Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Endometriosis

The most impactful endometriosis symptom: An international, cross-sectional, two-round survey study

INTRODUCTION

There is considerable variation in the types of symptoms experienced by people living with endometriosis, and it is unclear which symptoms impact people the most. This study aimed to identify the specific symptoms that are "most impactful" to people living with the condition.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Two sequential online surveys were conducted. Women aged over 18 years with a diagnosis of endometriosis were eligible to participate. Participants first provided a free-text list of all the endometriosis symptoms they experienced (Survey 1, Australian only). Responses were condensed into a shorter list by grouping symptom types and selecting the top 20 most common and most impactful. Survey 2 (international) participants reviewed the list and selected all that they had experienced in the last 3 months, nominated one as their single "most impactful symptom", and rated its impact on one of five randomized scale types.

RESULTS

Survey 1 and Survey 2 had 195 and 983 responses, respectively. The mean age of respondents was 30.8 ± 7.9 years. There were 275 separate symptom descriptions from Survey 1, which were condensed into 104 groups, of which 25 met criteria for inclusion in Survey 2. The most commonly experienced symptoms were abdominal pain (93% of respondents), bloating (92%), and fatigue (90%), and the symptoms nominated as causing the most impact were pelvic pain (20%), abdominal pain (15%), and cramps (7%). Nearly everyone (99.7%) in Survey 2 reported experiencing at least one pain symptom. The symptoms that generated the highest impact scores were infertility (99.8/100), irregular menstrual cycles (95.3/100), and constipation (92/100). The average impact score was 87.5/100.

CONCLUSIONS

There was substantial variation in the symptom selected as causing the most impact, and the level of impact was high. A focus on measuring the "most impactful symptom" in future research may enable us to better capture and measure the true symptom experience.

A systematic literature review on patient-reported outcome domains and measures in nonsurgical efficacy trials related to chronic pain associated with endometriosis: an urgent call to action

ABSTRACT

Endometriosis, a common cause for chronic pelvic pain, significantly affects quality of life, fertility, and overall productivity of those affected. Therapeutic options remain limited, and collating evidence on treatment efficacy is complicated. One reason could be the heterogeneity of assessed outcomes in nonsurgical clinical trials, impeding meaningful result comparisons. This systematic literature review examines outcome domains and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in clinical trials. Through comprehensive search of Embase, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL up until July 2022, we screened 1286 records, of which 191 were included in our analyses. Methodological quality (GRADE criteria), information about publication, patient population, and intervention were assessed, and domains as well as PROMs were extracted and analyzed. In accordance with IMMPACT domain framework, the domain pain was assessed in almost all studies (98.4%), followed by adverse events (73.8%). By contrast, assessment of physical functioning (29.8%), improvement and satisfaction (14.1%), and emotional functioning (6.8%) occurred less frequently. Studies of a better methodological quality tended to use more different domains. Nevertheless, combinations of more than 2 domains were rare, failing to comprehensively capture the bio-psycho-social aspects of endometriosis-associated pain. The PROMs used showed an even broader heterogeneity across all studies. Our findings underscore the large heterogeneity of assessed domains and PROMs in clinical pain-related endometriosis trials. This highlights the urgent need for a standardized approach to both, assessed domains and high-quality PROMs ideally realized through development and implementation of a core outcome set, encompassing the most pivotal domains and PROMs for both, stakeholders and patients.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Used in Randomized Controlled Trials Following Surgical Intervention for Endometriosis: A Structured Review from the AAGL Practice Guidelines Group

OBJECTIVE

No consensus currently exists regarding patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) instruments. This structured review was conducted to identify the PROMs used by randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated surgical treatment in patients with endometriosis.

DATA SOURCES

Two parallel searches were conducted by a medical librarian using Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and Cochrane Library for RCTs published from 2000 to July 2022. One search focused on studies reporting quality of life (QoL), and the second search focused on studies reporting pain and sexual, bowel, and bladder function.

