Improving quality of life through the routine use of the patient concerns inventory for head and neck cancer patients: baseline results in a cluster preference randomised controlled trial

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Cancer Care: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) come directly from the patient, without clinician interpretation, to provide a patient-centered perspective.

Objective

To understand the association of PROM integration into cancer care with patient-related, therapy-related, and health care utilization outcomes.

Data Sources

Searches included MEDLINE and MEDLINE Epub ahead of print, in-process, and other nonindexed citations; Embase databases (OvidSP); PsychINFO; CENTRAL; and CINAHL from January 1, 2012 to September 26, 2022.

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that enrolled adult patients (ages 18 years and older) with active cancer receiving anticancer therapy using a PROM as an intervention.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Pairs of review authors, using prepiloted forms, independently extracted trial characteristics, disease characteristics, and intervention details. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guideline was followed. Random-effects analyses were conducted.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Overall mortality, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures, and hospital utilization outcomes.

Results

From 1996 to 2022, 45 RCTs including 13 661 participants addressed the association of PROMs with outcomes considered important to patients. The addition of a PROM likely reduced the risk of overall mortality (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.98; moderate certainty), improved HRQoL (range 0-100) at 12 weeks (mean difference [MD], 2.45; 95% CI, 0.42-4.48; moderate certainty). Improvements of HRQoL at 24 weeks were not significant (MD, 1.87; 95% CI, -1.21 to 4.96; low certainty). There was no association between the addition of a PROM and HRQoL at 48 weeks. The addition of a PROM was not associated with reduced ED visits (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.54-1.02; low certainty) or hospital admissions (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.73-1.02; low certainty).

Conclusion and Relevance

The findings of this study suggest that the integration of PROMs into cancer care may improve overall survival and quality of life.

Follow-up arrangements in head and neck cancer clinics during the COVID-19 pandemic: results from two tertiary UK head and neck cancer centres

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this paper is to report the pattern of follow-up that occurred for a cohort of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients across two large centres in the UK (Aintree and Leeds), as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Patients had been treated for HNC with curative intent between April 2017 and October 2019 by 14 oral and maxillofacial (OMFS) and ear nose and throat (ENT) oncology surgeons in the Patient Concerns Inventory intervention trial. In October 2020, hospital records were reviewed, and information collected on the timing and mode (face-to-face/telephone/video) of follow-up consultations. In addition, recurrence, second primary tumours and deaths were recorded.

RESULTS

At the start of 'lockdown', 212 members of the cohort were known to be alive. During the post-lockdown period (follow-up appointment data comprised 5 months in Aintree and 7 months in Leeds) 7 died and 13 were identified as palliative/recurrence/new primary/metastases ('new event'). In Aintree, the first ENT/OMFS consultations after lockdown were 51 (67%) telephone and 25 (33%) face-to-face appointments. In Leeds, 46 (78%) consultations were by telephone and 13 (22%) were face-to-face. The second ENT/OMFS consultations post lockdown included 11 (44%) telephone and 14 (56%) face-to-face in Aintree, and 21 (75%) telephone and 7 (25%) face-to-face in Leeds.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that clinicians favoured remote consultations. Variations in practice were observed but reached a point of a 'hybrid follow-up approach' that included both face-to-face and remote consultations. With the emergence of telemedicine, clinicians may consider a follow-up model tailored to risk stratification. The development of the mode of such a consultation model needs further evaluation.

The Patient Concerns Inventory in head and neck oncology: a structured review of its development, validation and clinical implications

Introduction

The Patient Concerns Inventory (PCI) is a condition specific prompt list that was initially developed for head and neck cancer (HNC) and is referred to as the PCI–HN. There have been numerous publications regarding the PCI–HN, since it was first published in 2009. To date, there has not been a review of its development, validation and clinical implications. A collation of relevant papers into key sections allows multidisciplinary teams and researchers to have an overview of the PCI–HN’s background, evaluation and utility. This is essential if colleagues are to have confidence in the tool and be able to reflect on how to optimise its use in clinical practice.

Methods

Five search engines were used: EMBASE, Medline, PubMed, CINAHL and Handle-on-QOL for the specific term ‘Patient Concerns Inventory’ up to and including 1st February 2022. In addition, an accumulation of PCI–HN data of 507 HNC patients was drawn from previous studies in Liverpool and Leeds between 2007 and 2020 and was analysed specifically for this paper.

Results

54 papers relating to the PCI–HN were identified. The review is structured into eight sections: (1) What is the PCI–HN and how does it work; (2) Feasibility and acceptability; (3) Psychometrics; (4) Items selected and frequency (5) Associations with Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) and casemix; (6) Other observational studies; (7) Randomised trial evaluation; (8) General discussion and further research.

Conclusions

As the term PCI is quite ubiquitous and produces many hits when searching the literature, this review provides a very concise and convenient historical context for the PCI–HN and collates the current literature.

