Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer 6/2016

16.12.2015 | Original Article

PRO-ONKO—selection of patient-reported outcome assessments for the clinical use in cancer patients—a mixed-method multicenter cross-sectional exploratory study

verfasst von: Heike Schmidt, Daniela Merkel, Michael Koehler, Hans-Henning Flechtner, Jörg Sigle, Bernd Klinge, Karin Jordan, Dirk Vordermark, Margarete Landenberger, Patrick Jahn

Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Ausgabe 6/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Cancer patients frequently suffer from multiple symptoms often impairing functional status and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). A comprehensive assessment including patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is recommended to enable individualized supportive care. However, PRO assessments are still not part of routine clinical practice. Therefore, this project aimed to compile an item pool from validated assessment instruments to facilitate the use of PROs for clinical decision-making in oncology clinics.

Methods

This qualitative dominant mixed-method cross-sectional exploratory study was carried out in four centers and comprised two stages. Stage I: Six interdisciplinary focus groups were conducted to choose questionnaires meeting particular clinical requirements. Stage II: Adult patients with heterogeneous cancer diagnoses, receiving in- or out-patient treatment were asked to participate and complete the chosen questionnaires (participation 71/74). Resulting PROs were compared with clinical records. Health care professionals (HCPs) and patients rated the usefulness for routine clinical practice.

Results

The European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and Distress Thermometer were chosen for screening and M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) and EORTC single items for monitoring. Comparison of n = 88 PRO assessments with clinical records showed consistent documentation of side effects like fever and emesis. Symptoms like fatigue, sadness, or sleep disturbance were not documented regularly in the medical records but captured by PRO assessments. Patients and HCPs judged the chosen questionnaires and electronic data collection as useful.