METHOD OF STUDY SELECTION

During the title and abstract screening and reference check, 600 results were identified on PROMs relating to QoL and 465 studies on PROMs relating to pain and sexual, bowel, and/or bladder function and an evaluation of 17 and 12 studies conducted, respectively. The inclusion criteria involved selecting RCTs that focused on surgical intervention and assessing QoL, pain, and sexual, bowel, and/or bladder function using PROMs.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Covidence software was used to organize and identify duplicate articles through screening. We developed a data extraction form to collect key information about each included study, as well as the pertinent PROMs used in the study. Assessment of the risk of bias of each study was also performed. A total of 19 studies were identified involving 2089 participants and a total of 16 PROMs used across the studies; 9 of 19 studies (47%) were rated as having a low risk of bias. There were no high-risk studies identified in this review.

CONCLUSION

This study identified a large number of RCTs in surgical treatment of endometriosis that used various PROMs to assess QoL, pain, and bladder, bowel, and sexual function. The PROMs used by high-quality RCTs for QoL include Endometriosis Health Profile-30, Endometriosis Health Profile-5, Short-Form 36, Short-Form 12, and EQ-5D; for bowel-related symptoms Knowles-Eccersley-Scott-Symptom Questionnaire, Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index, and Cleveland Clinic Fecal Incontinence Severity Scoring System/Wexner; for bladder-related function Bristol Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms, International Prostate Symptom Score, Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire, and Urinary Symptom Profile; and finally for sexual function Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire and Sexual Activity Questionnaire. Unlike other domains, only one tool (visual analog scale) was the dominant PROM used for the assessment of pain. In addition, the use of more than one PROM in each study to assess different aspects of patient's health and pain symptoms did not become prevalent until after 2015.

Developing a set of patient-centered outcomes for routine use in endometriosis: An international Delphi study

INTRODUCTION

There is large variation in individual patient care for endometriosis. A uniform approach to measure outcomes could be incorporated into routine clinical practice to personalize and monitor treatments and potentially improve the quality of care. The aim of this study is to identify a group of patient-centered outcomes for use in routine endometriosis care which are relevant to all patient profiles.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

By means of a modified two-round Delphi study with international representation including healthcare professionals, researchers and patient representatives (51 participants, 16 countries) we developed a set of patient-centered measurements. The participants evaluated 47 Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and 30 Clinician Reported Outcome Measures (CROMs) regarding their feasibility and relevance for their use in routine endometriosis care. After the two rounds of quotation, meetings of the experts were convened to participate in a final discussion to finalize the consensus of the final set of included measures.

RESULTS

The final set of patient-centered outcomes includes six PROMs (measuring symptomatic impact, pain, work productivity and quality of life) and 10 CROMs (measuring clinical, imaging and surgical indicators). A supplementary list of outcomes was added to include important dimensions that were considered essential by the expert panel but are not relevant to all patients. In addition the need for development of specific tools (PROMs) measuring the psychological impact and the impact in sexual activity of endometriosis was highlighted.

CONCLUSIONS

We have developed a set of patient-centered outcomes measures in endometriosis care. The selected outcomes comprise the common features for all patients suffering from endometriosis. adapted for use in routine practice. The list of outcomes has been adapted for use in routine practice from which clinicians can chose, depending on their needs.

REDCap and the National Mesothelioma Virtual Bank-a scalable and sustainable model for rare disease biorepositories

OBJECTIVE

Rare disease research requires data sharing networks to power translational studies. We describe novel use of Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap), a web application for managing clinical data, by the National Mesothelioma Virtual Bank, a federated biospecimen, and data sharing network.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

National Mesothelioma Virtual Bank (NMVB) uses REDCap to integrate honest broker activities, enabling biospecimen and associated clinical data provisioning to investigators. A Web Portal Query tool was developed to source and visualize REDCap data in interactive, faceted search, enabling cohort discovery by public users. An AWS Lambda function behind an API calculates the counts visually presented, while protecting record level data. The user-friendly interface, quick responsiveness, automatic generation from REDCap, and flexibility to new data, was engineered to sustain the NMVB research community.

RESULTS

NMVB implementations enabled a network of 8 research institutions with over 2000 mesothelioma cases, including clinical annotations and biospecimens, and public users' cohort discovery and summary statistics. NMVB usage and impact is demonstrated by high website visits (>150 unique queries per month), resource use requests (>50 letter of interests), and citations (>900) to papers published using NMVB resources.

