Patient-reported outcome measurement implementation in cancer survivors: a systematic review

Interventions influencing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) response rates in cancer: a scoping review

PURPOSE

Despite the emerging evidence around patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) monitoring benefits in oncology, completion rates remain low due to numerous multi-level barriers. This review summarizes existing literature on interventions employed to improve PROMs response rates in routine practice among patients with cancer.

METHODS

PubMed database was used to perform a literature search of articles published between 2000 and 2022. Articles were included if they focused on PROMs implementation in non-clinical trial setting and reported results on methodologies and their influence on response rates.

RESULTS

A total of 495 abstracts were screened for eligibility, and 14 articles that met the inclusion criteria were included. PROMs mode of administration varied between electronic only (four studies, 28.6%), paper only (two studies, 14.3%), electronic-paper (six studies, 42.9%), and electronic-telephone (two studies, 14.3%). Reminder systems, using electronic, paper, or in-person, were implemented in 12 studies (85.7%). Different strategies of initial recruitment, aiming to enhance patients' PROM engagements, were outlined in five studies (35.7%).

CONCLUSION

Multiple interventions were implemented to improve PROMs completion rates. Mode of questionnaire administration, reminder systems, patient education on benefits of PROMs, and clinical staff involvement were shown to be effective in increasing the overall completion rate.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

This review provides a summary for researchers and clinicians on the current practice of PROMs implementation, thus creating a framework for the impact of different methodologies on patient's response rate for better monitoring of recurring symptoms, including long-term side effects, emotional distress, and changes in health-related quality of life.

Measuring patient reported outcomes in brachytherapy: Why we should do it and more importantly how

As the treatment for cancer improves and advances are made, the clinical focus is often on treatment response and survival. However, these are not the only factors which are important to patients. More patients are living longer after cancer treatment and therefore it is important that we can describe not only the treatment to patients but also what their life will be like during and after treatment. Patient reported outcomes (PROs) allow us to describe these. Although there are a range of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) available to the clinician to assess these, the use of them in many areas of brachytherapy lags behind ideal levels. Brachytherapy has many features that differ to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) yet the assessment of quality of life during and after treatment is much more scarce than EBRT. Brachytherapy is often used in the setting of organ preservation or in place of radical surgery, yet there is a paucity of quality of life data comparing the different treatment modalities. This review article will aim to elaborate on the evidence that exists in the use of specific PROMs within prostate, breast and gynaecologic cancers and describe the development of a novel PROMs approach in rectal brachytherapy which aims to identify and resolve symptoms at an early stage.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures as an Intervention: A Comprehensive Overview of Systematic Reviews on the Effects of Feedback

OBJECTIVES

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have emerged as a promising approach to involve patients in their treatment process. Beyond serving as outcome measures, PROMs can be applied to provide feedback to healthcare providers and patients, thereby offering valuable insights that can improve health outcomes and care processes. This overview offers a comprehensive synthesis of the effects of PROM feedback, contributing to the evidence-based discussion on PROMs' potential to enhance patient care.

METHODS

Following Cochrane Collaboration recommendations, this overview included literature reviews across diverse treatment areas, investigating the impact of PROM feedback on patient health outcomes (including quality of life, symptoms, or survival) and care process outcomes (including communication, symptom identification, or clinical practice). The methodological quality of the evidence was assessed with a modified version of A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2, and the potential overlap of primary studies was quantified. Results were narratively synthesized.

RESULTS

Forty reviews grouped into 4 categories of treatment areas were included. Overall, their methodological quality was low. The overall overlap of primary studies was 2.2%, reaching up to 15.7% within specific treatment areas. The results indicate that PROM feedback may enhance the quality-of-care processes, whereas its effects on patient health outcomes remained less conclusive.

CONCLUSIONS

PROM feedback positively influences the interaction between physicians and patients across the included treatment areas. Further research is needed to comprehend the trickle-down effects of PROM feedback and how to enhance its potential in yielding health benefits for patients.

Can Digital Health Improve Therapeutic Compliance in Oncology?

PURPOSE

Therapeutic compliance, or adherence, is critical in oncology because of the complexity and duration of cancer treatment regimens. Nonadherence can lead to suboptimal therapeutic outcomes, increased disease progression, higher mortality rates, and elevated health care costs. Traditional methods to enhance compliance, such as patient education and regular follow-ups, have shown limited success.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This review examines the potential of digital health technologies to improve adherence in oncology. Various studies and trials are analyzed to assess the effectiveness of these technologies in supporting patients with cancer.