Conclusions

Future studies should examine how PROs can complement or substitute routine documentation in order to achieve standardized assessment and documentation during the treatment process in different settings and examine possible benefits for patients.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Kroenke K et al (2013) Somatic symptoms in cancer patients trajectory over 12 months and impact on functional status and disability. Support Care Cancer 21(3):765–773CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kroenke K et al (2013) Somatic symptoms in cancer patients trajectory over 12 months and impact on functional status and disability. Support Care Cancer 21(3):765–773CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Walker MS et al (2014) Early treatment discontinuation and switching in first-line metastatic breast cancer: the role of patient-reported symptom burden. Breast Cancer Res Treat 144(3):673–681CrossRefPubMed Walker MS et al (2014) Early treatment discontinuation and switching in first-line metastatic breast cancer: the role of patient-reported symptom burden. Breast Cancer Res Treat 144(3):673–681CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Trotti A et al (2003) CTCAE v3.0: development of a comprehensive grading system for the adverse effects of cancer treatment. Semin Radiat Oncol 13(3):176–181CrossRefPubMed Trotti A et al (2003) CTCAE v3.0: development of a comprehensive grading system for the adverse effects of cancer treatment. Semin Radiat Oncol 13(3):176–181CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Xiao C, Polomano R, Bruner DW (2013) Comparison between patient-reported and clinician-observed symptoms in oncology. Cancer Nurs 36(6):E1–e16CrossRefPubMed Xiao C, Polomano R, Bruner DW (2013) Comparison between patient-reported and clinician-observed symptoms in oncology. Cancer Nurs 36(6):E1–e16CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Snyder CF et al (2012) Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: a review of the options and considerations. Qual Life Res 21(8):1305–1314CrossRefPubMed Snyder CF et al (2012) Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: a review of the options and considerations. Qual Life Res 21(8):1305–1314CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Cleeland CS et al (2000) Assessing symptom distress in cancer patients: the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory. Cancer 89(7):1634–1646CrossRefPubMed Cleeland CS et al (2000) Assessing symptom distress in cancer patients: the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory. Cancer 89(7):1634–1646CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Reeve BB et al (2014) Recommended patient-reported core set of symptoms to measure in adult cancer treatment trials. J Natl Cancer Inst 106(7) Reeve BB et al (2014) Recommended patient-reported core set of symptoms to measure in adult cancer treatment trials. J Natl Cancer Inst 106(7)
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Reeve BB et al (2013) ISOQOL recommends minimum standards for patient-reported outcome measures used in patient-centered outcomes and comparative effectiveness research. Qual Life Res 22(8):1889–1905CrossRefPubMed Reeve BB et al (2013) ISOQOL recommends minimum standards for patient-reported outcome measures used in patient-centered outcomes and comparative effectiveness research. Qual Life Res 22(8):1889–1905CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Howell D et al (2013) Core domains for a person-focused outcome measurement system in cancer (PROMS-Cancer Core) for routine care: a scoping review and Canadian Delphi Consensus. Value Health 16(1):76–87CrossRefPubMed Howell D et al (2013) Core domains for a person-focused outcome measurement system in cancer (PROMS-Cancer Core) for routine care: a scoping review and Canadian Delphi Consensus. Value Health 16(1):76–87CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Kotronoulas G et al (2014) What is the value of the routine use of patient-reported outcome measures toward improvement of patient outcomes, processes of care, and health service outcomes in cancer care? A systematic review of controlled trials. J Clin Oncol 32(14):1480–1501CrossRefPubMed Kotronoulas G et al (2014) What is the value of the routine use of patient-reported outcome measures toward improvement of patient outcomes, processes of care, and health service outcomes in cancer care? A systematic review of controlled trials. J Clin Oncol 32(14):1480–1501CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Snyder CF et al (2014) When using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice, the measure matters: a randomized controlled trial. J Oncol Pract 10(5):e299–e306CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Snyder CF et al (2014) When using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice, the measure matters: a randomized controlled trial. J Oncol Pract 10(5):e299–e306CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Chen J, Ou L, Hollis SJ (2013) A systematic review of the impact of routine collection of patient reported outcome measures on patients, providers and health organisations in an oncologic setting. BMC Health Serv Res 13:211CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Chen J, Ou L, Hollis SJ (2013) A systematic review of the impact of routine collection of patient reported outcome measures on patients, providers and health organisations in an oncologic setting. BMC Health Serv Res 13:211CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Greenhalgh J (2009) The applications of PROs in clinical practice: what are they, do they work, and why? Qual Life Res 18(1):115–123CrossRefPubMed Greenhalgh J (2009) The applications of PROs in clinical practice: what are they, do they work, and why? Qual Life Res 18(1):115–123CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Snyder CF et al (2011) Can patient-reported outcome measures identify cancer patients’ most bothersome issues? J Clin Oncol 29(9):1216–1220CrossRefPubMed Snyder CF et al (2011) Can patient-reported outcome measures identify cancer patients’ most bothersome issues? J Clin Oncol 29(9):1216–1220CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Huebner J et al (2014) Integrating cancer patients’ perspectives into treatment decisions and treatment evaluation using patient-reported outcomes - a concept paper. