medical research has increased the focus on patient-reported outcomes and symptom measures. However, patient-reported outcomes data are subject to recall bias, limiting reliability. Patient-reported data are most valid when reported by patients in real time; however, this type of data is difficult to collect from patients experiencing acute health events such as labor. Mobile technologies such as the MyCap app, integrated with the REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) platform, have emerged as tools for collecting patient-generated health data in real time offering potential improvements in data quality and relevance.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of using MyCap for real-time, patient-reported data collection during latent labor. The objective was to assess the usability of MyCap in characterizing patient experiences during this acute health event and to identify any challenges in data collection that could inform future research.

METHODS

In this descriptive cohort study, we quantified and characterized data collected prospectively through MyCap and the extent to which participants engaged with the app as a research tool for collecting patient-reported data in real time. Longitudinal quantitative and qualitative surveys were sent to (N=18) enrolled patients with term pregnancies planning vaginal birth at Oregon Health Sciences University. Participants were trained in app use prenatally. Then participants were invited to initiate the research survey on their personal smartphone via MyCap when they experienced labor symptoms and were asked to return to MyCap every 3 hours to provide additional longitudinal symptom data.

RESULTS

Out of 18 enrolled participants, 17 completed the study. During latent labor, 13 (76.5%) participants (all those who labored at home and two-thirds of those who were induced) recorded at least 1 symptom report during latent labor. A total of 191 quantitative symptom reports (mean of 10 per participant) were recorded. The most commonly reported symptoms were fatigue, contractions, and pain, with nausea and diarrhea being less frequent but more intense. Four participants recorded qualitative data during labor and 14 responded to qualitative prompts in the postpartum period. The study demonstrated that MyCap could effectively capture real-time patient-reported data during latent labor, although qualitative data collection during active symptoms was less robust.

CONCLUSIONS

MyCap is a feasible tool for collecting prospective data on patient-reported symptoms during latent labor. Participants engaged actively with quantitative symptom reporting, though qualitative data collection was more challenging. The use of MyCap appears to reduce recall bias and facilitate more accurate data collection for patient-reported symptoms during acute health events outside of health care settings. Future research should explore strategies to enhance qualitative data collection and assess the tool's usability across more diverse populations and disease states.

Concurrent validity of the Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation and hip-specific patient-reported outcome measures

Aims

The Single Assessment Numerical Evalution (SANE) score is a pragmatic alternative to longer patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The purpose of this study was to investigate the concurrent validity of the SANE and hip-specific PROMs in a generalized population of patients with hip pain at a single timepoint upon initial visit with an orthopaedic surgeon who is a hip preservation specialist. We hypothesized that SANE would have a strong correlation with the 12-question International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT)-12, the Hip Outcome Score (HOS), and the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), providing evidence for concurrent validity of the SANE and hip-specific outcome measures in patients with hip pain.

Methods

This study was a cross-sectional retrospective database analysis at a single timepoint. Data were collected from 2,782 patients at initial evaluation with a hip preservation specialist using the iHOT-12, HOS, HOOS, and SANE. Outcome scores were retrospectively analyzed using Pearson correlation coefficients.

Results

Mean raw scores were iHOT-12 67.01 (SD 29.52), HOS 58.42 (SD 26.26), HOOS 86.85 (SD 32.94), and SANE 49.60 (SD 27.92). SANE was moderately correlated with the iHOT-12 (r = -0.4; 95% CI -0.35 to -0.44; p < 0.001), HOS (r = 0.57; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.60; p < 0.001), and HOOS (r = -0.55; 95% CI -0.51 to -0.58; p < 0.001). The iHOT-12 and HOOS were recorded as a lower score, indicating better function, which accounts for the negative r values.

Conclusion

This study was the first to investigate the relationship between the SANE and the iHOT-12, HOS, and HOOS in a population of patients with hip pain at the initial evaluation with an orthopaedic surgeon, and found moderate correlation between SANE and the iHOT-12, HOS, and HOOS. The SANE may be a pragmatic alternative for clinical benchmarking in a general population of patients with hip pain. The construct validity of the SANE should be questioned compared to legacy measures whose content validity has been more rigorously investigated.

Enhancing Clinicians' Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Outpatient Care: Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for collecting self-reported data among hospital outpatients, clinicians' use of these data remains suboptimal. Insight into this issue and strategies to enhance the use of PROMs are critical but limited.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine clinicians' use of PROM data for value-based outpatient consultations and identify efforts to enhance their use of PROMs in a Dutch university hospital. First, we aimed to investigate clinicians' use of outpatients' PROM data in 2023, focusing on adoption, implementation, and maintenance. Second, we aimed to develop insights into the organizational-level strategies implemented to enhance clinicians' use of PROM data from 2020 to 2023. This included understanding the underlying rationales for these strategies and identifying strategies that appeared to be missing to address barriers or leverage facilitators. Third, we aimed to explore the key factors driving and constraining clinicians' use of PROMs in 2023.

METHODS

We integrated data from 4 sources: 1-year performance data on clinicians' use of PROMs (n=70 subdepartments), internal hospital documents from a central support team (n=56), a survey among clinicians (n=47), and interviews with individuals contributing to the organizational-level implementation of PROMs (n=20). The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework was used to analyze clinicians' adoption, implementation, and maintenance of PROMs. Strategies were analyzed using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy, and results were structured around the constructs of capability, opportunity, and motivation.

RESULTS

On average, around 2023, clinicians accessed PROM data for approximately 3 of 20 (14%) patients during their outpatient consultation, despite numerous strategies to improve this practice. We identified issues in adoption, implementation, and maintenance. The hospital's strategies, shaped organically and pragmatically, were related to 27 (37%) out of 73 Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change strategies. These strategies focused on enhancing clinicians' capability, opportunity, and motivation. We found shortcomings in the quality of execution and completeness of strategies in relation to addressing all barriers and leveraging facilitators. We identified variations in the factors influencing the use of PROMs among frequent PROM users, occasional users, and nonusers. Challenges to effective facilitation were apparent, with certain desired strategies being unfeasible or impeded.

CONCLUSIONS

Enhancing clinicians' use of PROMs has remained challenging despite various strategies aimed at improving their capability, opportunity, and motivation. The use of PROMs may require more substantial changes than initially expected, necessitating a shift in clinicians' professional attitudes and practices. Hospitals can facilitate rather than manage clinicians' genuine use of PROMs. They must prioritize efforts to engage clinicians with PROMs for value-based outpatient care. Specific attention to their professionalization may be warranted. Tailored strategies, designed to address within-group differences in clinicians' needs and motivation, hold promise for future efforts.

Understanding factors impacting patient-reported outcome measures integration in routine clinical practice: an umbrella review

PURPOSE

Patient-report outcome measures (PROMs) have gained widespread support as a mechanism to improve healthcare quality. We aimed to map out key enablers and barriers influencing PROMs implementation strategies in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

An umbrella review was conducted to identify reviews exploring enablers and barriers related to the integration of PROMs in routine clinical practice from January 2000 to June 2023. Information on key enablers and barriers was extracted and summarised thematically according to the Theoretical Domains Framework.

RESULTS

34 reviews met our criteria for inclusion. Identified reviews highlighted barriers such as limited PROMs awareness among clinicians and patients, perceived low value by clinicians and patients, PROMs that were too complex or difficult for patients to complete, poor usability of PROMs systems, delayed feedback of PROMs data, clinician concerns related to use of PROMs as a performance management tool, patient concerns regarding privacy and security, and resource constraints. Enablers encompassed phased implementation, professional training, stakeholder engagement prior to implementation, clear strategies and goals, 'change champions' to support PROMs implementation, systems to respond to issues raised by PROMs, and integration into patient pathways. No consensus favoured paper or electronic PROMs, yet offering both options to mitigate digital literacy bias and integrating PROMs into electronic health records emerged as important facilitators.

CONCLUSIONS

The sustainable implementation of PROMs is a complex process that requires multicomponent organisational strategies covering training and guidance, necessary time and resources, roles and responsibilities, and consultation with patients and clinicians.