RESULTS

mHealth applications have been shown to improve medication adherence through features like medication reminders and symptom tracking. Telemedicine facilitates continuous care and reduces the need for travel, significantly improving adherence and patient satisfaction. Patient-reported outcome measures enhance clinical decision making and personalized treatment plans by incorporating patient feedback. Electronic medical records and patient portals improve compliance by providing easy access to medical information and fostering better patient-provider communication. Connected pillboxes aid in consistent medication intake and reduce dispensing errors.

CONCLUSION

Digital health technologies offer significant benefits in oncology by enhancing patient engagement, improving adherence to treatment protocols, and enabling comprehensive cancer care management. However, challenges such as the digital divide, data privacy concerns, and the need for tailored interventions must be addressed. Future research should focus on evaluating the effectiveness of digital interventions and developing personalized digital health tools to maximize therapeutic compliance.

[Patient-reported outcomes-the role of the patient's subjective perspective for research and clinical care]

Because only patients can adequately assess symptoms, disability, and quality of life, concordance between a patient's and physician's assessment is often low. Accordingly, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used in research and routine clinical care. In daily practice, PROs are not only applied to measure the patient's perceived outcome of medical treatments, but also to assess their health status before intervention starts. Typically, several patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), which are reliable and valid, are available for the assessment of the most important PROMs. In daily clinical practice, the integration of PROs can be useful for clinical assessment and treatment planning or for quality management. Currently, the most promising application is routine patient monitoring using digital PROMs (ePROMs). Systematic reviews have revealed that the routine use of PROMs in daily clinical care is associated with, among others, improved physician-patient communication, higher patient satisfaction, reduced symptom burden, higher quality of life, and improved survival. This effect is especially strong if health care professionals continuously receive the results of the PRO monitoring. Patients are usually inclined to disclose their health status, and the positive effects of routine patient monitoring are widely recognized. However, several barriers to using PROs and PROMs still exist.

Pain in Long-Term Cancer Survivors: Prevalence and Impact in a Cohort Composed Mostly of Breast Cancer Survivors

Cancer survival is becoming more common which means that there is now a growing population of cancer survivors, in whom pain may be common. However, its prevalence has hardly been addressed systematically. We aimed to assess the prevalence and explore the pathophysiology and impact of pain on health outcomes in cancer survivors. We conducted a retrospective-prospective cohort study in cancer-free patients diagnosed with cancer at least five years before the study start date. We used multivariable regression to establish the association of patients' cancer characteristics with pain, and then the association of patients' pain features with health outcomes and related symptoms. Between March and July 2021, 278 long-term cancer survivors were evaluated. Almost half of them (130/278, 46.8%) had pain, of whom 58.9% had a probable neuropathic component, but only 18 (13.8%) were taking specific drugs for neuropathic pain. A history of surgery-related pain syndrome in breast cancer patients was more than twice as frequent in the pain cohort. Post-chemotherapy and post-radiotherapy pain syndromes were uncommon. Pain was associated with lower QoL, emotional functioning, professional performance, and disability scores. Pain is a frequent health determinant in cancer survivors. Referral to specialised pain services may be a reasonable move in some cases.

Cancer Survivorship at Stanford Cancer Institute

The Stanford Cancer Survivorship Program is a key initiative of Stanford Cancer Institute. The program's mission is to improve the experience and outcomes of patients and family caregivers throughout all phases of the cancer trajectory by advancing survivorship research, clinical care, and education. The four pillars of the program include clinical care delivery with a focus on primary care-survivorship collaboration and expanding specialty services, education and training of healthcare professionals, transdisciplinary patient-oriented research, and community engagement. Cross-cutting areas of expertise include the following: (a) adolescents and young adults (AYAs), (b) mental health and patient self-management, (c) integration of primary care, and (d) postgraduate medical education. The clinical care model includes embedded survivorship clinics within disease groups in outpatient clinics, novel clinics designed to address unmet needs such as sexual health for women, and primary care-based faculty-led survivorship clinics for patients undergoing active cancer care requiring co-management, those who have completed active therapy and those at high risk for cancer due to genetic risk. Educational initiatives developed to date include an online course and medical textbook for primary care clinicians, a lecture series, monthly research team meetings, and rotations for medical trainees. Patient-facing activities include webinars and a podcast series designed to promote awareness, thus expanding the provision of expert-vetted information. Ongoing research focuses on oncofertility and family building after cancer, improving communication for AYAs, changing mindsets to improve quality of life through targeted digital interventions, increasing capacity to care for cancer survivors, and strengthening collaboration with community partners. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Stanford's Cancer Survivorship Program includes a robust transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary research, training and clinical platform that is committed to advancing access and improving care for people living with and beyond cancer, through innovation in design and care delivery.

