A large, multi-center survey assessing health, social support, literacy, and self-management resources in patients with heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with heart failure (HF) have multimorbidity which may cause difficulties with self-management. Understanding the resources patients draw upon to effectively manage their health is fundamental to designing new practice models to improve outcomes in HF. We describe the rationale, conceptual framework, and implementation of a multi-center survey of HF patients, characterize differences between responders and non-responders, and summarize patient characteristics and responses to the survey constructs among responders. METHODS: This was a multi-center cross-sectional survey study with linked electronic health record (EHR) data. Our survey was guided by the Chronic Care Model to understand the distribution of patient-centric factors, including health literacy, social support, self-management, and functional and mental status in patients with HF. Most questions were from existing validated questionnaires. The survey was administered to HF patients aged ≥ 30 years from 4 health systems in PCORnet® (the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network): Essentia Health, Intermountain Health, Mayo Clinic, and The Ohio State University. Each health system mapped their EHR data to a standardized PCORnet Common Data Model, which was used to extract demographic and clinical data on survey responders and non-responders. RESULTS: Across the 4 sites, 10,662 patients with HF were invited to participate, and 3330 completed the survey (response rate: 31%). Responders were older (74 vs. 71 years; standardized difference (95% CI): 0.18 (0.13, 0.22)), less racially diverse (3% vs. 12% non-White; standardized difference (95% CI): -0.32 (-0.36, -0.28)), and had higher prevalence of many chronic conditions than non-responders, and thus may not be representative of all HF patients. The internal reliability of the validated questionnaires in our survey was good (range of Cronbach's alpha: 0.50-0.96). Responders reported their health was generally good or fair, they frequently had cardiovascular comorbidities, > 50% had difficulty climbing stairs, and > 10% reported difficulties with bathing, preparing meals, and using transportation. Nearly 80% of patients had family or friends sit with them during a doctor visit, and 54% managed their health by themselves. Patients reported generally low perceived support for self-management related to exercise and diet. CONCLUSIONS: More than half of patients with HF managed their health by themselves. Increased understanding of self-management resources may guide the development of interventions to improve HF outcomes.

Characterizing the Patient Journey in Multiple Myeloma: Qualitative Review.

BACKGROUND: The patient experience of multiple myeloma (MM) is multifaceted and varies substantially between individuals. Current published information on the patient perspective and treatment of MM is limited, making it difficult to gain insights into patient needs regarding the condition. OBJECTIVE: In this review, a combined research method approach (ie, the review of published literature and social media posts) was undertaken to provide insight into patients' perspectives on the burden and treatment of MM, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the impact of MM on caregivers of patients with MM. METHODS: Targeted searches of PubMed and PsycINFO were conducted from November 16, 2010, to November 16, 2020; in parallel, patient-reported information derived from social media posts from 6 patient advocacy websites and YouTube were searched. The review of patient advocacy websites and YouTube targeted patient-reported information from patients with a self-reported diagnosis of MM who discussed their experience of MM and its treatments. RESULTS: A total of 27 articles and 138 posts were included (patient-reported information included data from 76 individuals), and results from both sources showed that patients experienced a variety of symptoms and treatment side effects, including neuropathy, fatigue, nausea, and back pain. These can affect areas of health-related quality of life (HRQOL), including physical functioning; emotional, psychological, and social well-being; the ability to work; and relationships. Patients valued involvement in treatment decision-making, and both the patient-reported information and the literature indicated that efficacy and tolerability strongly influence treatment decision-making. For patients, caregivers, and physicians, the preference for treatments was strongest when associated with increased survival. Caregivers can struggle to balance care responsibilities and jobs, and their HRQOL is affected in several areas, including emotional-, role-, social-, and work-related aspects of life. The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged patients' ability to manage MM because of limited hospital access and restrictions that negatively affected their lives, psychological well-being, and HRQOL. Unmet patient needs identified in the literature and patient-reported information were for more productive appointments with health care professionals, better-tolerated therapies, and more support for themselves and their caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of published literature and patient-reported information provides valuable and rich details on patient experiences and perceptions of MM and its treatment. The data highlighted that patients' HRQOL is impeded not only by the disease but also by treatment-related side effects. Patients in the literature and patient-reported information showed a strong preference for treatments that prolong life, and patients appeared to value participation in treatment decisions. However, there remain unmet needs and areas for further research, including treatment, caregiver burden, and how to conduct appointments with health care professionals. This may help improve the understanding of the journey of patients with MM. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Multiple Myeloma (MM) is the second most common cancer that affects blood cells. In this study, researchers wanted to know patients' views on the effects of MM and the treatments they received. Researchers also looked at the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients' treatment and the impact of MM on caregivers. To this end, the researchers reviewed information from 27 published studies and 138 social media posts by 76 patients with MM. Patients commonly reported nerve pain, tiredness, feeling sick, and back pain caused by MM and the treatments they received. The effects of MM and treatments affected patients' physical function; emotional, psychological, and social well-being; ability to work; and relationships. The researchers found that patients wanted to be involved in decisions related to their treatment. The effectiveness against MM and known negative effects strongly influenced the choice of treatments for patients. Increased survival was the strongest factor in the choice of treatment for patients, caregivers, and doctors. Researchers found that the emotional-, role-, social-, and work-related aspects of caregivers' lives were affected by caring for patients with MM. The COVID-19 pandemic also affected the ability of patients to manage their MM because of limited hospital access and the effects of restrictions that impacted their lives and psychological well-being. Finally, the researchers identified some areas requiring improvement, including unproductive appointments with health care professionals, the need for treatments with fewer negative effects, and more support for patients with MM and their caregivers. This information may be useful to improve and understand the experience of patients with MM.

