The acceptance and applicability of a patient-reported experience measurement tool in oncological care: a descriptive feasibility study in northern Germany

Patient experiences and needs in cancer care- results from a nationwide cross-sectional study in Germany

BACKGROUND

Patient-centredness has become a central quality indicator for oncology care. Elements include shared decision-making, patient navigation and integration of psychosocial care, which impact patient-reported and clinical outcomes. Despite efforts to promote patient-centred care in Germany in recent decades, implementation remains fragmented. Further, research on patient experiences with cancer care and its determinants is limited. Therefore, this study examines which patient- and facility-specific factors are associated with patient-centred quality care delivery.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted among 1,121 cancer patients in acute treatment, rehabilitation, and aftercare for different cancer entities across Germany. A participatory developed questionnaire was used. Outcome measures were the quality of physician-patient interaction and provision of psychosocial care during acute care. Predictors comprised patient-specific characteristics and treatment facility-specific factors. Multiple linear regression and multivariate binary logistic regression analyses were performed. In addition, a content analysis of open-ended comments on the patients' overall cancer care needs was applied.

RESULTS

Multiple linear regression analysis showed recent diagnosis (β=-0.12, p = < 0.001), being male (β=-0.11, p = 0.003), and having a preference for passive decision-making (β=-0.10, p = 0.001) to be significantly associated with higher interaction quality, but not age, education and health insurance type. An overall low impact of patient characteristics on interaction quality was revealed (adj. R2 = 0.03). Binary logistic regression analysis demonstrated the availability of central contact persons (OR = 3.10, p < 0.001) followed by recent diagnosis (p < 0.001), having breast cancer (p < 0.001) and being female (OR = 1.68, p < 0.05) to significantly predict offering psycho-oncological counselling to patients in acute care facilities. The availability of peer support visiting services (OR = 7.17, p < 0.001) and central contact persons (OR = 1.87, p < 0.001) in the care facility, breast cancer diagnosis (p < 0.001) and a higher level of education (p < 0.05) significantly increased the odds of patients receiving information about peer support in the treatment facility. Despite relatively satisfactory quality of physician-patient interactions in cancer care (M = 3.5 (± 1.1)), many patients expressed that better patient-centred communication and coordinated, comprehensive cancer care are needed.

CONCLUSION

The findings reflect effective developments and improvements in cancer care and suggest that patients' social characteristics are less decisive for delivering patient-centred quality care than systemic factors surrounding the care facilities. They can serve to inform oncology care in Germany.

Patient-Reported Experiences and Associated Factors in a Norwegian Radiotherapy Setting: An Explorative Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction

Radiotherapy is the main treatment modality in cancer. There is sparse knowledge on how patients with cancer experience their radiotherapy trajectory, and which factors might be associated with patients' experiences.

Objectives

The aim of the present study was to explore how adults with cancer receiving radiotherapy evaluate the quality of their care, utilizing a patient-reported experience measure, and how patient- and service-related characteristics are associated with their evaluation.

Methods

An explorative cross-sectional study using a self-completed questionnaire to assess patients' radiotherapy experiences was performed. Participants were recruited consecutively, within their last week of treatment, from two different hospitals in Norway from January 2021 to January 2022. Four hundred and eighty paper questionnaires were distributed to recruited patients, 240 at each hospital. Questionnaires were self-completed at home and returned by mail. The instrument person-centered coordinated care experience questionnaire (P3CEQ) was used. In addition to this, participants completed the European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and The Sense of Coherence 13 scale (SOC-13). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, parametric tests, and unadjusted/adjusted linear regression models were estimated.

Results

The study included 373 patients. Patients evaluated quality of care in terms of P3CEQ scores, with a mean score of 19.5 (standard deviation = 5.4). Lowest scores were identified in areas concerning person-centeredness and service coordination. There were no significant differences in P3CEQ scores between the younger and older groups. Having a partner and better SOC-13 scores were independently associated with the overall patient-reported experience score, whereas age was not.

Conclusion

Patient-reported experience scores indicate that improvements are needed in some areas, such as informing and involving patients in the planning and coordination of their care. Findings suggest paying special attention to patients without a partner to offer patients the best possible care.

Pancreatic Cancer Surgery: What Matters to Patients?

Pancreatic cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related death, with a poor overall survival rate. Although certain risk factors have been identified, the origins of pancreatic cancer are still not fully understood. Surgical resection remains the primary curative treatment, but pancreatic surgery is still associated with high morbidity and mortality rates, and most patients will experience recurrence. The impact of pancreatic cancer on patients' quality of life is significant, with an important loss of healthy life in affected individuals. Traditional outcome parameters, such as length of hospital stay, do not fully capture what matters to patients during recovery. Patient-centered care is therefore central, and the patient's perspective should be considered in pre-operative discussions. Patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs) could play an important role in assessing patient perspectives, but standardized methodology for evaluating and reporting them is needed. This narrative review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of patient perspectives and different patient-reported measures in pancreatic cancer surgery. Understanding the patient perspective is crucial for delivering patient-centered care and improving outcomes for patients with pancreatic cancer.

