Patients' views of using an outcome measure in palliative day care: a focus group study

Cancer-related fatigue and depression: a monocentric, prospective, cross-sectional study in advanced solid tumors

Background

Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is common in patients with advanced solid tumors and several risk factors are described. The possible role of depression is reported by clinicians despite the association with CRF being unclear.

Material and methods

In this monocentric, cross-sectional, prospective study we recruited patients with advanced solid tumors who were hospitalized at Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori of Milan. The primary objective was to assess the correlation between CRF and depression. Secondary objectives were the estimation of CRF and depression prevalence and the identification of associated clinical risk factors. CRF and depression were evaluated through the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue subscale and the Zung Self Depression Scale (ZSDS) questionnaires. The Cochran-Armitage trend test was used to demonstrate the primary hypothesis. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to investigate the impact of clinical variables.

Results

A total of 136 patients were enrolled. The primary analysis found a linear correlation (P < 0.0001) between CRF and depression. The prevalence of CRF and of moderate to severe depressive symptoms was 43.5% and 29.2%, respectively. In univariate analysis, patients with poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), anemia, distress, pain, and receiving oncological treatment were at a significantly higher risk for CRF, whereas poor ECOG PS, pain, and distress were risk factors for depression. In multivariate analysis, high levels of ZSDS were confirmed to be correlated to CRF: odds ratio of 3.86 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98-15.20) and 11.20 (95% CI 2.35-53.36) for ZSDS of 50-59 and 60-100, respectively (P value for trend 0.002). Moreover, the ECOG PS score was confirmed to be significantly associated with CRF (OR 7.20; 95% CI 1.73-29.96; P = 0.007).

Conclusions

Our data suggest a strong correlation between CRF and depression in patients with advanced solid tumors. Further investigations are needed to better understand this relationship and if depressive disorder therapeutic strategies could also impact on CRF.

•

Validated patient-reported outcome measures were used for screening CRF and depression in advanced cancer patients.

•

A direct strong correlation between CRF and depression was found in these patients, often unconsidered by clinicians.

•

Other different clinical risk factors for the onset and worsening of CRF were identified.

•

A comprehensive evaluation of cancer patients, that should also consider mood disorders, could improve CRF management.

Clinician Facial Expression of Emotion Corresponds with Patient Mindset

BACKGROUND

Mental health has a notable and perhaps underappreciated relationship with symptom intensity related to musculoskeletal pathophysiology. Tools for increasing awareness of mental health opportunities may help musculoskeletal specialists identify and address psychological distress and unhealthy misconceptions with greater confidence. One such type of technology-software that identifies emotions by analyzing facial expressions-could be developed as a clinician-awareness tool. A first step in this endeavor is to conduct a pilot study to assess the ability to measure patient mental health through specialist facial expressions.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Does quantification of clinician emotion using facial recognition software correlate with patient psychological distress and unhealthy misconceptions? (2) Is there a correlation between clinician facial expressions of emotions and a validated measure of the quality of the patient-clinician relationship?

METHODS

In a cross-sectional pilot study, between April 2019 and July 2019, we made video recordings of the clinician's face during 34 initial musculoskeletal specialist outpatient evaluations. There were 16 men and 18 women, all fluent and literate in English, with a mean age of 43 ± 15 years. Enrollment was performed according to available personnel, equipment, and room availability. We did not track declines, but there were only a few. Video recordings were analyzed using facial-emotional recognition software, measuring the proportion of time spent by clinicians expressing measured emotions during a consultation. After the visit, patients completed a demographic questionnaire and measures of health anxiety (the Short Health Anxiety Inventory), fear of painful movement (the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia), catastrophic or worst-case thinking about pain (the Pain Catastrophizing Scale), symptoms of depression (the Patient Health Questionnaire), and the patient's perception of the quality of their relationship with the clinician (Patient-Doctor Relationship Questionnaire).