The Development and Feasibility of a Novel Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (Eproms) Questionnaire in patients with penile cancer

BACKGROUND

Penile cancer (PeCa) is a rare cancer with surgical options that affect patients' quality-of-life. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are uncommonly utilized in this cohort despite their several patient-centered benefits and there are recommendations to further digitalize PROMs. This prospective, population-based study aimed to report the development and feasibility of a novel electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) questionnaire for patients with PeCa.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A novel ePROMs questionnaire was developed and sent to patients 3 days before outpatient clinic appointments. The questionnaire included up to 30 items on patient symptomology and quality-of-life, including a self-reported quality-of-life score (rated 0 being worst and 100 being best). Data were collected for patients followed up between August 2021 and May 2022. The primary feasibility outcomes, adherence and engagement, were measured by response and drop-out rates. Differences in responders and nonresponders were also ascertained. Secondary outcomes explored the clinical utility of the questionnaire. Responders were subcategorized into 3 groups: circumcision (Ci), partial penectomy (PP) or total penectomy (TP) and differences were analyzed. This study was approved by the local Trust Governance Panel, including for ethical considerations.

RESULTS

220 adult males were sent ePROMs questionnaires, and 141 (64%) responded initially. The mean dropout rate of subsequent questionnaires was 56%. The maximum number of questionnaires sent to and completed by a patient was 8 (n = 1). Nonresponders were older (P < .0001), with poorer performance status (P < .0001) and lower body mass index (P = .0288). TP patients reported the lowest median quality-of-life score 68.50 (8-99), followed by the Ci group (72.0, 37-94) and the PP group (76.0, 10-99).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients initially engaged and adhered to the ePROMs questionnaire but struggled to maintain this over time. Clinical data gathered by the questionnaire may be utilized to inform patient care. The questionnaire requires additional validation, research, and education.

"Numbers call for action, personalized narratives provide support and recognition": a qualitative assessment of cancer patients' perspectives on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) feedback with narratives

PURPOSE

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are questionnaires completed by patients to gain insight in their health-related quality of life. However, patients often find the interpretation of PROMS challenging. A personalized narrative, i.e., a story with patients' experiences tailored to the reader, could help explain PROMs and might be appreciated alongside numerical outcomes. We studied how cancer patients perceive PROMs feedback presented in a regular numerical and a novel narrative format.

METHODS

Cancer patients who completed PROMs in routine clinical practice were recruited. All participants received numerical feedback and a personalized narrative. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to uncover perceptions of both formats. Interviews were analyzed with an inductive reflexive approach to thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients with breast cancer, melanoma, and bladder cancer participated. Thematic analysis identified six themes: "Understanding: I get the gist of it!"; "Usefulness: Tell me why I should complete PROMs"; "Format preferences: Numbers are cold, narratives are warm"; "Taking action: Can I do something about my score?"; "Personal relevance: Personalized narratives show me what life has in store for me"; and "Personal relevance: That's (not) me!" Numbers seemed to help participants act, whereas narratives may provide emotional support and recognition. Participants identified with the content of the narrative yet differed in how they related to the main character.

CONCLUSION

Personalized narratives could be a useful addition to PROMs feedback. The studied formats seem to serve different purposes; numbers help to facilitate action, personalized narratives provide recognition.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Personalized narratives may be a useful new way to communicate about quality of life to cancer survivors and help them to envision what the impact of cancer can be.

Behavioural digital biomarkers enable real-time monitoring of patient-reported outcomes: a substudy of the multicentre, prospective observational SafeHeart study

AIMS

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) serve multiple purposes, including shared decision-making and patient communication, treatment monitoring, and health technology assessment. Patient monitoring using PROMs is constrained by recall and non-response bias, respondent burden, and missing data. We evaluated the potential of behavioural digital biomarkers obtained from a wearable accelerometer to achieve personalized predictions of PROMs.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Data from the multicentre, prospective SafeHeart study conducted at Amsterdam University Medical Center in the Netherlands and Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet in Copenhagen, Denmark, were used. The study enrolled patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator between May 2021 and September 2022 who then wore wearable devices with raw acceleration output to capture digital biomarkers reflecting physical behaviour. To collect PROMs, patients received the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and EuroQoL 5-Dimensions 5-Level (EQ5D-5L) questionnaire at two instances: baseline and after six months. Multivariable Tobit regression models were used to explore associations between digital biomarkers and PROMs, specifically whether digital biomarkers could enable PROM prediction. The study population consisted of 303 patients (mean age 62.9 ± 10.9 years, 81.2% male). Digital biomarkers showed significant correlations to patient-reported physical and social limitations, severity and frequency of symptoms, and quality of life. Prospective validation of the Tobit models indicated moderate correlations between the observed and predicted scores for KCCQ [concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) = 0.49, mean difference: 1.07 points] and EQ5D-5L (CCC = 0.38, mean difference: 0.02 points).

CONCLUSION

Wearable digital biomarkers correlate with PROMs, and may be leveraged for real-time prediction. These findings hold promise for monitoring of PROMs through wearable accelerometers.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Within a National Multispecialty Surgical Quality Improvement Program

Importance

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly recognized for their ability to promote patient-centered care, but concerted health information technology (HIT)-enabled PROM implementations have yet to be achieved for national surgical quality improvement.

Objective

To evaluate the feasibility of collecting PROMs within a national surgical quality improvement program.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a pragmatic implementation cohort study conducted from February 2020 to March 2023. Hospitals in the US participating in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and their patients were included in this analysis.

Exposures

Strategies to increase PROM collection rates were identified using the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) Framework for Spread and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and operationalized with the IHI Model for Improvement's Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary goal was to accrue more than 30 hospitals and achieve collection rates of 30% or greater in the first 3 years. Logistic regression was used to identify hospital-level factors associated with achieving collection rates of 30% or greater and to identify patient-level factors associated with response to PROMs.

Results

At project close, 65 hospitals administered PROMs to 130 365 patients (median [IQR] age, 60.1 [46.2-70.0] years; 77 369 female [59.4%]). Fifteen PDSA cycles were conducted to facilitate implementation, primarily targeting the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains of Inner Setting (ie, HIT platform) and Individuals (ie, patients). The target collection rate was exceeded in quarter 3 (2022). Fifty-eight hospitals (89.2%) achieved collection rates of 30% or greater, and 9 (13.8%) achieved collection rates of 50% or greater. The median (IQR) maximum hospital-level collection rate was 40.7% (34.6%-46.7%). The greatest increases in collection rates occurred when both email and short-message service text messaging were used, communications to patients were personalized with their surgeon's and hospital's information, and the number of reminders increased from 2 to 5. No identifiable hospital characteristic was associated with achieving the target collection rate. Patient age and insurance status contributed to nonresponse.

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this cohort study suggest that the large-scale electronic collection of PROMs into a national multispecialty surgical registry was feasible. Findings suggest that HIT platform functionality and earning patient trust were the keys to success; although, iterative opportunities to increase collection rates and address nonresponse remain. Future work to drive continuous surgical quality improvement with PROMs are ongoing.

"Peace of Mind" After Mastectomy: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Many women eligible for breast conservation therapy (BCT) elect unilateral mastectomy (UM) with or without contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) and cite a desire for "peace of mind." This study aimed to characterize how peace of mind is defined and measured and how it relates to surgical choice.

METHODS

Nine databases were searched for relevant articles through 8 October 2023, and data were extracted from articles meeting the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria were met by 20 studies. Most were prospective cohort studies (65%, 13/20). In the majority of the studies (72%, 13/18), Non-Hispanic white/Caucasian women comprised 80 % or more of the study's sample. Almost half of the studies used the phrase "peace of mind" in their publication (45%, 9/20), and few directly defined the construct (15%, 3/20). Instead, words representing an absence of peace of mind were common, specifically, "anxiety" (85%, 17/20), "fear" (75%, 15/20), and "concern" (75%, 15/20). Most of the studies (90%, 18/20) measured peace of mind indirectly using questionnaires validated for anxiety, fear, worry, distress, or concern, which were administered at multiple postoperative time points (55%, 11/20). Most of the studies (95%, 18/19) reported at least one statistically significant result showing no difference in peace of mind between BCT, UM, and/or CPM at their latest time of assessment.

CONCLUSION

Peace of mind is largely framed around concepts that suggest its absence, namely, anxiety, fear, and concern. Existing literature suggests that peace of mind does not differ among average-risk women undergoing BCT, UM, or CPM. Shared surgical decisions should emphasize at least comparable emotional and/or psychosocial well-being between CPM and breast conservation.