How to make PROMs work: qualitative insights from leaders at United States hospitals with successful PROMs programs

PURPOSE

Elucidate facilitators, barriers, and key lessons learned regarding the implementation of system-wide clinical patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) programs among United States (US) healthcare leaders.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 35 US healthcare leaders, including chief-level executives, data directors, PROM directors, and department chairs involved in PROM implementation across seven diverse healthcare systems from February to June 2020. Transcripts were coded, evaluated for qualitative themes, and categorized according to the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR).

RESULTS

According to US hospital leaders with experience in existing clinical PROM programs, there are facilitators and barriers to implementation success in each CFIR domain. Allowing clinicians to select PROM measures and ensuring a user-friendly data platform (intervention); adapting data collection to patient home environments (outer setting); informing clinicians of the multi-faceted use of PROM data for research, clinical care, and business (inner setting); implementing PROM education earlier into clinician training (characteristics of individuals); and establishing specialty-agnostic PROM implementation teams (process) were among key facilitators to implementation success.

CONCLUSION

Leaders of geographically and clinically diverse PROM programs in the US identify common themes that facilitate successful implementation. Drivers of success depend on factors within and outside the clinical environment. These findings may serve to guide both establishing new PROM programs and refining existing PROM programs.

Ten Considerations for Integrating Patient-Reported Outcomes into Clinical Care for Childhood Cancer Survivors

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are subjective assessments of health status or health-related quality of life. In childhood cancer survivors, PROMs can be used to evaluate the adverse effects of cancer treatment and guide cancer survivorship care. However, there are barriers to integrating PROMs into clinical practice, such as constraints in clinical validity, meaningful interpretation, and technology-enabled administration of the measures. This article discusses these barriers and proposes 10 important considerations for appropriate PROM integration into clinical care for choosing the right measure (considering the purpose of using a PROM, health profile vs. health preference approaches, measurement properties), ensuring survivors complete the PROMs (data collection method, data collection frequency, survivor capacity, self- vs. proxy reports), interpreting the results (scoring methods, clinical meaning and interpretability), and selecting a strategy for clinical response (integration into the clinical workflow). An example framework for integrating novel patient-reported outcome (PRO) data collection into the clinical workflow for childhood cancer survivorship care is also discussed. As we continuously improve the clinical validity of PROMs and address implementation barriers, routine PRO assessment and monitoring in pediatric cancer survivorship offer opportunities to facilitate clinical decision making and improve the quality of survivorship care.

Assessment of dyspnea, ADL, and QOL in the perioperative period in lung cancer patients treated with minimally invasive surgery

OBJECTIVE

Patients with lung cancer generally undergo minimally invasive surgery, such as video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). This study examined the changes in health conditions and symptoms of patients with lung cancer using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) C-30 questionnaires after surgery.

METHODS

This was a longitudinal descriptive study. One hundred and three patients with lung cancer who underwent lung resection at Tokushima University Hospital between 2012 and 2021 were eligible. They completed EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-LC13, the Cancer Dyspnea scale (CDS), and pulmonary-ADL (P-ADL) before and 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery.

RESULTS

Regarding functional scale scores, impairments in physical and role functions persisted for 6 months after surgery. In symptom scale scores, fatigue, pain, dyspnea, and appetite loss continued for 6 months after surgery. In CDS, sense of effort, discomfort, and total dyspnea scale scores were elevated for 6 months after surgery. In P-ADL, most ADL were impaired 1 month after surgery, but recovered by 3 months. The dyspnea index of ADL was lower for 6 months after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Impairments in health conditions and symptoms persisted for 6 months after surgery despite its minimally invasive nature. J. Med. Invest. 70 : 388-402, August, 2023.