Gov➔Value: How to combine reported quality experiences and patient-reported outcome measures. First results on vulvar cancer patients in an Italian Research Hospital

Introduction

Vulvar cancer (VC) accounts for <1% of cancers affecting the female gender. Clinical Pathways (CP) and Clinical Outcomes Monitoring are useful for providing high-quality care to these patients. However, it is essential to integrate them with the patient's perspective according to Value-Based Healthcare paradigms. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are tools for assessing outcomes and experiences with health care from the patient's perspective. The aim of this paper is to collect and synthesize PROMs and main stakeholders' experience on the VC CP, according to a value-based approach.

Materials and methods

To select the most appropriate instrument, a review was conducted on the main databases and official websites of specific institutions and organizations. In the second phase, a 2-round Delphi survey was conducted to assess the Reported Experience Measures (REMs) tool. Questions were evaluated according to four criteria (general relevance, evidence-based, measurability, actionability) and included if strong agreement was reached. A Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was executed. Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega were computed. Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon rank sum test were used to compare ratings between groups. Descriptive statistics were performed for both PROMs and REMs instruments.

Results

For PROMs assessment, EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire was selected and administered to 28 patients. Global Health Status/Quality of Life and Functional Scales Scores were high or very high, while symptoms scale reported low or medium scores. The final REMs consists of 22 questions for professionals and 16 for patients and caregivers. It was administered to 22 patients, 11 caregivers, 5 physicians, 2 nurses and 1 clinical senior manager. PCA identified 4 components. Scale reliability was acceptable (α = 0.75 95% CI: 0.61-0.85; ω = 0.69; 95% CI: 0.54, 0.82). A statistically significant difference between the patient/caregiver group and the professionals was found for items 8 (follow-up), 10 (perceived quality), 12 (safety), and 16 (climate) (p = 0.02; p = 0.03; p < 0.001; p < 0.001, respectively).

Discussion

PROMs could provide new ways of intercepting patients' needs and feedback, thus acting on them. The proposed REMs tool would allow to detect information not available elsewhere, which, through Audit and feedback strategies, could lead to enhancement of healthcare experience, according to a value-based approach.

Measuring patient centeredness with German language Patient-Reported Experience Measures (PREM)-A systematic review and qualitative analysis according to COSMIN

BACKGROUND

Patient centeredness is an integral part of the quality of care. Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are assumed to be an appropriate tool to assess patient-centredness. An evaluation of German-speaking PREMs is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review and qualitative analysis of psychometric measurement qualities of German-language PREMs using for the first time a comprehensive framework of patient centredness.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in Medline, PsycInfo, CINHAL, Embase, Cochrane database (last search 9th November 2021) for studies describing generic, surgery- or cancer care-specific PREMs. All questionnaires that were developed in or translated into German were included. The content of the included PREMs was evaluated using a comprehensive framework of patient centredness covering 16 domains. Baseline data of all PREM studies were extracted by two independent reviewers. Psychometric measurement qualities of the PREMs were assessed using current COSMIN guidelines.

RESULTS

After removal of duplicates 3,457 abstracts were screened, of which 3,345 were excluded. The remaining 112 articles contained 51 PREMs, of which 12 were either developed in (4 PREMs) or translated into German (8 PREMs). Eight PREMs were generic (NORPEQ, PPE-15, PEACS, HCAHPS, QPPS, DUQUE, PEQ-G, Schoenfelder et al.), 4 cancer care-specific (EORTC IN-PATSAT32, PSCC-G, Danish National Cancer Questionnaire, SCCC) and none was surgery-specific. None of the PREMs covered all domains of patient-centeredness. Overall rating of structural validity was adequate only for PEACS and HCAHPS. High ratings for internal consistency were given for NORPEQ, Schoenfelder et al., PSCC-G and the SCCC. Cross-cultural validity for translated questionnaires was adequate only for the PSCC-G, while reliability was adequately assessed only for the EORTC IN-PATSAT32. Due to a lack of measurement gold standard and minimal important change, criterion validity and measurement invariance could not be assessed for any of the PREMs.