Challenges and benefits of using the HeartDiet food frequency questionnaire in cardiac rehabilitation practice

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

A heart-healthy diet is an important component of secondary prevention in ischemic heart disease. The Danish Health Authority recommends using the validated 19-item food frequency questionnaire HeartDiet in cardiac rehabilitation practice to assess patients' need for dietary interventions, and HeartDiet has been included in national electronic patient-reported outcome instruments for cardiac rehabilitation. This study aims to evaluate challenges and benefits of its use. The objectives are to: 1) describe HeartDiet responses of patients with ischemic heart disease and discuss HeartDiet's suitability as a screening tool, 2) discuss whether an abridged version should replace HeartDiet.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A cross-sectional study using data from a national feasibility test. HeartDiet was sent electronically to 223 patients with ischemic heart disease prior to cardiac rehabilitation. Data were summarised with descriptive statistics, and Spearman's rank correlations, explorative factor analysis, and Cohen's kappa coefficient were used to derive and evaluate abridged versions. The response rate was 68 % (n = 151). Evaluated with HeartDiet, no respondents had a heart-healthy diet. There was substantial agreement between HeartDiet and an abridged 9-item version (kappa = 0.6926 for Fat Score, 0.6625 for FishFruitVegetable Score), but the abridged version omits information on milk products, wholegrain, nuts, and sugary snacks.

CONCLUSION

With the predefined cut-offs, HeartDiet's suitability as a screening tool to assess needs for dietary interventions was limited, since no respondents were categorised as having a heart-healthy diet. An abridged version can replace HeartDiet, but the tool's educational potential will be compromised, since important items will be omitted.

ASTHMAXcel PRO patient satisfaction and usability field testing

Background: ASTHMAXcel PRO, an enhanced version of the ASTHMAXcel mobile application, has been developed to deliver comprehensive, guideline-based asthma education while also facilitating the collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and enhancing user experience.

Objective: To perform field testing and conduct formative and summative evaluation of the ASTHMAXcel PRO application to assess its impact on patient satisfaction, usability, and usage.

Methods: Twenty-eight adult patients completed a baseline visit during which ASTHMAXcel PRO was introduced, health literacy was assessed, and demographic data were collected. They were instructed to use the app for 4 weeks. The Questionnaire for User Interface Satisfaction (QUIS) and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) questionnaire were administered at baseline and 4 weeks to assess user satisfaction and technology acceptance, respectively. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to gather feedback regarding the application from patients.

Results: The baseline total scores were high for both UTAUT and QUIS (mean (SD): 64.2 (10.1), 6.8 (2.2) respectively) indicating that user satisfaction and acceptance began at high levels. UTAUT total score, as well as all domain scores, improved significantly from baseline to 4 weeks (p < 0.02). QUIS total score along with several domain scores (screen, system capabilities, usability) also increased from baseline to 4-weeks (p = 0.03, 0.01, 0.03, 0.01, respectively). These improvements remained significant when adjusting for age, gender, education, and health literacy. Patients reported that the application was helpful, informative, and easy to understand and use.

Conclusion: The significant increases in satisfaction and technology adoption observed among ASTHMAXcel PRO users demonstrate that the application is viable and has the potential to improve upon usability challenges faced by existing mobile health applications.

Performance measurement and user-centeredness in the healthcare sector: Opening the black box adapting the framework of Donabedian

The framework of Donabedian is widely applied to performance assessment at the healthcare system level. Donabedian categorised the care quality measurement around three dimensions, namely structure, process, and outcomes. The first dimension concerns the inputs; the second one, the combinations of factors and inputs; the last one, the effectiveness in terms of patients' health status. Donabedian early included in the last dimension the patient satisfaction. Nevertheless, nowadays, outcomes are generally measured through hard endpoints, such as re-admissions and mortality indicators. Recently, the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) have been included among the outcome measures within the Donabedian framework. How to move the concept of patient-centeredness to a macro level, including the patient point of view in care quality measurement, evaluation, and improvement? This paper integrates the Donabedian structure-process-outcome framework, by incorporating in the proper dimension the patient-indicators, namely the abovementioned PROMs and Patient-Reported Experience Measures (PREMs). While PROMs are clearly measures of outcome, PREMs can be collocated in the process dimension, since they can be useful for mapping processes and care pathways, in a lean perspective, as well as in the outcome dimension, because inherently linked to outcome, and enablers of patient-centeredness.

Psychometric Properties of the Instrument for Scoring Clinical Outcomes of Research for Epidermolysis Bullosa patient score (iscorEB-p): a patient-reported outcome measure

BACKGROUND

In contrast to clinical diagnosis via external examination, patient-related outcome measures (PROMs) allow access to patients' internal perceptions. In the case of epidermolysis bullosa (EB) - a rare disease characterized by a wide variety of symptoms and individual disease courses - it is important to integrate the patient's perspective into diagnostic processes. The Instrument for Scoring Clinical Outcomes of Research for EB (iscorEB) is an EB-specific measurement tool, combining a clinician score (iscorEB-c) and a patient questionnaire (iscorEB-p).

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to establish the iscorEB-p as an independent PROM tool by exploring its psychometric properties.

METHODS

Sample-based psychometric testing and evaluation were performed on data collected via a multinational online cross-sectional study.

RESULTS

Data analysis was performed with n = 95 participants across all EB types. The reliability and internal consistency of the iscorEB-p was excellent (α = 0.90). Principal component analysis with a varimax rotation resulted in a two-factor solution, explaining 55.6% of the total variance, with the distinct factors 'everyday life functioning' and 'specific EB symptoms'. Convergent validity was shown by high correlations to the Satisfaction With Life Scale (r = -0.52, P < 0.001), the Quality of Life in Epidermolysis Bullosa questionnaire (r = 0.72, P < 0.001) and the Epidermolysis Bullosa Family Burden of Disease questionnaire (r = -0.73, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The iscorEB-p is a reliable and valid instrument to assess patient-reported health status of people with EB.

"I Want It to Look Natural": Development and Validation of the FACE-Q Aesthetics Natural Module

BACKGROUND

The concept of "natural" after a facial aesthetic treatment represents an understudied area. We added scales to FACE-Q Aesthetics to provide a means to measure this concept from the patient's perspective.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to develop and validate the FACE-Q Aesthetic Natural module.

METHODS

Concept elicitation interviews with people having minimally invasive treatments were conducted to explore the natural concept and develop scales. Patient and expert input refined scale content. An online sample (ie, Prolific) of people who had a facial aesthetic treatment was analyzed with Rasch measurement theory to examine psychometric properties. A test-retest reliability study was performed, and construct validity was examined.

RESULTS

Interviews with 26 people were conducted. Three scales were developed and refined with input from 12 experts, 11 patients, and 184 online survey participants. Data from 1358 online participants provided evidence of scale reliability and validity. Reliability was high with person separation index, Cronbach alpha, and intraclass correlation coefficient values without extremes ≥0.82. Tests of construct validity confirmed that the scales functioned as hypothesized. Higher scores on the Expectations scale were associated with how important it was to have a natural look and movement after treatment. In addition, higher scores on the Natural Appearance and Natural Outcome scales correlated with better scores on other FACE-Q Aesthetics scales, and were associated with the face looking and feeling natural and with overall satisfaction with facial appearance.

CONCLUSIONS

Many people seeking facial aesthetic treatments want to look natural after treatment. These new FACE-Q Aesthetics scales provide a means to measure the concept of natural from the patient's perspective.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3

Anchor-based minimal important difference values are often sensitive to the distribution of the change score

PURPOSE

Anchor-based studies are today the most popular approach to determine a minimal important difference value for an outcome variable. However, a variety of construction methods for such values do exist. This constitutes a challenge to the field. In order to distinguish between more or less adequate construction methods, meaningful minimal requirements can be helpful. For example, minimal important difference values should not reflect the intervention(s) the patients are exposed to in the study used for construction, as they should later allow to compare interventions. This requires that they are not sensitive to the distribution of the change score observed. This study aims at investigating to which degree established construction methods fulfil this minimal requirement.

METHODS

Six constructions methods were considered, covering very popular and recently suggested methods. The sensitivity of MID values to the distribution of the change score was investigated in a simulation study for these six construction methods.

RESULTS

Five out of six construction methods turned out to yield MID values which are sensitive to the distribution of the change score to a degree that questions their usefulness. Insensitivity can be obtained by using construction methods based solely on an estimate of the conditional distribution of the anchor variable given the change score.

CONCLUSION

In future the computation of MID values should be based on construction methods avoiding sensitivity to the distribution of the change score.