An Economic Evaluation Supported by Qualitative Data About the Patient Concerns Inventory (PCI) versus Standard Treatment Pathway in the Management of Patients with Head and Neck Cancer

BACKGROUND

The head and neck cancer (HNC) Patient Concerns Inventory (PCI) is a condition-specific prompt list that allows patients to raise concerns to cancer consultants that otherwise might be overlooked.

OBJECTIVE

This is the first economic evaluation of the PCI in patients with HNC investigating the costs and effects to the health service of not prioritising certain treatment pathways in addition to the primary cancer pathway. Additional costs can be accrued due to delayed referral to other appropriate services, e.g. hospital dentist. Economic evidence could influence future policy direction in this area globally.

METHODS

Alongside a 3-year clustered randomised controlled trial, an economic evaluation was undertaken with Client Service Receipt Inventory data collected at three different time points (baseline and 6 and 12 months post-baseline). Patients were identified by a multidisciplinary team at the trial clinics. This economic analysis compared the PCI intervention versus the non-PCI treatment pathway. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to investigate the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gain of the PCI versus non-PCI intervention treatment pathways. Qualitative data were also collected from seven consultants to triangulate findings from the economic evaluation.

RESULTS

The analysis used data from 191 patients (66% of the full trial sample). The PCI inventory was low cost, at just over £13 per participant. The PCI intervention was cost effective and also cost saving, with an incremental cost difference of £295.91 over the 12-month follow-up period. The QALY values were higher in the PCI intervention strategy, with a value of 0.79, whereas the non-PCI group had a value of 0.76, thus the PCI intervention was dominant. The sensitivity analysis showed that, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained, the probability of being cost effective was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-0.83). Qualitative results showed that consultants using the PCI reported an enhanced awareness of patients' overall post-treatment needs.

DISCUSSION

The PCI provided an effective means to conduct clinical consultations by avoiding unnecessary healthcare costs and focussing on aspects of care most important to patients. The cost per QALY gain was within the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline threshold. The economic evaluation showed that the PCI intervention strategy was dominant and therefore cost saving to the national health service (NHS) and was more effective in terms of treatment.

CONCLUSION

The PCI appears to be a low-cost intervention that generates a cost-effective benefit to patients from a NHS perspective if rolled out as part of routine care. Qualitative evidence has shown that the use of the PCI is supported by consultants in routine practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials Identifier: NCT03086629.

Health-related quality of life at 3 months following head and neck cancer treatment is a key predictor of longer-term outcome and of benefit from using the patient concerns inventory

INTRODUCTION

During clinical follow-up it can be difficult to identify those head and neck cancer (HNC) patients who are coping poorly and could benefit from additional support. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaires and prompt lists provide a means by which patients can express their perceived outcomes and raise concerns. The first aim of this secondary analysis following a randomized trial was to explore which patient characteristics, at around 3 months following treatment completion (baseline), best predict HRQOL 12 months later. The second aim was to attempt to ascertain which patients were most likely to benefit from using prompt list.

METHODS

Cluster-controlled pragmatic trial data were analyzed. HRQOL was measured by the University of Washington Quality of life questionnaire (UW-QOLv4). The prompt list was the Patient Concerns Inventory (PCI-HN).

RESULTS

The trial involved 15 eligible consultants and a median (inter-quartile range) of 16 (13-26) primary HNC patients per consultant, with 140 PCI patients and 148 controls. Baseline HRQOL was the dominant predictor of 12-month HRQOL with other predictors related to social, financial, and lifestyle characteristics as well as clinical stage and treatment. Although formal statistical tests for interaction were non-significant the trend in analyses over a range of outcomes suggested that patients with worse baseline HRQOL could benefit more from the PCI-HN.

DISCUSSION

HRQOL early post-treatment is a key predictor of longer-term outcome. Measuring and using HRQOL and the PCI-HN are not only surrogates for predicting HRQOL at 15 months post-treatment, but also tools to help guide interventions.