RESULTS

Clinician facial expressions consistent with happiness were associated with less patient health anxiety (r = -0.59; p < 0.001) and less catastrophic thinking (r = -0.37; p = 0.03). Lower levels of clinician expressions consistent with sadness were associated with less health anxiety (r = 0.36; p = 0.04), fewer symptoms of generalized anxiety (r = 0.36; p = 0.03), and less catastrophic thinking (r = 0.33; p = 0.05). Less time expressing anger was associated with greater health anxiety (r = -0.37; p = 0.03), greater symptoms of anxiety (r = -0.46; p < 0.01), more catastrophic thinking (r = -0.38; p = 0.03), and greater symptoms of depression (r = -0.42; p = 0.01). More time expressing surprise was associated with less health anxiety (r = -0.44; p < 0.01) and symptoms of depression (r = -0.52; p < 0.01). More time expressing fear was associated with less kinesiophobia (r = -0.35; p = 0.04). More time expressing disgust was associated with less catastrophic thinking (r = -0.37; p = 0.03) and less health anxiety (GAD-2; r = -0.42; p = 0.02) and symptoms of depression (r = -0.44; p < 0.01). There was no association between a clinicians' facial expression of emotions and patient experience with patient-clinician interactions.

CONCLUSION

The ability to measure a patient's mindset on the clinician's face confirms that clinicians are registering the psychological aspects of illness, whether they are consciously aware of them or not. Future research involving larger cohorts of patients, mapping clinician-patient interactions during consultation, and more sophisticated capture of nonverbal and verbal cues, including a broader range of emotional expressions, may help translate this innovation from the research setting to clinical practice.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Tools for measuring emotion through facial recognition could be used to train clinicians to become aware of the psychological aspects of health and to coach clinicians on effective communication strategies both for gentle reorientation of common misconceptions as well as for appropriate and timely diagnosis and treatment of psychological distress.

How do patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) support clinician-patient communication and patient care? A realist synthesis

BACKGROUND

In this paper, we report the findings of a realist synthesis that aimed to understand how and in what circumstances patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) support patient-clinician communication and subsequent care processes and outcomes in clinical care. We tested two overarching programme theories: (1) PROMs completion prompts a process of self-reflection and supports patients to raise issues with clinicians and (2) PROMs scores raise clinicians' awareness of patients' problems and prompts discussion and action. We examined how the structure of the PROM and care context shaped the ways in which PROMs support clinician-patient communication and subsequent care processes.

RESULTS

PROMs completion prompts patients to reflect on their health and gives them permission to raise issues with clinicians. However, clinicians found standardised PROMs completion during patient assessments sometimes constrained rather than supported communication. In response, clinicians adapted their use of PROMs to render them compatible with the ongoing management of patient relationships. Individualised PROMs supported dialogue by enabling the patient to tell their story. In oncology, PROMs completion outside of the consultation enabled clinicians to identify problematic symptoms when the PROM acted as a substitute rather than addition to the clinical encounter and when the PROM focused on symptoms and side effects, rather than health related quality of life (HRQoL). Patients did not always feel it was appropriate to discuss emotional, functional or HRQoL issues with doctors and doctors did not perceive this was within their remit.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper makes two important contributions to the literature. First, our findings show that PROMs completion is not a neutral act of information retrieval but can change how patients think about their condition. Second, our findings reveal that the ways in which clinicians use PROMs is shaped by their relationships with patients and professional roles and boundaries. Future research should examine how PROMs completion and feedback shapes and is influenced by the process of building relationships with patients, rather than just their impact on information exchange and decision making.

Functionality and feedback: a realist synthesis of the collation, interpretation and utilisation of patient-reported outcome measures data to improve patient care

Background

The feedback of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) data is intended to support the care of individual patients and to act as a quality improvement (QI) strategy.

Objectives

To (1) identify the ideas and assumptions underlying how individual and aggregated PROMs data are intended to improve patient care, and (2) review the evidence to examine the circumstances in which and processes through which PROMs feedback improves patient care.

Design

Two separate but related realist syntheses: (1) feedback of aggregate PROMs and performance data to improve patient care, and (2) feedback of individual PROMs data to improve patient care.

Interventions

Aggregate – feedback and public reporting of PROMs, patient experience data and performance data to hospital providers and primary care organisations. Individual – feedback of PROMs in oncology, palliative care and the care of people with mental health problems in primary and secondary care settings.

Main outcome measures

Aggregate – providers’ responses, attitudes and experiences of using PROMs and performance data to improve patient care. Individual – providers’ and patients’ experiences of using PROMs data to raise issues with clinicians, change clinicians’ communication practices, change patient management and improve patient well-being.

Data sources

Searches of electronic databases and forwards and backwards citation tracking.

Review methods

Realist synthesis to identify, test and refine programme theories about when, how and why PROMs feedback leads to improvements in patient care.