Time points of outcome are often neglected in acupuncture meta-analyses: a methodological survey

OBJECTIVES

To systematically understand the transparency of outcome measurement time point reporting in meta-analyses of acupuncture.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We searched for meta-analyses of acupuncture published between 2013 and 2022 in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. A team of method-trained investigators screened studies for eligibility and collected data using pilot-tested standardized questionnaires. We documented in detail the reporting of outcome measurement time points in acupuncture meta-analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 224 acupuncture meta-analyses were included. Of these, 98 (43.8%) studies did not specify the time points of primary outcome. Among 126 (56.3%) meta-analyses which reported the time points of primary outcome, only 22 (17.5%) meta-analyses specified time points in corresponding protocol. Among 48 (38.1%) meta-analyses that estimated treatment effects of multiple time points, 11 (22.9%) meta-analyses used inappropriate meta-analysis method (subgroup analysis) to pool effect size, and none of the meta-analyses used advanced methods for pooling effect sizes at different time points.

CONCLUSION

Transparency in reporting outcome time points for acupuncture meta-analyses and appropriate methods to pool the effect size of multiple time points were lacking. For future systematic reviews, the transparency of outcome measurement time points should be emphasized in the protocols and final reports. Furthermore, advanced methods should be considered for pooling effect sizes at multiple time points.

Electronic Collection of Patient-Reported Outcomes to Improve Kidney Care: Benefits, Drawbacks, and Next Steps

Kidney services worldwide are increasingly using digital health technologies to deliver care. This includes kidney electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems: ambulatory digital technologies that enable the capture of PRO data electronically from people with kidney disease remotely and in real time to be shared with their kidney care team. Current kidney ePRO systems commonly aim to support the monitoring and management of symptoms in patients with kidney disease. The majority have thus far only been implemented in research settings and are not yet routinely used in clinical practice, leaving their readiness for real-world implementation largely unknown. Compared with paper-based PRO collection, ePRO systems have certain advantages, which we categorize as efficiency benefits (e.g., lower administrative burden), direct patient care benefits (e.g., automated PRO-based patient education), and health system and research benefits (e.g., collecting ePRO data once for multiple purposes). At the same time, kidney ePRO systems come with drawbacks, such as their potential to exacerbate existing inequities in care and outcomes and to negatively affect staff burden and patients' experience of kidney care. Areas that hold promise for expediting the development and uptake of kidney ePRO systems at the local, organizational, and national level include harnessing national kidney registries as enabling infrastructures; using novel data-driven technologies (e.g., computerized adaptive test systems, configurable dashboards); applying implementation science and action research approaches to enhance translation of ePRO research findings into clinical practice; and engaging stakeholders, including patients and carers, health care professionals, policymakers, payers, ePRO experts, technology providers, and organizations that monitor and improve the quality of kidney services.

Health-related quality of life for pediatric patients with end-stage kidney disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL)

INTRODUCTION

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) studies demonstrate the impact of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on the physical and psychosocial development of children. While several instruments are used to measure HRQoL, few have standardized domains specific to pediatric ESRD. This review examines current evidence on self and proxy-reported HRQoL among pediatric patients with ESRD, based on the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) questionnaires.

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on HRQoL using the PedsQL 4.0 Generic Core Scale (GCS) and the PedsQL 3.0 ESRD Module among 5- to 18-year-old patients. We queried PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases. Retrospective, case-controlled, and cross-sectional studies using PedsQL were included.

FINDINGS

Of 435 identified studies, 14 met inclusion criteria administered in several countries. Meta-analysis demonstrated a significantly higher total HRQoL for healthy patients over those with ESRD (SMD:1.44 [95% CI: 0.78-2.09]) across all dimensional scores. In addition, kidney transplant patients reported a significantly higher HRQoL than those on dialysis (PedsQL GCS, SMD: 0.33 [95% CI: 0.14-0.53]) and (PedsQL ESRD, SMD: 0.65 [95% CI: 0.39-0.90]) concordant with parent-proxy reports.

DISCUSSION

Patients with ESRD reported lower HRQoL in physical and psychosocial domains compared with healthy controls, while transplant and peritoneal dialysis patients reported better HRQoL than those on hemodialysis. This analysis demonstrates the need to identify dimensions of impaired functioning and produce congruent clinical interventions. Further research on the impact of individual comorbidities in HRQoL is necessary for developing comprehensive, integrated, and holistic treatment programs.

Extending the Range of Measurement for Minimally Invasive Treatments by Adding New Concepts to FACE-Q Aesthetics Scales

Background

The Satisfaction with Face Overall and Psychological Function scales are the most frequently used FACE-Q Aesthetics module scales. This study aimed to extend their range of measurement by adding and testing new concepts. We aimed to create FACE-Q Aesthetics item libraries.

Methods

In-depth concept elicitation interviews were conducted. Concepts were formed into items and refined through multiple rounds of patient and expert input. The items were tested with people living in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom who had minimally invasive facial aesthetic treatments. Participants were recruited through an online platform (ie, Prolific). Psychometric properties were examined using Rasch measurement theory analysis, test-retest reliability, and construct validity.

Results

We conducted 26 interviews. New concepts were developed into items and refined with input from 12 experts, 11 clinic patients, and 184 Prolific participants. A sample of 1369 Prolific participants completed 52 appearance and 22 psychological items. After removing 10 and 2 items respectively, the psychometric tests provided evidence of reliability with the person separation index, Cronbach alpha, and test-retest reliability values without extremes of 0.88 or more. For validity, lower scores were associated with looking older than one's age, being more bothered by facial skin laxity, treatment wearing off, and having deeper lines on Merz Assessment scales. Short-form scales formed from the 42 appearance items provide examples of item library application.

Conclusions

This study provides an innovative means to customize scales to measure appearance and psychological function that maximizes content validity and minimizes respondent burden in the context of minimally invasive treatments.

Selecting patient-reported outcome measures: "what" and "for whom"

Patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) are becoming more widely implemented across health care for important reasons. However, with thousands of PROMs available and the science of psychometrics becoming more widely applied in health measurement, choosing the right ones to implement can be puzzling. This article provides a framework of the different types of PROMs by organizing them into 4 categories based upon "what" is being measured and "from whom" the questions are asked: (1) condition-specific and domain-specific, (2) condition-specific and global, (3) universal and global, and (4) universal and domain-specific. We delve deeper into each category with clinical examples. This framework can empower health care leaders and policymakers to make more informed decisions when selecting the best PROMs to implement, ensuring PROMs deliver on their potential to promote high quality, patient-centered care.

Protocol for a mixed-methods study to develop and feasibility test a digital system for the capture of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients receiving chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies (the PRO-CAR-T study)

INTRODUCTION

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies are novel, potentially curative therapies for haematological malignancies. CAR T-cell therapies are associated with severe toxicities, meaning patients require monitoring during acute and postacute treatment phases. Electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs), self-reports of health status provided via online questionnaires, can complement clinician observation with potential to improve patient outcomes. This study will develop and evaluate feasibility of a new ePRO system for CAR-T patients in routine care.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Multiphase, mixed-methods study involving multiple stakeholder groups (patients, family members, carers, clinicians, academics/researchers and policy-makers). The intervention development phase comprises a Delphi study to select PRO measures for the digital system, a codesign workshop and consensus meetings to establish thresholds for notifications to the clinical team if a patient reports severe symptoms or side effects. Usability testing will evaluate how users interact with the digital system and, lastly, we will evaluate ePRO system feasibility with 30 CAR-T patients (adults aged 18+ years) when used in addition to usual care. Feasibility study participants will use the ePRO system to submit self-reports of symptoms, treatment tolerability and quality of life at specific time points. The CAR-T clinical team will respond to system notifications triggered by patients' submitted responses with actions in line with standard clinical practice. Feasibility measures will be collected at prespecified time points following CAR T-cell infusion. A qualitative substudy involving patients and clinical team members will explore acceptability of the ePRO system.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Favourable ethical opinion was granted by the Health and Social Care Research Ethics Committee B(HSC REC B) (ref: 23/NI/0104) on 28 September 2023. Findings will be submitted for publication in high-quality, peer-reviewed journals. Summaries of results, codeveloped with the Blood and Transplant Research Unit Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement group, will be disseminated to all interested groups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISCTRN11232653.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in High-Risk Medical Device Registries: A Scoping Review

Little is known about the methods and outcomes of patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) use among high-risk medical device registries. The objective of this scoping review was to assess the utility and predictive ability of PROMs in high-risk medical device registries. We searched Ovid Medline, Embase, APA PsychINFO, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases for published literature. After searching, 4323 titles and abstracts were screened, and 262 full texts were assessed for their eligibility. Seventy-six papers from across orthopedic (n = 64), cardiac (n = 10), penile (n = 1), and hernia mesh (n = 1) device registries were identified. Studies predominantly used PROMs as an outcome measure when comparing cohorts or surgical approaches (n = 45) or to compare time points (n = 13) including pre- and postintervention. Fifteen papers considered the predictive ability of PROMs. Of these, 8 treated PROMs as an outcome, 5 treated PROMs as a risk factor through regression analysis, and 2 papers treated PROMs as both a risk factor and as an outcome. One paper described PROMs to study implant survival. To advance methods of PROM integration into clinical decision-making for medical devices, an understanding of their use in high-risk device registries is needed. This scoping review found that there is a paucity of studies using PROMs to predict long-term patient and clinical outcomes in high-risk medical device registries. Determination as to why PROMs are rarely used for predictive purposes in long-term data collection is needed if PROM data are to be considered suitable as real-world evidence for high-risk device regulatory purposes, as well as to support clinical decision-making.