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 23(2):173–179CrossRef Huebner J et al (2014) Integrating cancer patients’ perspectives into treatment decisions and treatment evaluation using patient-reported outcomes - a concept paper. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 23(2):173–179CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Velikova G et al (2010) Patients report improvements in continuity of care when quality of life assessments are used routinely in oncology practice: secondary outcomes of a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Cancer 46(13):2381–2388CrossRefPubMed Velikova G et al (2010) Patients report improvements in continuity of care when quality of life assessments are used routinely in oncology practice: secondary outcomes of a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Cancer 46(13):2381–2388CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Chung AE, Basch EM (2015) Incorporating the patient’s voice into electronic health records through patient-reported outcomes as the “Review of Systems”. J Am Med Inform Assoc Chung AE, Basch EM (2015) Incorporating the patient’s voice into electronic health records through patient-reported outcomes as the “Review of Systems”. J Am Med Inform Assoc
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Sigle J, Porzsolt F (1996) Practical aspects of quality-of-life measurement: design and feasibility study of the quality-of-life recorder and the standardized measurement of quality of life in an outpatient clinic. Cancer Treat Rev 22 Suppl A:75–89CrossRefPubMed Sigle J, Porzsolt F (1996) Practical aspects of quality-of-life measurement: design and feasibility study of the quality-of-life recorder and the standardized measurement of quality of life in an outpatient clinic. Cancer Treat Rev 22 Suppl A:75–89CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Gamper EM et al (2014) The EORTC emotional functioning computerized adaptive test: phases I-III of a cross-cultural item bank development. Psychooncology 23(4):397–403CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gamper EM et al (2014) The EORTC emotional functioning computerized adaptive test: phases I-III of a cross-cultural item bank development. Psychooncology 23(4):397–403CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
Zurück zum Zitat EHA (2012) Guidelines. Patient reported outcomes in hematology. Genua: forum service editore EHA (2012) Guidelines. Patient reported outcomes in hematology. Genua: forum service editore
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Santana MJ et al (2015) Training clinicians in how to use patient-reported outcome measures in routine clinical practice. Qual Life Res Santana MJ et al (2015) Training clinicians in how to use patient-reported outcome measures in routine clinical practice. Qual Life Res
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Antunes B, Harding R, Higginson IJ (2014) Implementing patient-reported outcome measures in palliative care clinical practice: a systematic review of facilitators and barriers. Palliat Med 28(2):158–175CrossRefPubMed Antunes B, Harding R, Higginson IJ (2014) Implementing patient-reported outcome measures in palliative care clinical practice: a systematic review of facilitators and barriers. Palliat Med 28(2):158–175CrossRefPubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Boyce MB, Browne JP, Greenhalgh J (2014) The experiences of professionals with using information from patient-reported outcome measures to improve the quality of healthcare: a systematic review of qualitative research. BMJ Qual Saf 23(6):508–518CrossRefPubMed Boyce MB, Browne JP, Greenhalgh J (2014) The experiences of professionals with using information from patient-reported outcome measures to improve the quality of healthcare: a systematic review of qualitative research. BMJ Qual Saf 23(6):508–518CrossRefPubMed
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Howell D et al (2015) Patient-reported outcomes in routine cancer clinical practice: a scoping review of use, impact on health outcomes, and implementation factors. Ann Oncol Howell D et al (2015) Patient-reported outcomes in routine cancer clinical practice: a scoping review of use, impact on health outcomes, and implementation factors. Ann Oncol
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Osoba D (2007) Translating the science of patient-reported outcomes assessment into clinical practice. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 37:5–11CrossRefPubMed Osoba D (2007) Translating the science of patient-reported outcomes assessment into clinical practice. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 37:5–11CrossRefPubMed
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Warrington L, Absolom K, Velikova G (2015) Integrated care pathways for cancer survivors - a role for patient-reported outcome measures and health informatics. Acta Oncol 54(5):600–608CrossRefPubMed Warrington L, Absolom K, Velikova G (2015) Integrated care pathways for cancer survivors - a role for patient-reported outcome measures and health informatics. Acta Oncol 54(5):600–608CrossRefPubMed