Results

Providers were more likely to take steps to improve patient care in response to the feedback and public reporting of aggregate PROMs and performance data if they perceived that these data were credible, were aimed at improving patient care, and were timely and provided a clear indication of the source of the problem. However, implementing substantial and sustainable improvement to patient care required system-wide approaches. In the care of individual patients, PROMs function more as a tool to support patients in raising issues with clinicians than they do in substantially changing clinicians’ communication practices with patients. Patients valued both standardised and individualised PROMs as a tool to raise issues, but thought is required as to which patients may benefit and which may not. In settings such as palliative care and psychotherapy, clinicians viewed individualised PROMs as useful to build rapport and support the therapeutic process. PROMs feedback did not substantially shift clinicians’ communication practices or focus discussion on psychosocial issues; this required a shift in clinicians’ perceptions of their remit.

Strengths and limitations

There was a paucity of research examining the feedback of aggregate PROMs data to providers, and we drew on evidence from interventions with similar programme theories (other forms of performance data) to test our theories.

Conclusions

PROMs data act as ‘tin openers’ rather than ‘dials’. Providers need more support and guidance on how to collect their own internal data, how to rule out alternative explanations for their outlier status and how to explore the possible causes of their outlier status. There is also tension between PROMs as a QI strategy versus their use in the care of individual patients; PROMs that clinicians find useful in assessing patients, such as individualised measures, are not useful as indicators of service quality.

Future work

Future research should (1) explore how differently performing providers have responded to aggregate PROMs feedback, and how organisations have collected PROMs data both for individual patient care and to improve service quality; and (2) explore whether or not and how incorporating PROMs into patients’ electronic records allows multiple different clinicians to receive PROMs feedback, discuss it with patients and act on the data to improve patient care.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013005938.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Effectiveness of complex interventions focused on quality-of-life assessment to improve palliative care patients' outcomes: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

One of the most crucial palliative care challenges is in determining how patient' needs are defined and assessed. Assessing quality of life has been defined as a priority in palliative care, and it has become a central concept in palliative care practice.

AIM

To determine to what extent interventions focused on measuring quality of life in palliative care practice are effective in improving outcomes in palliative care patients.

DESIGN

Systematic review according to the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and hand searches.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library were searched for articles published until June 2012, and through hand searching from references lists of included articles. Only studies that included adult palliative care patients, in any palliative care clinical practice setting of care, and with an experimental, quasi-experimental, or observational analytical study design were eligible for inclusion. All studies were independently reviewed by two investigators who scored them for methodological quality by using the Edwards Method Score.

RESULTS

In total, 11 articles (of 8579) incorporating information from 10 studies were included. Only three were randomized controlled trials. The quality of the evidence was found from moderate to low. Given a wide variability among patients' outcomes, individual effect size (ES) was possible for 6 out of 10 studies, 3 of which found a moderate ES on symptoms (ES = 0.68) and psychological (ES = 0.60) and social (ES = 0.55) dimensions.

CONCLUSION

Effectiveness of interventions focused on quality-of-life assessment is moderate. Additional studies should explore the complexity of the real palliative care world more accurately and understand the effects of independent variables included in complex palliative care interventions.

First assessments by specialist cancer nurses in the community: an ethnography

PURPOSE

The aim of the study is to explore how specialist cancer nurses carry out first assessments of patients in the community, their use of the Symptoms and Concerns Checklist (SCC) and their views on first assessments.

METHODS & SAMPLE

An ethnographic approach was taken. The data were collected by use of non-participant observation of specialist nurses carrying out a first assessment of patients with cancer, followed by semi-structured interviews with six specialist nurses. Data were analysed using iterative thematic analysis.

KEY RESULTS

All the specialist nurses recognised the value of facilitating the patients' narrative. Use of the SCC was seen to jar with the overall theme of building relationships during the first assessment visit. It was recognised by the specialist nurses that the SCC was beneficial in prompting the patients to discuss psycho-social concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

This study gives insight into the conflict and ambiguity for specialist nurses when using the SCC during the first assessment visit. It confirms the SCC as beneficial in cueing some patients to identify specific concerns and for these concerns to be recognised by the specialist nurses.

Does quality of life assessment in palliative care look like a complex screening program?

BACKGROUND

Palliative Care (PC) is an approach that improves the Quality of Life (QoL). A number of QoL assessment tools have been developed and validated in PC. It is not clear how QoL should be measured in PC practice. A procedure of QoL assessment in clinical practice can be defined as a clinical intervention focused on QoL assessment. This is a typical complex intervention that should be appropriately developed and described in all its components and assessed for its effectiveness. The aim of this study is to define a framework to help researchers to develop and evaluate clinical interventions focused on QoL assessment in PC.