Data linkages between patient-powered research networks and health plans: a foundation for collaborative research.

OBJECTIVE: Patient-powered research networks (PPRNs) are a valuable source of patient-generated information. Diagnosis code-based algorithms developed by PPRNs can be used to query health plans' claims data to identify patients for research opportunities. Our objective was to implement privacy-preserving record linkage processes between PPRN members' and health plan enrollees' data, compare linked and nonlinked members, and measure disease-specific confirmation rates for specific health conditions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This descriptive study identified overlapping members from 4 PPRN registries and 14 health plans. Our methods for the anonymous linkage of overlapping members used secure Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, 1-way, cryptographic hash functions. Self-reported diagnoses by PPRN members were compared with claims-based computable phenotypes to calculate confirmation rates across varying durations of health plan coverage. RESULTS: Data for 21 616 PPRN members were hashed. Of these, 4487 (21%) members were linked, regardless of any expected overlap with the health plans. Linked members were more likely to be female and younger than nonlinked members were. Irrespective of duration of enrollment, the confirmation rates for the breast or ovarian cancer, rheumatoid or psoriatic arthritis or psoriasis, multiple sclerosis, or vasculitis PPRNs were 72%, 50%, 75%, and 67%, increasing to 91%, 67%, 93%, and 80%, respectively, for members with ≥5 years of continuous health plan enrollment. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that PPRN membership and health plan data can be successfully linked using privacy-preserving record linkage methodology, and used to confirm self-reported diagnosis. Identifying and confirming self-reported diagnosis of members can expedite patient selection for research opportunities, shorten study recruitment timelines, and optimize costs.

Information Needs Expressed During Patient-Oriented Oncology Consultations: Quantity, Variation, and Barriers.

High-quality oncology consultation includes patient-oriented communication tailored to patients' individualized needs. Common methods used in studies to increase question-asking are prompt lists and coaching pre-consultations. However, our patients were encouraged to ask questions by the physician during their visit. We aimed to estimate the quantity, nature, and variation of their questions when they were invited to ask by their oncologist. During radiotherapy consultations from 2012 to 2016, patient's questions were deliberately elicited and physician-transcribed. We derived mean and median number of questions per patient, variance by patient factors, and a taxonomy of subjects using thematic analysis. Three hundred ninety-six patients asked 2386 questions, median asked per patient = 6 (interquartile range = 4). We found significant variance with age (mean = 6.9 questions for < 60 years, 5.4 for ≥ 70 years) p = 0.018, insurance type (mean = 4.7 for Medicaid, 7.2 for private insurance) p = 0.0004, and tumor site (mean number of questions: skin = 4.6, lymphoma = 5.2, lung = 5.8, breast = 6.1, prostate = 6.3, rectum = 6.7 head and neck = 6.9, brain = 7.0, bladder = 7.2, anus = 8.8, others = 5.8) p = 0.0440. Of the diverse set of 57 topics, the commonest were 1. logistics, 2. radiotherapy details, 3. side effects, 4. diagnosis, and 5. stage and prognosis. Only 17 topics were asked by more > 10% of patients and 40 topics were asked by < 10% of patients. With median of 6 questions, it is practicable to routinely elicit and address individualized information needs. Potential barriers may be older and underinsured patients. The wide variety of topics, often pertaining to individuals' case, suggests that cancer clinicians should take time-out during consultation to elicit patients' questions to accomplish best-practice communication.