CONCLUSION

This is the first systematic review using a comprehensive framework of patient centredness and shows that none of the included PREMs, even those translated from other languages into German, cover all aspects of patient centredness. Furthermore, all included PREMS show deficits in the results or evaluation of psychometric measurement properties. Nonetheless, based on the results, the EORTC IN-PATSAT32 and PSCC-G can be recommended for use in cancer patients in the German-language region, while the German versions of the HCAHPS, NORPEQ, PPE-15 and PEACS can be recommended as generic PREMs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registration. PROSPERO CRD42021276827.

Using Generic and Disease-Specific Measures to Assess Quality of Life before and after 12 Months of Hearing Implant Use: A Prospective, Longitudinal, Multicenter, Observational Clinical Study

The primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the effect of hearing implant (HI) use on quality of life (QoL) and to determine which QoL measure(s) quantify QoL with greater sensitivity in users of different types of HIs. Participants were adult cochlear implant (CI), active middle ear implant (VIBRANT SOUNDBRIDGE (VSB)), or active transcutaneous bone conduction implant (the BONEBRIDGE (BB)) recipients. Generic QoL and disease-specific QoL were assessed at three intervals: pre-activation, 6 months of device use, and 12 months of device use. 169 participants completed the study (110 CI, 18VSB, and 41BB). CI users' QoL significantly increased from 0-6 m device use on both the generic- and the disease-specific measures. On some device-specific measures, their QoL also significantly increased between 6 and 12 m device use. VSB users' QoL significantly increased between all tested intervals with the disease-specific measure but not the generic measure. BB users' QoL significantly increased from 0-6 m device use on both the generic- and the disease-specific measures. In sum, HI users experienced significant postoperative increases in QoL within their first 12 m of device use, especially when disease-specific measures were used. Disease-specific QoL measures appeared to be more sensitive than their generic counterparts.

Questionnaire-Based Assessment of the Masticatory Function and Facial Nerve Recovery Post Pterional Approach in Brain Tumors Surgery

Background: The pterional approach for craniotomy, one of the most used surgical intervention in neurosurgery, results in a series of postoperative changes that, if they persist, affect the patient’s life, social reintegration, and his/her physical and mental recovery. The aim of the present study was to develop and validate a questionnaire for indicating directly affected masticatory muscles groups and facial nerve branches, in patients undergoing the pterional approach in neurosurgery, so that the recovery therapy can be monitored and personalized. Methods: A self-reporting questionnaire consisting of 18 items (12 for postoperative masticatory status and 6 for facial nerve branches involvement), validated on fifteen patients, following three steps: items development, scale development, and scale evaluation, was prospectively applied twice, at a one-year interval (T0 and T1), with thirty-two patients suffering from vascular or tumoral pathology and surgically treated through a pterional approach. Results: No statistically significant correlation could be found between postoperative outcomes and age or gender. Facial nerve branch involvement could not be correlated with any of the assessed variables. Pathology and time elapsed from surgery were statistically significantly correlated to preauricular pain on the non-operated side (p = 0.008 and p = 0.034, respectively). Time elapsed from surgery was statistically significantly correlated to the ability to chew hard food, pain while yawning, and preauricular pain during back and forward jaw movements and gradual mouth opening. Conclusions: We created and validated a valuable patient-centered questionnaire that can be employed as a tool for postoperative assessment of directly affected masticatory muscles and groups of facial nerve branches.

Laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC in LAMN with small volume of peritoneal disease: a valuable option of treatment for good patient-related experience measures (PREMs)

BACKGROUND

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is the best effective treatment for pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP). In the last years, the advances in histopathology have stratified PMP lesions in different degrees of aggressivity suggesting the possibility of a tailored treatment. In a subset of patients with small volume peritoneal disease, laparoscopic CRS and HIPEC is feasible. The aim of this study is to analyze the results of laparoscopic CRS + HIPEC in a monocentric series of patients under patient-related experience measures (PREMs).

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic CRS-HIPEC with curative intent at Cancer Institute of Montpellier were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database and analyzed. Selection criteria for laparoscopic approach were low-grade PMP with pathological confirmation prior to CRS-HIPEC, age < 75 years, no extra-peritoneal disease, peritoneal cancer index (PCI) < 10, and a limited history of abdominal surgery. A PREMS interview was conducted before analysis with all the included patients. Outcomes of interest included postoperative morbidity, medium-term survival, and PREMs.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients were operated on for low-grade PMP with a laparoscopic approach at our institution. Conversions to laparotomy were necessary in three patients, and postoperative complications were observed in three patients (Clavien 3b in one patient). In-hospital postoperative median stay was 9.5 days. No death or recurrence was observed during the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic CRS-HIPEC for LAMN in presence of small peritoneal disease is feasible in terms of postoperative morbidity and mortality. According to our PREMs questionnaire, patients' expectations were satisfied.