METHODS

A study group of experts in PC and in research methodology was set up to define a framework that would describe the principles of clinical interventions focused on QoL assessment in PC. The study group discussed the WHO Population Screening Principles as a possible useful framework. The new principles had to be developed taking into account the following criteria: 1) specific to PC practice; 2) address a single underlying characteristic; 3) anchored to relevant literature; 4) consistent with the WHO PC definition.With regard to contents and the format of the principles, discussions occurred among the study group members through a cognitive process.

RESULTS

We reviewed each of the WHO Population Screening Principles and adapted them to QoL assessment, taking into account the defined criteria. As a result, a new framework, the QoL Assessment Principles in Palliative Care was developed. It consisted of 4 sections, for a total of 11 principles.

CONCLUSIONS

The WHO Screening Principles framework was used to outline the eleven essential principles to be considered in developing and/or evaluating clinical interventions focused on QoL assessment in PC. The QoL Assessment Principles in Palliative Care identified could represent a methodological and ethical standard to be considered when developing and evaluating a clinical intervention focused on QoL assessment in PC.

Outcomes 'out of africa': the selection and implementation of outcome measures for palliative care in Africa

BACKGROUND

End-of-life care research across Africa is under-resourced and under-developed. A central issue in research in end-of-life care is the measurement of effects and outcomes of care on patients and families. Little is known about the experiences of health professionals' selection and implementation of outcome measures (OM) in clinical care, research, audit, or teaching in Africa.

METHODS

An online survey was undertaken of those using outcome measures across the region, as part of the PRISMA project. A questionnaire addressing the use of OMs was developed for a similar survey in Europe and adapted for Africa. Participants were sampled through the contacts database of APCA. Invitation emails were sent out in January 2010 and reminders in February 2010.

RESULTS

168/301 invited contacts (56%) from 24 countries responded, with 78 respondents having previously used OM (65% in clinical practice, 12% in research and 23% for both). Main reasons for not using OM were a lack of guidance/training on using and analysing OM, with 49% saying that they would use the tools if this was provided. 40% of those using OM in clinical practice used POS, and 80% used them to assess, evaluate and monitor change. The POS was also the main tool used in research, with the principle criteria for use being validation in Africa, access to the tool and time needed to complete it. Challenges to the use of tools were shortage of time and resources, lack of guidance and training for the professionals, poor health status of patients and complexity of OM. Researchers also have problems analysing OM data. The APCA African POS was the most common version of the POS used, and was reported as a valuable tool for measuring outcomes. Respondents indicated the ideal outcome tool should be short, multi-dimensional and easy to use.

CONCLUSION

This was the first survey on professionals' views on OM in Africa. It showed that the APCA African POS was the most frequently OM used. Training and support are needed to help professionals utilise OM in palliative care, and OMs have an ongoing and important role in palliative care in Africa.

The use of two common palliative outcome measures in clinical care and research: a systematic review of POS and STAS

The Palliative Care Outcome Scale (POS) and the Support Team Assessment Schedule (STAS) are outcome measures assessing quality of care in palliative care patients. This review aims to appraise their use in clinical care and research. Five electronic databases were searched (February 2010) for original papers describing the validation or use of POS and/or STAS. Of the 83 papers included, 43 studies were on POS, 39 on STAS and one study using both. Eight STAS studies validated the original version, four an adaptation; 20 studies applied the STAS in another culture and 19 in other languages. POS papers reported included: 14 adapted POS versions, 12 translations of the POS and 15 studies of use in different cultures. Both measures have been used in cancer, HIV/AIDS and in mixed groups. POS has also been applied in neurological, kidney, pulmonary and heart disease. Both tools were used in different areas such as the evaluation of care or interventions, description of symptom prevalence and implementation of outcome measures in clinical practice. Overall, they seem to be well accepted tools for outcome measurement in palliative care, both in clinical care and research.

PRISMA: a pan-European co-ordinating action to advance the science in end-of-life cancer care

INTRODUCTION

The epidemiology of progressive cancer and associated mortality in Europe underlines the essential need for high quality palliative and end-of-life care for its citizens. Currently, care of patients at the end-of-life is under-researched and under-funded. This is due to a lack of prioritisation, challenges in defining end-of-life, lack of a common research strategy for Europe that identifies and implements best practice and highest scientific principles, and the need for common use of appropriate well-validated tools to measure and improve the end-of-life cancer experience in Europe.