DISCUSSION

NMVB's REDCap implementation and query tool is a framework for implementing federated and integrated rare disease biobanks and registries. Advantages of this framework include being low-cost, modular, scalable, and efficient. Future advances to NVMB's implementations will include incorporation of -omics data and development of downstream analysis tools to advance mesothelioma and rare disease research.

CONCLUSION

NVMB presents a framework for integrating biobanks and patient registries to enable translational research for rare diseases.

Symptom tracking in endometriosis using digital technologies: Knowns, unknowns, and future prospects

Endometriosis is a common chronic pain condition with no known cure and limited treatment options. Digital technologies, ranging from smartphone apps to wearable sensors, have shown potential toward facilitating chronic pain assessment and management; however, to date, many of these tools have not been specifically deployed or evaluated in patients with endometriosis-associated pain. Informed by previous studies in related chronic pain conditions, we discuss how digital technologies may be used in endometriosis to facilitate objective, continuous, and holistic symptom tracking. We postulate that these pervasive and increasingly affordable technologies present promising opportunities toward developing decision-support tools assisting healthcare professionals and empowering patients with endometriosis to make better-informed choices about symptom management.

How subjective well-being, patient-reported clinical improvement (PROMs) and experience of care (PREMs) relate in an acute psychiatric care setting?

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are increasingly acknowledged as critical tools for enhancing patient-centred, value-based care. However, research is lacking on the impact of using standardized patient-reported indicators in acute psychiatric care. The aim of this study was to explore whether subjective well-being indicators (generic PROMs) are relevant for evaluating the quality of hospital care, distinct from measures of symptom improvement (disease-specific PROMs) and from PREMs.

METHODS

Two hundred and forty-eight inpatients admitted to a psychiatric university hospital were included in the study between January and June 2021. Subjective well-being was assessed using standardized generic PROMs on well-being, symptom improvement was assessed using standardized disease-specific PROMs, and experience of care using PREMs. PROMs were completed at admission and discharge, PREMs were completed at discharge. Clinicians rated their experience of providing treatment using adapted PREMs items.

RESULTS

Change in subjective well-being (PROMs) at discharge was significantly (p < 0.001), but moderately (r² = 28.5%), correlated to improvement in symptom outcomes, and weakly correlated to experience of care (PREMs) (r² = 11.0%), the latter being weakly explained by symptom changes (r² = 6.9%). Patients and clinicians assessed the experience of care differently.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the case for routinely measuring patients' subjective well-being to better capture the unmet needs of patients undergoing psychiatric hospital treatment, and the use of standardized patient-reported measures as key indicators of high quality of care across mental health services.

Collection and Utilization of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in a Colorectal Surgery Clinic

INTRODUCTION

The routine collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) promises to improve patient care. However, in colorectal surgery, PROMs are uncommonly collected outside of clinical research studies and rarely used in clinical care. We designed and implemented a quality improvement project with the goals of routinely collecting PROMs and increasing the frequency that PROMs are utilized by colorectal surgeons in clinical practice.

METHODS

This mixed-methods, quality improvement project was conducted in the colorectal surgery clinic of a tertiary academic medical center. Patients were administered up to five PROMs before each appointment. PROM completion rates were measured. Additionally, we performed two educational interventions to increase utilization of our electronic health record's PROM dashboard by colorectal surgeons. Utilization rates and attitudes toward the PROM dashboard were measured.

RESULTS

Overall, patients completed 3600 of 3977 (90.9%) administered PROMs during the study period. At baseline, colorectal surgeons reviewed 6.7% of completed PROMs. After two educational interventions, this increased to 39.3% (P = 0.004). Colorectal surgeons also felt that the PROM dashboard was easier to use. Barriers to greater PROM dashboard utilization included poor user interface/user experience and a perceived lack of knowledge, time, and relevance.

CONCLUSIONS

The collection of PROMs in colorectal surgery clinics is feasible and can result in high PROM completion rates. Educational interventions can improve the utilization of PROMs by colorectal surgeons in clinical practice. Our experience collecting PROMs through this quality improvement initiative can serve as a template for other colorectal surgery clinics interested in collecting and utilizing data from PROMs.