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Basch E, Abernethy AP (2011) Supporting clinical practice decisions with real-time patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Oncol 29(8):954–956CrossRefPubMed Basch E, Abernethy AP (2011) Supporting clinical practice decisions with real-time patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Oncol 29(8):954–956CrossRefPubMed
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Cleeland CS, Sloan JA (2010) Assessing the Symptoms of Cancer Using Patient-Reported Outcomes (ASCPRO): searching for standards. J Pain Symptom Manage 39(6):1077–1085CrossRefPubMed Cleeland CS, Sloan JA (2010) Assessing the Symptoms of Cancer Using Patient-Reported Outcomes (ASCPRO): searching for standards. J Pain Symptom Manage 39(6):1077–1085CrossRefPubMed
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Howell D et al (2012) Psychosocial health care needs assessment of adult cancer patients: a consensus-based guideline. Support Care Cancer Howell D et al (2012) Psychosocial health care needs assessment of adult cancer patients: a consensus-based guideline. Support Care Cancer
33.
Zurück zum Zitat von Elm E et al (2014) The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int J Surg 12(12):1495–1499CrossRef von Elm E et al (2014) The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int J Surg 12(12):1495–1499CrossRef
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Johnson RB, Onwuegbuzie AJ, Turner LA (2007) Toward a definition of mixed methods research. J Mixed Methods Res 1(2):112–133CrossRef Johnson RB, Onwuegbuzie AJ, Turner LA (2007) Toward a definition of mixed methods research. J Mixed Methods Res 1(2):112–133CrossRef
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Mayring P (2000) Qualitative content analysis [28 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research 1(2) Art. 20 Mayring P (2000) Qualitative content analysis [28 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research 1(2) Art. 20
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Bonomi AE et al (1996) Multilingual translation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) quality of life measurement system. Qual Life Res 5(3):309–320CrossRefPubMed Bonomi AE et al (1996) Multilingual translation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) quality of life measurement system. Qual Life Res 5(3):309–320CrossRefPubMed
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Aaronson NK et al (1993) The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 85(5):365–376CrossRefPubMed Aaronson NK et al (1993) The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 85(5):365–376CrossRefPubMed
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Schaeffeler N et al (2015) Assessing the need for psychooncological support: screening instruments in combination with patients’ subjective evaluation may define psychooncological pathways. Psychooncology Schaeffeler N et al (2015) Assessing the need for psychooncological support: screening instruments in combination with patients’ subjective evaluation may define psychooncological pathways. Psychooncology
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Donovan KA et al (2014) Validation of the distress thermometer worldwide: state of the science. Psychooncology 23(3):241–250CrossRefPubMed Donovan KA et al (2014) Validation of the distress thermometer worldwide: state of the science. Psychooncology 23(3):241–250CrossRefPubMed
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Schmidt H et al (2015) Symptom burden of cancer patients: validation of the German M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory: a cross-sectional multicenter study. J Pain Symptom Manage 49(1):117–125CrossRefPubMed Schmidt H et al (2015) Symptom burden of cancer patients: validation of the German M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory: a cross-sectional multicenter study. J Pain Symptom Manage 49(1):117–125CrossRefPubMed
41.
Zurück zum Zitat Landenberger M et al (2015) Trans-sectoral care for patients with colorectal cancer: design of a prospective randomized controlled multi-center trial (FKZ 01GY1143). Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes 109(2):171–180CrossRefPubMed Landenberger M et al (2015) Trans-sectoral care for patients with colorectal cancer: design of a prospective randomized controlled multi-center trial (FKZ 01GY1143). Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes 109(2):171–180CrossRefPubMed
42.
Zurück zum Zitat Brundage MD et al (2015) Communicating patient-reported outcome scores using graphic formats: results from a mixed-methods evaluation. Qual Life Res Brundage MD et al (2015) Communicating patient-reported outcome scores using graphic formats: results from a mixed-methods evaluation. Qual Life Res
43.
Zurück zum Zitat Jagsi R et al (2013) Qualitative analysis of practicing oncologists’ attitudes and experiences regarding collection of patient-reported outcomes. J Oncol Pract 9(6):e290–e297CrossRefPubMed Jagsi R et al (2013) Qualitative analysis of practicing oncologists’ attitudes and experiences regarding collection of patient-reported outcomes. J Oncol Pract 9(6):e290–e297CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
PRO-ONKO—selection of patient-reported outcome assessments for the clinical use in cancer patients—a mixed-method multicenter cross-sectional exploratory study
verfasst von
Heike Schmidt
Daniela Merkel
Michael Koehler
Hans-Henning Flechtner
Jörg Sigle
Bernd Klinge
Karin Jordan
Dirk Vordermark
Margarete Landenberger
Patrick Jahn
Publikationsdatum
16.12.2015
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Ausgabe 6/2016
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-015-3055-4

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2016

Supportive Care in Cancer 6/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Update Onkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.