Level of Evidence 4

How to select and understand guidelines for patient-reported outcomes: a scoping review of existing guidance

BACKGROUND

Over the past few decades, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have been used to understand patient health conditions better. Therefore, numerous PRO measures (questionnaires) and guidelines or guidance have been developed. However, it is challenging to select target guidance from among the many available guidance and to understand the chosen guidance. This study comprehensively collected the existing PRO guidance for clinical trials or studies and practices to support novice PRO users in academia, industry, clinical practice, and regulatory and reimbursement decision-making.

METHODS

For the scoping review, we searched the MEDLINE, Embase, Google Books, WorldCat, and the National Library of Medicine (NLM) Bookshelf databases from 2009 to 2023. The eligibility criteria were PRO guidance for clinical trials, clinical practice, or application such as health technology assessment. Those guidance cover aspects such as quality of life (QOL), PRO, health-related QOL, health state utilities, psychometric requirements, implementation methods, analysis and interpretation, or clinical practice applications. After the systematic search, three researchers individually reviewed the collected data, and the reviewed articles and books were scrutinized using the same criteria.

RESULTS

We collected the PRO guidance published in articles and books between 2009 and 2023. From the database searches, 1,455 articles and 387 books were identified, of which one book and 33 articles were finally selected. The collected PRO guidance was categorized into the adoption of PRO measures, design and reporting of trials or studies using PROs, implementation of PRO evaluation in clinical trials or studies or clinical practice, analysis and interpretation of PROs, and application of PRO evaluation. Based on this categorization, we suggest the following for novices: When selecting guidance, novices should clarify the "place" and "purpose" where the guidance will be used. Additionally, they should know that the terminology related to PRO and the scope and expectations of PROs vary by "places" and "purposes".

CONCLUSIONS

From this scoping review of existing PRO guidance, we provided summaries and caveats to assist novices in selecting guidance that fits their purpose and understanding it.

Delivering Person-Centered Peritoneal Dialysis

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) enables people to have a home-based therapy, permitting greater autonomy for individuals along with enhanced treatment satisfaction compared with in-center dialysis care. The burden of treatment on PD, however, remains considerable and underpins the need for person-centered care. This reflects the need to address the patient as a person with needs and preferences beyond just the medical perspective. Shared decision making is central to the recent International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis recommendations for prescribing PD, balancing the potential benefits of PD on patient well-being with the burden associated with treatment. This review considers the role of high-quality goal-directed prescribing, incremental dialysis, and remote patient monitoring in reducing the burden of dialysis, including an approach to implementing incremental PD. Although patient-related outcomes are important in assessing the response to treatment and, particularly life participation, the corollary of dialysis burden, there are no clear routes to the clinical implementation of patient-related outcome measures. Delivering person-centered care is dependent on treating people both as individuals and as equal partners in their care.

Recommendations to address respondent burden associated with patient-reported outcome assessment

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used in healthcare research to provide evidence of the benefits and risks of interventions from the patient perspective and to inform regulatory decisions and health policy. The use of PROs in clinical practice can facilitate symptom monitoring, tailor care to individual needs, aid clinical decision-making and inform value-based healthcare initiatives. Despite their benefits, there are concerns that the potential burden on respondents may reduce their willingness to complete PROs, with potential impact on the completeness and quality of the data for decision-making. We therefore conducted an initial literature review to generate a list of candidate recommendations aimed at reducing respondent burden. This was followed by a two-stage Delphi survey by an international multi-stakeholder group. A consensus meeting was held to finalize the recommendations. The final consensus statement includes 19 recommendations to address PRO respondent burden in healthcare research and clinical practice. If implemented, these recommendations may reduce PRO respondent burden.

Multilingual Framework for Risk Assessment and Symptom Tracking (MRAST)

The importance and value of real-world data in healthcare cannot be overstated because it offers a valuable source of insights into patient experiences. Traditional patient-reported experience and outcomes measures (PREMs/PROMs) often fall short in addressing the complexities of these experiences due to subjectivity and their inability to precisely target the questions asked. In contrast, diary recordings offer a promising solution. They can provide a comprehensive picture of psychological well-being, encompassing both psychological and physiological symptoms. This study explores how using advanced digital technologies, i.e., automatic speech recognition and natural language processing, can efficiently capture patient insights in oncology settings. We introduce the MRAST framework, a simplified way to collect, structure, and understand patient data using questionnaires and diary recordings. The framework was validated in a prospective study with 81 colorectal and 85 breast cancer survivors, of whom 37 were male and 129 were female. Overall, the patients evaluated the solution as well made; they found it easy to use and integrate into their daily routine. The majority (75.3%) of the cancer survivors participating in the study were willing to engage in health monitoring activities using digital wearable devices daily for an extended period. Throughout the study, there was a noticeable increase in the number of participants who perceived the system as having excellent usability. Despite some negative feedback, 44.44% of patients still rated the app's usability as above satisfactory (i.e., 7.9 on 1-10 scale) and the experience with diary recording as above satisfactory (i.e., 7.0 on 1-10 scale). Overall, these findings also underscore the significance of user testing and continuous improvement in enhancing the usability and user acceptance of solutions like the MRAST framework. Overall, the automated extraction of information from diaries represents a pivotal step toward a more patient-centered approach, where healthcare decisions are based on real-world experiences and tailored to individual needs. The potential usefulness of such data is enormous, as it enables better measurement of everyday experiences and opens new avenues for patient-centered care.

Development and validation of the genitourinary syndrome of menopause symptoms and vaginal treatments acceptability questionnaire (GSM-SVTAQ): An electronic patient-reported outcomes measure

OBJECTIVES

To develop and validate an electronic, patient-reported outcomes measure (PROM) specific for genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) patients. The PROM aimed to accurately assess the burden of GSM symptoms, their impact on health-related and sexual quality of life, and the acceptability of vaginal treatments.

METHODS

The study encompassed a comprehensive three-stage approach to the development and validation of the PROM. Initially, during the preliminary design stage, the necessity for a new PROM was recognized, an expert panel was formed, and semi-structured qualitative interviews were carried out with GSM patients. In the second stage, the study used the five-step pre-validation methodology established by Prior et al. to generate and refine the PROM items. The third and final stage encompassed the determination of scale and item content validity indexes to ensure validity. Additionally, the reliability of each construct was evaluated using Cronbach's α.

RESULTS

The resulting PROM was named GSM-SVTAQ (GSM-symptoms and vaginal treatments acceptability questionnaire). It demonstrated excellent validity in assessing symptoms burden, health-related and sexual quality of life, and vaginal treatment acceptability, with high content validity indices and strong internal consistency. The scale content validity indices and Cronbach's α coefficients for the three domains were (0.926, 0.939), (0.875, 0.947), and (0.824, 0.855), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The GSM-SVTAQ stands as the first GSM-specific, valid, and reliable PROM capable of comprehensively measuring the three components of GSM and the acceptability of vaginal treatments. Its implementation has the potential to significantly enhance patient care and outcomes in GSM management.