Routine provision of feedback from patient-reported outcome measurements to healthcare providers and patients in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) assess a patient's subjective appraisal of health outcomes from their own perspective. Despite hypothesised benefits that feedback  on PROMs can support decision-making in clinical practice and improve outcomes, there is uncertainty surrounding the effectiveness of PROMs feedback.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of PROMs feedback to patients, or healthcare workers, or both on patient-reported health outcomes and processes of care.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, two other databases and two clinical trial registries on 5 October 2020. We searched grey literature and consulted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two review authors independently screened and selected studies for inclusion. We included randomised trials directly comparing the effects on outcomes and processes of care of PROMs feedback to healthcare professionals and patients, or both with the impact of not providing such information.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two groups of two authors independently extracted data from the included studies and evaluated study quality. We followed standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and EPOC. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. We conducted meta-analyses of the results where possible.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 116 randomised trials which assessed the effectiveness of PROMs feedback in improving processes or outcomes of care, or both in a broad range of disciplines including psychiatry, primary care, and oncology. Studies were conducted across diverse ambulatory primary and secondary care settings in North America, Europe and Australasia. A total of 49,785 patients were included across all the studies. The certainty of the evidence varied between very low and moderate. Many of the studies included in the review were at risk of performance and detection bias. The evidence suggests moderate certainty that PROMs feedback probably improves quality of life (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 0.26; 11 studies; 2687 participants), and leads to an increase in patient-physician communication (SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.52; 5 studies; 658 participants), diagnosis and notation (risk ratio (RR) 1.73, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.08; 21 studies; 7223 participants), and disease control (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.41; 14 studies; 2806 participants). The intervention probably makes little or no difference for general health perceptions (SMD 0.04, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.24; 2 studies, 552 participants; low-certainty evidence), social functioning (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.09; 15 studies; 2632 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and pain (SMD 0.00, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.08; 9 studies; 2386 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of PROMs feedback on physical functioning (14 studies; 2788 participants) and mental functioning (34 studies; 7782 participants), as well as fatigue (4 studies; 741 participants), as the certainty of the evidence was very low. We did not find studies reporting on adverse effects defined as distress following or related to PROM completion.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PROM feedback probably produces moderate improvements in communication between healthcare professionals and patients as well as in diagnosis and notation, and disease control, and small improvements to quality of life. Our confidence in the effects is limited by the risk of bias, heterogeneity and small number of trials conducted to assess outcomes of interest. It is unclear whether   many of these improvements are clinically meaningful or sustainable in the long term. There is a need for more high-quality studies in this area, particularly studies which employ cluster designs and utilise techniques to maintain allocation concealment.

Improving quality of life through the routine use of the patient concerns inventory for head and neck cancer patients: main results of a cluster preference randomised controlled trial

PURPOSE

The patient concerns inventory (PCI) is a prompt list allowing head and neck cancer (HNC) patients to discuss issues that otherwise might be overlooked. This trial evaluated the effectiveness of using the PCI at routine outpatient clinics for one year after treatment on health-related QOL (HRQOL).

METHODS

A pragmatic cluster preference randomised control trial with 15 consultants, 8 'using' and 7 'not using' the PCI intervention. Patients treated with curative intent (all sites, disease stages, treatments) were eligible.

RESULTS

Consultants saw a median (inter-quartile range) 16 (13-26) patients, with 140 PCI and 148 control patients. Of the pre-specified outcomes, the 12-month results for the mean University of Washington Quality of Life (UW-QOLv4) social-emotional subscale score suggested a small clinical effect of intervention of 4.6 units (95% CI 0.2, 9.0), p = 0.04 after full adjustment for pre-stated case-mix. Results for UW-QOLv4 overall quality of life being less than good at 12 months (primary outcome) also favoured the PCI with a risk ratio of 0.83 (95% CI 0.66, 1.06) and absolute risk 4.8% (- 2.9%, 12.9%) but without achieving statistical significance. Other non-a-priori analyses, including all 12 UWQOL domains and at consultant level also suggested better HRQOL with PCI. Consultation times were unaffected and the number of items selected decreased over time.

CONCLUSION

This novel trial supports the integration of the PCI approach into routine consultations as a simple low-cost means of benefiting HNC patients. It adds to a growing body of evidence supporting the use of patient prompt lists more generally.

Systematic review of health-related quality of life following thyroid cancer

This systematic review provides a summary of all studies published between 2000 and 2019 using a health-related quality of life (HRQOL) patient-completed questionnaire to report outcomes following diagnosis and treatment of thyroid cancer. The search terms were “thyroid cancer” or “thyroid carcinoma,” “quality of life” or “health related quality of life,” and “questionnaire” or “patient reported outcome.” EMBASE, PubMed, Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and HaNDLE-On-QOL search engines were searched between 2 February and 23 February 2020. A total of 811 identified articles were reduced to 314 when duplicates were removed. After exclusion criteria (not thyroid specific, no quality of life questionnaires, and conference abstracts) were applied, 92 remained. Hand searching identified a further 2 articles. Of the 94 included, 16 had a surgical, 26 a primarily medical, and 52 a general focus. There were articles from 27 countries. A total of 49 articles were published from 2015 through 2019 inclusive. A total of 72 questionnaires were used among the articles and a range of 7 to 2215 participants were included within each article. This review demonstrated an increasing number of publications annually. The scope of enquiry into aspects of HRQOL following thyroid cancer is broad, with relatively few addressing surgical aspects and many focusing on the impact of radio-iodine. More research is required into shared decision-making in initial management decisions and HRQOL and interventions aimed specifically at addressing long-term HRQOL difficulties.