METHODS

PRISMA is a pan-European co-ordinating action funded under Framework Programme 7 of the European Commission. With 12 partners in 9 countries, it is delivering a series of 8 Work Packages with the common aim of promoting best practice in the measurement of end-of-life care, setting an agenda and guidance that reflects European cultural diversity, and is informed by both public and clinical priorities. Guidance in the selection, adaptation and use of core tools is informed by experts in public health and clinical research.

DISCUSSION

PRISMA is currently producing a series of outputs to be accessible to the wider community of researchers, policy makers, funders and clinicians. We encourage new partnerships to build on the work of PRISMA and to lead high quality work informed by our deliverables. PRISMA, we hope, is redressing the current lack of co-ordination of cancer end-of-life research across Europe, and will catalyse the conduct of evidence-based care that reflects European populations and priorities.

Use of a modified ESAS in cancer patients: a pilot study of patient and staff experiences

AIM

To evaluate the feasibility of a modified Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) for monitoring symptoms in oncological palliative care.

METHODS

A modified ESAS was delivered daily to 28 patients with advanced cancer. A questionnaire to discover staff members' opinions on the ESAS was delivered at the end of the study. Structured interviews were used to examine patients' opinions on the ESAS.

RESULTS

The mean total ESAS score was 28.9 on inclusion day and 25.8 on Day 3 (p=0.531). Eleven of 21 of the staff considered the ESAS to be a 'good' or 'very good' way to obtain information about patients' symptoms. Seventeen of 24 patients who participated in the interview felt that ESAS was easy to fill in, and that there were no missing questions.

CONCLUSION

The patients felt that the modified ESAS contained relevant symptoms, and that the questionnaires were easy to fill in. The staff considered the modified ESAS to be a useful instrument for obtaining information about patients' symptom distress. The modified ESAS is a good instrument for use as part of the daily clinical routine, as well as for monitoring symptoms in palliative oncological care.

Use of the palliative outcome scale in Argentina: a cross-cultural adaptation and validation study

Although measuring outcomes is essential to ensuring palliative care effectiveness, there is an absence of properly validated measures in many countries. We undertook a cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Palliative Outcome Scale (POS) into a Spanish (Argentina) language and cultural context. The methodology used a sequence of phases: 1) verification of conceptual equivalence (literature review, professional interviews, and patient focus groups); 2) multiple translations; 3) committee review; and 4) field testing. Psychometric analysis entailed evaluation of quantitative content validity, construct validity, staff and patients' ratings comparison, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and responsiveness to change. Conceptual equivalence was achieved. Multiple changes were introduced after the translations and field testing in 65 patients and 20 professionals. Content validity was high for all but one item. Construct validity against a validated quality-of-life measure (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life C-30) was confirmed (rho=0.74, P<0.0005). There was acceptable agreement between staff and patients (Cohen's weighted kappa >0.3) for 5/10, 8/10, and 6/9 items at each of three time-point evaluations and good correlation for all but one item (Spearman coefficient >0.7). Internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach's alpha=0.68-0.69 and 0.66-0.73) for patient and staff ratings, respectively, and test-retest reliability showed very high agreement for every item (>0.80). The Argentine POS showed adequate responsiveness to change, although significant difference was reached for only 3 out of 10 items for patients and staff, respectively. Completion of the POS did not take more than 12 and 6 minutes for patients and staff, respectively. This study indicates that the Argentine POS is a valid and reliable measure of palliative care outcomes with advanced cancer patients.

Is the Palliative Care Outcome Scale useful to staff in a day hospice unit?

AIM

this study was undertaken to elicit a day hospice team's experience of using the Palliative Care Outcome Scale (POS), with the intention of determining its usefulness to staff. An adapted version of POS was used for the purpose of the study.

SAMPLE

a multiprofessional team of eight day hospice staff took part in the study. All had used POS on a weekly basis for a minimum period of 3 months.

DESIGN

a focus group was conducted at the hospice. It was tape-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The data were analysed using an interpretive phenomenological approach.

RESULTS

staff felt POS had limited value as an outcome measure for use in this day hospice. Other simultaneous organizational changes at the hospice may also have influenced staff negatively. Further research is needed to explore similar implementation issues in more depth, as practice developments may be abandoned for potentially the wrong reasons.