Perceptions regarding the concept and definition of patient-reported outcomes among healthcare stakeholders in Japan with relation to quality of life: a cross-sectional study

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are frequently used in a variety of settings, including clinical trials and clinical practice. The definition of PRO and quality of life (QOL) and their relationship have been concluded through discussions among experts that has been the premise of PRO guidelines are not clearly stated in the guidelines. Therefore, the definition of PRO, especially in relation to QOL, is sometimes explained simply, as "PRO includes QOL," but this complicated matters. This study investigated the perceptions of PRO among various stakeholders (including patients and their families, the industry, clinicians, regulatory or health technology assessment personnel, and academic researchers) in Japan to clarify its definitions and that of QOL, including their relationship.We conducted a two-step survey: a qualitative interview survey and a web-based survey to ensure the validity of the survey. During the interviews, eight stakeholders described their perceptions and thoughts on PRO and its relationship to QOL, and their experience of using PRO. Overall 253 clinicians, 249 company employees, and 494 patients participated in the web survey to confirm how the findings of the interview survey supported the results.In the interview survey, patient advocates described various perspectives of PRO and QOL, including unexpected dynamic relationships, while the most other stakeholders explained PRO and QOL with the language used in the guidelines, but their responses were split. The web-based survey revealed that all stakeholders had a lower awareness of PRO than QOL. The most common perception of PRO, especially in the relationship to QOL, was "they did not fully overlap." Although there were differences in perceptions of the relationship between PRO and QOL among clinicians, company employees, and patients, all perceived PRO as a tool to facilitate communication in clinical practice.The present results are inconsistent with the simplified explanation of PRO, but consistent with the original PRO guideline definitions, which also considered the role of PRO in clinical practice. To make PRO a more potent tool, all stakeholders using PRO should confirm its definition and how it differs from QOL, have a unified recognition in each PRO use, and avoid miscommunication.

The subjective and objective quality of life score (SOQOLTM) for the quantification of general health status: a preliminary study with initial normative population values

BACKGROUND

Established health-related quality of life scores do not consider both subjective and objective indices of health. We propose the subjective and objective quality of life score (SOQOL) for the comprehensive assessment of health-related quality of life and aim to provide normative population data. The SOQOL is compatible with smartphone applications, allowing widespread use on a global scale.

METHODS

Normative SOQOL population data was sourced from pre-existing datasets on the EQ-5D-5L, daily step count, and walking speed. Normative values were calculated using weighted grand means. We trialled the SOQOL in a group of five patients presenting to a spinal neurosurgery clinic.

RESULTS

SOQOL scores decreased with age, and women had lower scores in every age group. In our case series, the spine patients with the biggest SOQOL deficit compared to age- and sex-matched population averages were found to be surgical while the rest were non-surgical.

CONCLUSIONS

The SOQOL shows promise as a simple and effective scoring tool that is compatible with smartphones, potentially useful for screening in primary and specialized care settings, and for assessment following healthcare interventions. This study, however, is preliminary, and the findings are primarily suggestive. They underline the necessity for future, more comprehensive studies to validate and expand upon these initial observations. The conclusion of both this abstract and the full paper will clearly state these limitations and the preliminary nature of the study.

Episodic disability questionnaire (EDQ) measurement properties among adults living with HIV in Canada, Ireland, United Kingdom, and United States

BACKGROUND

The Episodic Disability Questionnaire (EDQ) is a generic 35-item patient-reported outcome measure of presence, severity and episodic nature of disability. We assessed the measurement properties of the Episodic Disability Questionnaire (EDQ) with adults living with HIV.

METHODS

We conducted a measurement study with adults living with HIV in eight clinical settings in Canada, Ireland, United Kingdom, and United States. We electronically administered the EDQ followed by three reference measures (World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule; Patient Health Questionnaire; Social Support Scale) and a demographic questionnaire. We administered the EDQ only 1 week later. We assessed the internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha; > 0.7 acceptable), and test-retest reliability (Intra Class Correlation Coefficient; > 0.7 acceptable). We estimated required change in EDQ domain scores to be 95% certain that a change was not due to measurement error (Minimum Detectable Change (MDC95%)). We evaluated construct validity by assessing 36 primary hypotheses of relationships between EDQ scores and scores on the reference measures (> 75% hypotheses confirmed indicated validity).

RESULTS

Three hundred fifty nine participants completed the questionnaires at time point 1, of which 321 (89%) completed the EDQ approximately 1 week later. Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency ranged from 0.84 (social domain) to 0.91 (day domain) for the EDQ severity scale, and 0.72 (uncertainty domain) to 0.88 (day domain) for the EDQ presence scale, and 0.87 (physical, cognitive, mental-emotional domains) to 0.89 (uncertainty domain) for the EDQ episodic scale. ICCs for test-retest reliability ranged from 0.79 (physical domain) to 0.88 (day domain) for the EDQ severity scale and from 0.71 (uncertainty domain) to 0.85 (day domain) for the EDQ presence scale. Highest precision was demonstrated in the severity scale for each domain (MDC95% range: 19-25 out of 100), followed by the presence (MDC95% range: 37-54) and episodic scales (MDC95% range:44-76). Twenty-nine of 36 (81%) construct validity hypotheses were confirmed.

CONCLUSIONS

The EDQ possesses internal consistency reliability, construct validity, and test-retest reliability, with limited precision when administered electronically with adults living with HIV across in clinical settings in four countries. Given the measurement properties, the EDQ can be used for group level comparisons for research and program evaluation in adults living with HIV.

Further Refinement is Required for Patient-Reported Outcome Scales for Respiratory Diseases Based on Traditional Chinese Medicine Theory for Applicability

Objective

To summarize the contents and assess the methodological quality and measurement properties of the patient-reported outcome (PRO) scales featured with Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) for respiratory diseases based on the guideline of COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN).

Methods

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, VIP, and China Biology Medicine (CBM) were searched for studies on PRO scales featured with TCM for respiratory diseases from their inception until December 2022. The characteristics of the PRO scales were qualitatively summarized. Following the COSMIN guideline, the risk of bias was assessed according to the checklist, and different measurement properties (content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, reliability, criterion validity, and responsiveness) were evaluated. Finally, the evidence's overall quality was assessed, and the recommendation was formulated using the modified GRADE approach.

Results

A total of 13 scales were included, with 6 for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), 3 for lung cancer, 2 for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), 1 for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), and 1 for bronchiectasis. All 13 scales are disease-specific scales and were developed based on Chinese cultural background to measure the efficacy of TCM. The study did not provide information on measurement error, cross-cultural validity, and hypothesis testing for the construct validity of these measures. No scale was rated as sufficient in content validity and responsiveness. Two scales showed sufficient structural validity, while 11 scales exhibited sufficient internal consistency. Three scales demonstrated sufficient reliability, and 7 scales showed sufficient criterion validity. All 13 scales have a recommendation level of B.

Conclusion

The 13 scales could reflect the clinical efficacy of TCM and are suitable for the Chinese population. Nevertheless, the validation of these scales was not comprehensive enough, and the methodological quality of their studies needs to be further strengthened.

Why it is hard to use PROMs and PREMs in routine health and care

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) show the results of healthcare activities as rated by patients and others. Patients or their proxies record feedback using questionnaires. These can enhance quality for all and tailored care for individuals. This paper describes obstacles that inhibit widespread use of PROMs and PREMs and some potential solutions.Implementation is a prerequisite for any innovation to succeed. Health and care services are complex and people need to be engaged at every level. Most people are cautious about proven innovations such as PROMs and PREMs but champions and leaders can help them engage. The NASSS framework (reasons for Non-adoption, Abandonment and failure to Scale up, Spread or Sustain digital health innovations) helps indicate that implementation is complex why it may be resisted.The Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) approach aids implementation and helps ensure that everyone knows who should do what, when, where, how and why. Noise is an under-appreciated problem, especially when tracking patients over time such as before and after treatment. Interoperability of PROMs and PREMs with electronic health records should use Fast Health Interoperability Resources and internationally accepted coding schemes such as SNOMED CT and LOINC.Most projects need multiple measures to meet the needs of everyone involved. Measure selection should focus on their relevance, ease of use, and response rates.If these problems are avoided or mitigated, PROMs and PREMs can help deliver better patient outcomes, patient experience, staff satisfaction and health equity.

Involving Patients and Clinicians in the Design of Wireframes for Cancer Medicines Electronic Patient Reported Outcome Measures in Clinical Care: Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Cancer treatment is a key component of health care systems, and the increasing number of cancer medicines is expanding the treatment landscape. However, evidence of the impact on patients has been focused more on chemotherapy toxicity and symptom control and less on the effect of cancer medicines more broadly on patients' lives. Evolving electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) presents the opportunity to secure early engagement of patients and clinicians in shaping the collection of quality-of-life metrics and presenting these data to better support the patient-clinician decision-making process.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to obtain initial feedback from patients and clinicians on the wireframes of a digital solution (patient app and clinician dashboard) for the collection and use of cancer medicines ePROMs.

METHODS

We adopted a 2-stage, mixed methods approach. Stage 1 (March to June 2019) consisted of interviews and focus groups with cancer clinicians and patients with cancer to explore the face validity of the wireframes, informed by the technology acceptance model constructs (perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and behavioral intention to use). In stage 2 (October 2019 to February 2020), the revised wireframes were assessed through web-based, adapted technology acceptance model questionnaires. Qualitative data (stage 1) underwent a framework analysis, and descriptive statistics were performed on quantitative data (stage 2). Clinicians and patients with cancer were recruited from NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde, the largest health board in Scotland.

RESULTS

A total of 14 clinicians and 19 patients participated in a combination of stage 1 interviews and focus groups. Clinicians and patients indicated that the wireframes of a patient app and clinician dashboard for the collection of cancer medicines ePROMs would be easy to use and could focus discussions, and they would be receptive to using such tools in the future. In stage 1, clinicians raised the potential impact on workload, and both groups identified the need for adequate IT skills to use each technology. Changes to the wireframes were made, and in stage 2, clinicians (n=8) and patients (n=16) indicated it was "quite likely" that the technologies would be easy to use and they would be "quite likely" to use them in the future. Notably, clinicians indicated that they would use the dashboard to enable treatment decisions "with around half" of their patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study emphasizes the importance of consulting both patients and clinicians in the design of digital solutions. The wireframes were perceived positively by patients and clinicians who were willing to use such technologies if available in the future as part of routine care. However, challenges were raised, and some differences were identified between participant groups, which warrant further research.

From simple to even simpler, but not too simple: a head-to-head comparison of the Better-Worse and Drop-Down methods for measuring patient health status

BACKGROUND

We recently developed a novel, preference-based method (Better-Worse, BW) for measuring health status, expressed as a single metric value. We have since expanded it by developing the Drop-Down (DD) method. This article presents a head-to-head comparison of these two methods. We explored user feasibility, interpretability and statistics of the estimated coefficients, and distribution of the computed health-state values.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional online survey among patients with various diseases in the USA. The BW and DD methods were applied in the two arms of the study, albeit in reverse order. In both arms, patients first performed a descriptive task (Task 1) to rate their own health status according to the 12 items (each with 4 levels) in the CS-Base health-outcome instrument. They then performed Task 2, in which they expressed preferences for health states by the two methods. We then estimated coefficients for all levels of each item using logistic regression and used these to compute values for health states.

RESULTS

Our total sample comprised 1,972 patients. Completion time was < 2 min for both methods. Both methods were scored as easy to perform. All DD coefficients were highly significant from the reference level (P < 0.001). For BW, however, only the second-level coefficient of "Cognition" was significantly different (P = 0.026). All DD coefficients were more precise with narrower confidence intervals than those of the BW method.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the BW and DD are novel methods that are easy to apply. The DD method outperformed the BW method in terms of the precision of produced coefficients. Due to its task, it is free from a specific distorting factor that was observed for the BW method.

Distinct profiles of anhedonia and reward processing and their prospective associations with quality of life among individuals with mood disorders

Leading professional health bodies have called for the wider adoption of Patient Reported Outcome Measures, such as quality of life, in research and clinical practice as a means for understanding why the global burden of depression continues to climb despite increased rates of treatment use. Here, we examined whether anhedonia-an often recalcitrant and impairing symptom of depression-along with its neural correlates, was associated with longitudinal changes in patient-reported quality of life among individuals seeking treatment for mood disorders. We recruited 112 participants, including n = 80 individuals with mood disorders (58 unipolar, 22 bipolar) and n = 32 healthy controls (63.4% female). We assessed anhedonia severity along with two electroencephalographic markers of neural reward responsiveness (scalp-level 'Reward Positivity' amplitude and source-localized reward-related activation in the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex), and assessed quality of life at baseline, 3- and 6-month follow-up. Anhedonia emerged as a robust correlate of quality of life cross-sectionally and longitudinally among individuals with mood disorders. Furthermore, increased neural reward responsiveness at baseline was associated with greater improvements in quality of life over time, and this improvement was mediated by longitudinal improvements in anhedonia severity. Finally, differences in quality of life observed between individuals with unipolar and bipolar mood disorders were mediated by differences in anhedonia severity. Our findings indicate that anhedonia and its reward-related neural correlates are linked to variability in quality of life over time in individuals with mood disorders. Treatments capable of improving anhedonia and normalizing brain reward function may be necessary for improving broader health outcomes for individuals seeking treatment for depression.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01976975.

A Swiss digital Delphi study on patient-reported outcomes

AIMS OF THE STUDY

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) indicators are patient-reported outcomes (PROs). PROs are defined as any report of the status of a patient's health condition or health behaviour that comes directly from the patient, without interpretation of the patient's response by a clinician or anyone else. Despite Swiss national bodies (FOPH, FMH) recognising the potential of PRO measures (PROMs) for improving the health system, no consensus has yet emerged regarding a generic PROM framework or specific domains for practical uptake. The aim of the present digital Delphi study was to generate a consensual Swiss expert opinion on a generic PROM framework, measurement domains and items from a validated instrument (PROMIS [Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System]) as well as on the role and implementation of PROs in the Swiss healthcare system via PRO consensus statements.

METHODS

A 4-round digital Delphi study was conducted among Swiss PRO stakeholders. A total of n = 21 Swiss PROM stakeholders completed round 1 surveys on the PROM framework. During the stakeholder meeting, n = 11 stakeholders completed round 2 and round 3 surveys pertaining to measurement domains and items, respectively. In-meeting key questions and discussion items were extracted, consolidated into statements and subjected to consensus voting in a round 4, post-meeting survey. Consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement.

RESULTS

Pre-meeting, agreement was reached for the tripartite framework of physical, mental and social health (95-100%). During the meeting, agreement was reached on all seven measurement domains of a generic PROM (PROMIS-29), ranging from 80% (Anxiety, Sleep Disturbance) to 100% (Pain Interference, Depression, Ability to Participate in Social Roles). Consensus was also reached for all PROMIS-29 items, with average domain consensus ranging from 83% (Sleep Disturbance, Ability to Participate in Social Roles) to 100% (Depression). Finally, four post-meeting consensus statements regarding PROs in Switzerland reached agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

A Delphi method can help identify areas of need regarding PROMs in Switzerland. The current study identified a generic PROM as a missing quality indicator for the Swiss national health system's value. A pre-meeting informational briefing, expert presentations and moderation supported three voting rounds to help identify PROMIS-29 as a PROM framework (round 1), measurement domains (round 2) and items (round 3) as a basis for further validation research. The empirical agreement among diverse stakeholders supports broad consensus towards preliminary feasibility of integrating generic PROMs into the Swiss health system based on content relevance.

The Assessment of Patient-Reported Outcomes for the Authorisation of Medicines in Europe: A Review of European Public Assessment Reports from 2017 to 2022

OBJECTIVES

Health regulators have progressively increased their attention and focus on patient-reported outcomes (PROs), driven by the diffusion of a patient-centred approach to the drug development process. This study investigates the consideration of PROs and their measures (PROMs) in the authorisation of medicines in Europe.

METHODS

All medicines for human use authorised or refused by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in the period 2017-2022 were identified, and corresponding European Public Assessment Reports (EPARs) were downloaded for review. Medicine and PROs/PROM characteristics were systematically recorded. A multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify variables associated with the use of patient-reported evidence in EPARs.

RESULTS

Overall, 497 EPARs of authorised medicines and 19 EPARs of refused medicines were analysed; of these, 240 (48.3%) and 10 (52.6%), respectively, reported any use of PROs/PROMs (p = 0.710). For authorised medicines, the likelihood of using PROs/PROMs was negatively affected by generic (OR = 0.01, p < 0.001) and biosimilar status (OR = 0.46, p = 0.013) and positively affected by orphan status (OR = 1.41, p = 0.177). The use of PROMs (50.6% in 2017 vs 47.9% in 2022) did not show a clear pattern over the 6-year period considered (p = 0.758) and was particularly uncommon in some therapeutic areas (e.g., 15.2% in infectious diseases). A total of 816 dyads of PROs/PROMs were identified. On average each EPAR considered 1.6 (range: 0-14) instruments. Patient-reported outcomes were typically secondary (53.3%) and exploratory endpoints (18.8%); in one-third of cases (32.5%), they assessed generic quality of life. Among the PROMs, 227 (27.8%) targeted general population; EQ-5D (11.0%), SF-36/SF-12 (5.9%) and EORTC QLQ-C30 (5.6%) were the instruments most frequently used.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests PROs/PROMs are considered in less than half of total medicine assessments and even more rarely in some disease areas. The adoption of PROs is key in EMA strategy to 2025 and would be facilitated by consensus development on their measures and optimisation of data collection.

Measuring Quality of Life after Venous Thromboembolism: Who, When, and How?

There is a growing body of evidence revealing that many patients with a history of venous thromboembolism (VTE) suffer from long-lasting sequelae such as post-thrombotic syndrome and post-pulmonary embolism syndrome. These two syndromes are detrimental to patients as they affect their quality of life (QOL). From this perspective, monitoring QOL may play a crucial role to improve quality care in VTE patients. Many studies have explored possible temporal relations between VTE episodes and decreased functional status and/or QOL. However, studies exploring the implementation of QOL and functional status questionnaires in clinical practice are scarce. In this context, we discuss possible perspectives synthetized from available literature regarding in whom, when, and how QOL could be measured in clinical practice.

Lessons Learned and Practice Pearls: Optimal Integration of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes in the Medical Oncology Clinic

This editorial reviews the many opportunities and obstacles associated with ePRO integration in oncology

Development and Validation of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Fingernail and Toenail Conditions: The NAIL-Q

Background

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are needed to measure outcomes that matter to people with nail conditions, from their perspective.

Objective

To design a comprehensive new PROM (NAIL-Q) to measure outcomes important in toenail and fingernail conditions.

Methods

A mixed methods iterative approach was used. Phase 1 involved concept elicitation interviews that were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded line-by-line. Concepts were developed into scales and refined through cognitive debriefing interviews with patients and expert input. Data was then collected from an international sample using a crowdsource platform. Eligible participants were aged ≥18 years with a nail condition for at least 3 months. Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analysis was used to examine item and scale performance. Other psychometric tests included test-retest reliability, and convergent and construct validity.

Results

Phase 1 interviews involved 23 patients with 10 nail conditions and input from 11 dermatologists. The analysis led to the development of 84 items for field-testing. In Phase 2, 555 participants completed the survey. Toenail conditions (n = 441) were more common than fingernail conditions (n = 186). The RMT analysis reduced the number of items tested to 45 in 7 scales measuring nail appearance, health-related quality of life concerns, and treatment outcomes. All items had ordered thresholds and nonsignificant chi-square p values. Reliability statistics with and without extremes for the Person Separation Index were ≥0.79 and Cronbach's alpha were ≥0.83, and for intraclass correlation coefficients were ≥0.81. Construct validity was further supported in that most participants agreed that the NAIL-Q was easy to understand, asked relevant and important questions in a respectful way, and that it should be used to inform clinical care.

Conclusion

The NAIL-Q is a rigorously designed and tested PROM that measures nail appearance, health-related quality of life and treatment outcomes. This PROM can be used in clinical practice to inform patient care and to include the patient perspective in research.

Digital Patient Reported Outcome Measures Platform for Post-COVID-19 Condition and Other Long-Term Conditions: User-Centered Development and Technical Description

BACKGROUND

Post-COVID-19 condition (PCC), colloquially known as long COVID, is a multisystem condition characterized by persistent symptoms beyond 4 weeks after the SARS-CoV-2 infection. More than 60 million people with PCC worldwide need prompt assessment, diagnosis, and monitoring, with many requiring specialist help from a multidisciplinary team of health care professionals (HCPs). Consequently, a scalable digital system is required for both people with PCC and HCPs to capture the breadth of symptoms and their impact on health, using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs).

OBJECTIVE

We aim to develop and implement a novel PCC digital PROM (DPROM) platform for (1) securely collecting PROM and PREM data from people with PCC, (2) enabling users to monitor symptoms longitudinally and assess response to treatment, (3) generating reports for the electronic health records (EHRs), (4) providing summary reports on PCC services based on national requirements, and (5) facilitating the sharing of relevant data with authorized research teams to accelerate our understanding of this new condition and evaluate new strategies to manage PCC.

METHODS

We (1) undertook requirement analysis with people with PCC, HCPs, and researchers to identify the needs of the DPROM platform and determine its required functionalities; (2) designed and developed a clinically useful web portal for staff and a mobile app for patients, with a web-based alternative app to improve patient and staff choice, limit the risk of digital exclusion, and account for variability across services; (3) determined the PROMs and PREMs that PCC services would prefer to use on the platform; and (4) designed the summary report function that can be generated for each user for the EHR and for reporting to national health authorities.

RESULTS

A DPROM platform to record PCC symptom profile, condition severity, functional disability, and quality of life, based on the C19-YRS (Yorkshire Rehabilitation Scale) and other PROMs and PREMs, was developed. Individual-level medical information and details on the COVID-19 illness can be captured systematically. The platform generates easy-to-understand scores, radar plots and line graphs for people with PCC to self-monitor their condition and for HCPs to assess the natural course of the condition and the response to interventions. Clinics can configure a suite of PROMs and PREMs based on their local and national service and commissioning requirements and support research studies which require large-scale data collection on PROMs. The DPROM platform enables automatic aggregate data analysis for services to undertake service evaluation and cost-effectiveness analysis. The DPROM platform generated summary report can be uploaded to the EHRs of people with PCC.

CONCLUSIONS

A multifunctional DPROM platform to assess, grade, and monitor PCC has been developed. Future research will analyze the system's usability in specialist PCC clinical services and other long-term conditions.

Development of a novel healthcare discrimination measure: PreDict

Introduction

Patient reported quality of care measures are widely recognized tools for healthcare system performance assessment. Yet, there are few existing patient reported quality of care measures regarding health equity, and none to specifically collect patient experiences of discrimination in health care.

Objective

To develop an item pool to measure patient experiences of healthcare discrimination-the Patient-Reported Experiences of Discrimination in Care Tool (PreDict).

Methods

Utilizing a multistage, exploratory sequential mixed methods study design, we conducted qualitative interviews (n=73) and expert panel consensus analysis to develop items to capture patient experiences of discrimination. This process plus systematic literature review identified extant items and informed de novo items for inclusion in the item pool. Items were developed in English and Spanish and were not represented by extant items. Following identification of the initial item pool (n=125), candidate items underwent cognitive interview testing with English (n=113) and Spanish (n=70) speaking participants to evaluate items for clarity and comprehensiveness. English and Spanish items were also evaluated by a bilingual expert panel to recommend pool items for inpatient field testing.

Results

One hundred and three items underwent cognitive interview testing and fifty-nine items were retained. Lack of clarity was the most cited factor for removal or revision of items. Expert panel review resulted in the removal of one additional item and the revision of seven items.Fifty-eight candidate items were retained for inclusion in field testing and future analyses using item response theory modeling.

Conclusion

PreDict fills an important gap in measurement of discrimination, which is known to influence patient health outcomes. Development and testing to date demonstrate evidence of validity in characterizing the complex phenomenon of healthcare discrimination.

The iBLAD study: patient-reported outcomes in bladder cancer during oncological treatment: a multicenter national randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are getting widely implemented, but little is known of the impact of applying PROs in specific cancer diagnoses. We report the results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of the active use of PROs in patients with locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer (BC) undergoing medical oncological treatment (MOT) with focus on determining the clinical effects of using PROs during chemo- or immunotherapy compared to standard of care.

METHODS

We recruited patients from four departments of oncology from 2019 to 2021. Inclusion criteria were locally advanced or metastatic BC, initiating chemo- or immunotherapy. Patients were randomized 1:1 between answering selected PRO-CTCAE questions electronically once weekly with a built-in alert-algorithm instructing patients of how to handle reported symptoms as a supplement to standard of care for handling of side effects (intervention arm (IA)) vs standard procedure for handling of side effects (control arm (CA)). No real-time alerts were sent to the clinic when PROs exceeded threshold values. Clinicians were prompted to view the completed PROs in the IA at each clinical visit. The co-primary clinical endpoints were hospital admissions and treatment completion rate. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), quality of life (EORTC's QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BLM30) and dose reductions.

RESULTS

228 patients with BC were included, 76% were male. 141 (62%) of the patients had metastatic disease. 51% of patients in the IA completed treatment vs. 56% of patients in the CA, OR 0.83 (95% CI 0.47-1.44, p = 0.51). 41% of patients in the IA experienced hospitalization vs. 32% in the CA, OR 1.48 (95% CI 0.83-2.65, p = 0.17). OS was comparable between the two arms (IA: median 22.3mo (95% CI 17.0-NR) vs. CA: median 23.1mo (95% CI 17.7-NR). Patient and clinician compliance was high throughout the study period (80% vs 94%).

CONCLUSIONS

This RCT did not show an effect of PRO on completion of treatment, hospitalizations or OS for BC patients during MOT despite a high level of patient and clinician compliance. The lack of real-time response to alerts remains the greatest limitation to this study.